ANALYSIS ON LAPTOP USING QFD A case Study on Improving Lenovo ThinkPad X201i 3249J4C.A case Study on Improving Lenovo ThinkPad X201i 3249J4C.

ANALYSIS ON LAPTOP USING QFD

ANALYSIS ON LAPTOP USING QFD

——————A case Study on A case Study on Improving Lenovo ThinkPad Improving Lenovo ThinkPad X201i 3249J4C.X201i 3249J4C.

CONTENT

INTRODUCTION1

METHODOLOGY2

CASE STUDY CASE STUDY3

CONCLUSION4

REFERENCES5

1. INTRODUCTION

The purpose: ——Improve Lenovo ThinkPad X201i 3249J4C laptop.

Method:——Quality function deployment (QFD) ——Comparing Lenovo and Sony

Summary sheet of customer investigation

Investigation project

Awareness

Perception

Lenovo Sony

Speed 5 4 3

Weight 5 3 5

Capacity 5 4 3

(5 levels scale)1=don’t attention5=special focus

We need to improve the Lenovo ThinkPad X201i 3249J4C laptop according to Customer needs .

The indexes customers care

Technique index

(attractive quality )

(attractive quality )

The congruent relationship between the indexes customers care and technique index

Speed

Weight

Capacity

Frequency

Memory

Material

Size

Thickness

Hard disk

The parameter comparison between Lenovo ThinkPad X201i 3249J4 and Sony X138JC/P(pink)

Frequency Memory Material Weight Size ThicknessHarddisk

Lenovo2.13GHz 2GB Magnalium 1.44kg 12.1 inch 17.9mm 250G

Sony 1.86GHz 2GB Mixed mode

carbon fiber 780g

11.1 inch 13.9mm 128G

2. METHODOLOGY

QFD :

To help transform the customer needs into engineering characteristics for a product or service, prioritizing each product or service characteristic while simultaneously setting the development targets for the product or service.

The House Of Quality

3. CASE STUDY

Customer Requirements

Customerrequirements

Index level

Customer satisfaction

Speed

Weight

Capacity

Step 1

Planning Matrix

CustomerRequirem-ents

Import-ance

Comparative analysis

Improvement goalKey Customer needs

rank

Enterprise ElseImprove-ment goal

Standard increased rate

Commodity characteris-

tic point Absolute weight

Weight﹪

Speed 5 4 3 5 1.25 ◎ 9.375 31.9

Weight 5 3 5 5 1.67 ◎ 12.525 42.6

Capacity 5 4 3 5 1.25 ○ 7.5 25.5

Total 29.4 100

Step 2

Technical Requirements

Technical requirements

Technical index

Frequency

Memory Material Size Thickness Harddisk

Step 3

Relationship Matrix

Frequency memory Material Size Thickness Harddisk

Speed ⊙ ○

Weight ⊙ ○ ○

Capacity ⊙

Technicalrequirements

Customer requirements

Step 4

Correlation Matrix

Technicalrequirements

Frequency Memory Material Size Thicknes

s

Harddisk

Frequency

Memory

Material

Size *Thickness *

Hard disk

Step 5

Setting

Technique analysis

Desired value

Quality character design

Oppone-ntCompara

tive analysis

Importance （ % ）

124513

+---=+

14.316.016.023.911.917.9

Targets

25.5○1.255345⊙Capacity

42.6○1.675535○○⊙Weight

31.9◎1.255345⊙⊙Speed

Commodity characteri-stic point

Standard increased rate

Improv-ement goal

ElseEnterp-rise

Weight﹪

Improvement goalComparative analysis

Import-ance

Planning Matrix

Harddisk

ThicknessSize MaterialInternal memory

Frequency

* Technicalrequirements

Customerrequirements

House of quality

Technicalrequirements

Frequency

Memory Material Size Thickness Harddisk

Targ-ets

Importance （ % ） 17.9 11.9 23.9 16.0 16.0 14.3

Comparative

analysis

Opponent + = - - - +

Technique analysis 3 1 5 4 2 1

Quality character design

Desired value

Setting

Technicalrequirements

Frequency

Memory Material Size Thickness Harddisk

Targ-ets

Importance （ % ） 17.9 11.9 23.9 16.0 16.0 14.3

Compar-ative

analysis

Opponent + = - - - +

Technique analysis 3 1 5 4 2 1

Quality character design

Desired value

Setting

Frequency

× ×× √√ √

MemoryMaterial Hard diskThicknessSize

The cost of frequency's advancement is relatively high.

It keeps at the same level as our rivals' and it will not make notable difference to laptop's

performance.

Have additional value in the patent technology

Hard to improve in a limited time.

Thickness and size has great influence on weight.

The expense on disk research is low and will boost customer's satisfaction.

4.CONCLUSION

Improving goals:

——A thinner and smaller laptop equipped with a bigger capacity.

5.REFERENCES

1. Sullivan LP (1986) Quality function deployment. Qual Prog19:39–502. Chan L-K, Wu M-L (2002) Quality function deployment: a literature review. Eur J Oper Res 143:463–4973. Cohen L (1995) Quality function deployment: how to make QFDwork for you. Addison-Wesley, New York