Application of Quality Function Deployment for the development of an organic product

Food Quality and Preference 40 (2015) 180–190

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Food Quality and Preference

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate / foodqual

Application of Quality Function Deployment for the developmentof an organic product

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.09.0120950-3293/� 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

⇑ Corresponding author at: Campus Universitário Trindade, Caixa Postal 476 –88040-900 Florianópolis, SC, Brazil. Tel.: +55 48 3721 7039.

E-mail addresses: [email protected] (J. de Fátima Cardoso),[email protected] (N. Casarotto Filho), [email protected] (P.A. CauchickMiguel).

Jaqueline de Fátima Cardoso a, Nelson Casarotto Filho b, Paulo Augusto Cauchick Miguel b,⇑a Post-graduate Program in Production Engineering, Federal University of Santa Catarina – UFSC, Brazilb Department of Production and Systems Engineering, Federal University of Santa Catarina – UFSC, Brazil

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history:Received 24 September 2013Received in revised form 14 September 2014Accepted 29 September 2014Available online 18 October 2014

Keywords:Quality Function DeploymentQFDProduct developmentOrganic food

The application of the Quality Function Deployment (QFD) method to develop food products has beenreported in a number of studies. Nevertheless, QFD was originally designed for other industrial sectors,and as such, certain adjustments are necessary for an effective application in the food sector. In this con-text, this study aims at demonstrating an application of QFD in the development of an organic product.There has been growing global demand for this type of product in recent years. This type of QFD appli-cation is not empirically consolidated in the literature. Thus, this study might be considered a pilot work.A QFD conceptual model consisting of four matrices was constructed to develop an organic fruit jelly. Themain adaptation is in the first matrix, which includes the key players in the supply chain. As food’s ingre-dients have natural variations in composition, the interactions among the ingredients are to be consid-ered. In addition, the influence of the production processes on the product’s functional properties andthe effects of the supply chain on the ingredients ensure that this type of product development has dif-ferent variables compared to other QFD applications for non-food products. Therefore, the conceptualmodel used in this study may serve in the development of other food products. This study asserts thatthe element of socio-environmental responsibility is essential for developing an organic product becausethis dimension comprised one-third of the relative weight of the planned quality.

� 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction

In the 1960s, companies in Japan exhibited strong growth, par-ticularly in the automotive sector, with constant changes to existingvehicle models and new product launches (Akao, 1990, 1996;Carnevalli, Sassi, & Cauchick Miguel, 2004). This growth generatedthe need for a method that would assure product quality in allphases of the new product development process. Studiesperformed in Japan to meet this need resulted in a method calledQuality Function Deployment – QFD (Akao, 1996). The purpose ofQFD is to translate the quality requirements from customers intothe attributes of a product; however, it can also be used to developservices (Carnevalli & Cauchick Miguel, 2008). The applicationof QFD improves product reliability, reduces design time(Devadasan, Kathiravan, & Thirunavukkarasu, 2006), and increasescustomer satisfaction (Carnevalli, Cauchick Miguel, & Calarge,2010; Lager, 2005).

Seeing the benefits of its application, QFD was adopted by sev-eral other countries and was introduced in the USA and Europe inthe 1980s. Although QFD has been used in the food industry since1987, the published examples are relatively limited (Benner,Linnemann, Jongen, & Folstar, 2003; Hofmeister, 1991). In Brazil,the method was only just introduced in the 1990s (Carnevalliet al., 2004). At that time, the method was introduced in a foodand packaging company (Sadia S.A.), and there are reports of QFDapplications in the industrial sector in Brazil since 1995 (Cheng,2003).

It is worth mentioning that the production of and market fororganic foods have expanded internationally and in Brazil sincethe 1990s (Guivant, 2003). The global demand for organic foodhas risen because people are more aware of the health impactsof chemical residues in foods (Arbos, de Freitas, Stertz, &Carvalho, 2010). Similarly, other researchers (e.g., Lobley, Butler,& Reed, 2009; Louden & Macrae, 2010; Maxey, 2006; Retamales,2011; Trauger, 2007) argue that the demand for organic foods isgrowing fast. Moreover, Demiryurek (2010) highlights that thegrowing consumer demand for organic foods has led to the devel-opment of international trade in organic agricultural products.

J. de Fátima Cardoso et al. / Food Quality and Preference 40 (2015) 180–190 181

Organic food production is aimed at producing ecologically sus-tainable, economically viable, and socially equitable food capableof integrating mankind into the environment (dos Santos &Monteiro, 2004). Moreover, the previous authors argue that theproduction of organic food has grown in both land areas under cul-tivation and in the number of producers and consumer markets,even though organic food represents a small portion of agriculture.The growth of organic agriculture is observed because conven-tional agriculture is based on the intensive use of chemicals. Con-sumers regard the conventional production system as a possiblerisk to their health and the environment and seek contamina-tion-free products (dos Santos & Monteiro, 2004). Organic agricul-ture is a production system that aims at achieving a better qualityof life for those who produce and consume food. Considering thedemand and market for this type of product, further growth is pro-jected in this market segment (dos Santos & Monteiro, 2004).

Considering the increased demand for organic foods and thevariety of food choices, producers seek to differentiate their prod-ucts to gain consumers. The QFD method fulfils this purposebecause it captures the voice of customers (VoC) and transformsit into the quality characteristics and attributes of the product.Although there have been publications on this subject in the foodindustry, outlets concerning the use of QFD in the developmentof organic food, which is the focus of this paper, are scarce.

This work is aimed at demonstrating a QFD application in thedevelopment of an organic product, that is, an organic fruit jelly.The following sections present the concept of QFD and its use infood product development. The subsequent section describes theresearch methods and procedures used to conduct this work. Thefollowing section presents a proposal for the application of QFDfor the development of organic products. Finally, the conclusionsof this work are drawn.

Related literature regarding Quality Function Deployment

Cheng and de Melo Filho (2007) define QFD as a way to system-atically communicate information related to the level of qualityand explain the work related to achieving quality, thereby aimingto reach the level of quality during product development. Toachieve this, QFD uses matrices to deploy customer demandedquality throughout the product development process. There aretwo theoretical lines in the application of QFD. The first line, pro-posed by Akao (1990), is as follows: there are a number of matriceswith an emphasis on quality, technology, reliability and cost. Theother line is the four stages model proposed by Hauser andClausing (1988), which is a simplified model in which four matri-ces are drawn, one for each stage of product development: thehouse of quality, component planning, the planning process andproduction planning. The set of matrices should be in place regard-less of the theoretical line. This set is called the QFD conceptualmodel. It can be defined as a set of deployment tables and matricesof a given product development, in which the matrices are estab-lished considering cause and effect relationships (Cheng & deMelo Filho, 2007).

The use of QFD has benefits and drawbacks. There are tangiblebenefits, such as improved reliability, reduction in the number ofchanges during product development, design time and costs, andcomplaints, as well as increased revenues (Carnevalli & CauchickMiguel, 2008). The intangible benefits are a flexible method, withcommunication improvement, assistance in decision-making andpriority setting, and increased company knowledge preservationand customer satisfaction (Carnevalli & Cauchick Miguel, 2008).

There are difficulties in using QFD, including interpreting cus-tomer desires, defining the relationships between demanded qual-ity and quality characteristics, developing teamwork and general

lack of knowledge of how to use the method (Carnevalli &Cauchick Miguel, 2008). Such difficulties have decreased the useof QFD. The authors of this study have proposed a way to reducethese difficulties. The difficulties and the proposal to reduce themare complemented by the studies of Benner, Geerts, et al. (2003)and Benner, Linnemann, et al. (2003), all of which are specificallyfocused on the development of food products.

QFD in the development of food products

The QFD method can be used in the development of differenttypes of products (Benner, Linnemann, et al., 2003). CauchickMiguel (2005) conducted a multiple-case study in seven compa-nies operating in Brazil to identify the best practices in the devel-opment of products using QFD. It was observed that the applicationof QFD in the food sector is one of the method’s best in the country.

Benner, Linnemann, et al. (2003) discuss whether QFD can befully applied in the development of food products, taking intoaccount that the method was developed for other industrial sec-tors. Publications on QFD in the development of food products typ-ically present general information, and the focus is on the firstmatrix and related to quality (demanded quality versus qualitycharacteristics). The previous authors add that, after a thoroughanalysis of the published examples, it is clear that the informationis not as useful as it first seemed. The applications are quite lim-ited, especially with regard to the four phases conceptual model;some publications show the four stages approach, but a largemajority do not go beyond the first matrix.

The QFD is better suited to the improvement of food productsthat already exist than to developing new products (Benner,Linnemann, et al., 2003). One of the major disadvantages of themethod is the difficulty in using the four stages model for theimprovement of food products. This disadvantage occurs becauseof the complexity of food products, the many interactions betweenthe ingredients and the influence of the productive processes onthe product’s functional properties. It is difficult to specify theproduct requirement values (Benner, Linnemann, et al., 2003).There is a natural variation in the composition of food ingredientsgenerating a higher standard deviation in comparison to the valueobtained in other industrial sectors.

Benner, Linnemann, et al. (2003) claim that the matrices arevery useful in visualizing the data and information necessary toimprove and develop a new product. Even when applying QFD aspresented by other researchers with expert experience, the methodmay not be applied in the food sector without changes. The finalquality of food products depends not only on the quality of ingre-dients but also on the processes that are applied by those involvedin the production chain. Benner, Linnemann, et al. (2003) suggestsome simplifications of the product in terms of its characteristicsand interactions to retain manageable matrices. These simplifica-tions must rely on research and development (R&D) knowledgeand those involved throughout the entire production chain.Another adjustment to the QFD method to make it applicable tofood products is the replacement of objective values with inter-vals-objectives because ingredients are often physiologically activeand subject to change.

Some proposals for modifying the QFD to apply it to the devel-opment of food products have been made. Hofmeister (1991) pro-posed that the ‘QFD Food Industry Roadmap’, in which twoalternative paths are defined from the voice of customer, be usedthroughout the new product development process in the develop-ment of packaging or food. Bech, Engelund, Juhl, Kristensen, andPoulsen (1994) divide the engineering features (‘hows’) into tech-niques and sense. Holmen and Kristensen (1996) divided the attri-butes of customer needs into those of the intermediary user and

182 J. de Fátima Cardoso et al. / Food Quality and Preference 40 (2015) 180–190

those of the final user. Modifications of the first matrix are found inthe literature (e.g., in Benner, 2005; Benner, Geerts, et al., 2003).

Considering the benefits of QFD and the difficulties presentedby Benner, Linnemann, et al. (2003), the method has been appliedin the development of food products such as chocolate (Viaene &Januszewska, 1999), fruits (Miguel, Spoto, Abrahão & da Silva,2007), pasta (Pinto & Paiva, 2010; Waisarayutt & Tutiyapak,2006), wheat flour (Kristianto, Ajmal, & Sandhu, 2012), meat(Park, Ham, & Lee, 2012; Rosado Junior et al., 2011), and olive oil(Bevilacqua, Ciarapica, & Marchetti, 2012). Table 1 summarizes aselection of publications and their goals, methods and tools, prod-uct and key results (for more details refer to the Appendix).

Table 1Use of QFD in the development of food products.

References Objective Methods and t

Viaene and Januszews(1999)

Build a structured approach for fooddevelopment through the ‘house ofquality’ applying to chocolate couverture

Consumer segmconsumer needspecifications,specifications.statistical methanalysis)

Waisarayutt andTutiyapak (2006)

Assess the potential of using QualityFunction Deployment in the process ofnew product development

Choice of threelistening to concross cultural c(4Cs); sensoriaarrays for prodcontrol

Miguel, Spoto, Abrahãoand da Silva (2007)

Establish the consumer purchasingbehavior concerning pineapple throughthe QFD method

Interview withtaste tests

Pinto and Paiva (2010) Development of pasta using QFD Interview withcleavage; extrafinal product;definition of thcharacteristics

Rosado Junior et al.(2011)

Determination of the main qualitycharacteristics required by the buyers ofthe bulls in terms of the products andservices associated with using the methodof splitting the quality function

Application ofproducts and smodel proposeand Danilevicz

Kristianto, Ajmal andSandhu (2012)

Search for the customer satisfaction bytaking into account the strategy of totalquality management adopted in acompany for the grinding of wheat flour

Customer satiscompetition beof a productionan action plan;

Park, Ham, and Lee(2012)

Use the QFD to identify the needs of NorthAmerican customers for a popular Koreanfood

Use of QFD incustomers and

Bevilacqua, Ciarapicaand Marchetti(2012)

Test the evaluation technique based onQFD and fuzzy logic. This enable to assessthe main characteristics of olive oil, whichare determining factors for customers andinfluence product acceptance

Application offrom subjectivverbally. Const(‘house of qual

It is observed in Table 1 that the use of QFD in the developmentof food products involves interviews with and administering ques-tionnaires to consumers, the opinion of experts, and sensorial anal-ysis. It also enables investigating the qualities required byconsumers and prioritizing them according to customers’ views.One of the methods used in conjunction with the QFD is the Anal-ysis of Cross Cultural Consumer Characterization (4Cs). The QFDfocuses on different types of customers, and different qualitiesare required by distinct groups. The 4C method establishes thatalthough customers have the same age or income level, they donot necessarily have the same buying behaviour because of differ-ent attitudes and levels of value awareness.

ools Product Main results

entation; analyses ofs; technical and sensory

instrumental and sensoryData evaluation byods (ANOVA and factor

Chocola-tecouvertu-re

The ‘house of quality’ can bedeveloped for more products in acertain experiment. Each of thematrices show significantdifferences between the designedvariables, i.e. the particularpreferences and real sensorialperceptions

types of macaroni bysumers; use of analysis of

onsumer characterizationl analysis; construction ofuct planning and process

Macaroni The use of the 4Cs in conjunctionwith the QFD allowed greaterdetailing of the needs of thedifferent types of customers

consumers in addition to Pineapple The method was consideredeffective in the evaluation of theproduct. Dissatisfaction wasidentified in consumers with regardto the quality of the product

costumers; quality table ofction of characteristics of

sensory evaluation;e target quality andof the raw material

Pasta readyto consumewith pre-bioticfunction

The construction of matrices andthe discussions inherent to thisactivity provided a betterperception of the relationshipbetween the quality characteristicsof the final product and theparameters for quality control of theraw materials

QFD considering theervices together – thed by Ribeiro, Echeveste,(2000)

Bull The adaptation of QFD for thecombined analysis (product andservice) interferes with the results,particularly those related to thepriority of services and can be usedfor other studies about this product

faction survey;nchmarking; constructionmatrix; development ofQFD assessment

Wheat flour The method should be applied at thelower levels of operation toencourage people to apply theprogram to improve the quality in aproactive way. This method trimsthe life cycle of analysis between aQFD and another and the companybecomes more competitive

four stages; research withspecialists

Bulgogi(bovinemeat)

Use of QFD as a tool for productimprovement, focusing on the firstmatrix (‘house of quality’ – HOQ).The model in four stages involvessuccessive applications of HOQ inthe phases of planning of theproduct and production. It enablesto suggest more systematicmethods to increase consumption ofBulgogi in the international market

fuzzy logic to handle datae evaluations expressedruction of a first matrixity’)

Olive oil Allowed to grade the quality of 7different brands of olive oil inrelation to customer preferences.The proposed technique can be usedboth for new products and fortesting the quality of existing ones

J. de Fátima Cardoso et al. / Food Quality and Preference 40 (2015) 180–190 183

New food products often do not succeed because they are notdesigned in accordance with consumers’ wishes or are not effi-ciently produced (Benner, Geerts, et al., 2003). The informationrequired for an efficient product development process is oftennot relayed to the appropriate party in the production chain. In thissense, Benner, Geerts, et al. (2003) and Benner (2005) propose aconceptual model to gather and disseminate essential informationfocused on the development of products, with consideration for theproductive chain. The model is based on QFD and includes someadjustments to make it applicable to the development of foodproducts. The proposal is called the ‘Chain Information Model’(CIM) and suggests changes to the first matrix (Fig. 1).

According to the authors (Benner, Geerts, et al., 2003; Benner,Linnemann, et al., 2003), it is not possible to set accurate target val-ues to the quality requirements in the matrices for the followingreasons: (i) the complex and diverse composition of food products;(ii) the interactions between many ingredients, such as chemicalreactions; and (iii) the influence of the productive chain and pro-duction processes on the properties of the products. Thus, all theactors in the production chain are initially included in the firstmatrix instead of the quality characteristics. This is known as a‘matrix of information’ (Fig. 1). Demanded quality versus produc-tive chain actors is shown in the central part of the matrix withthe following relationship indicators: ‘strong’, ‘weak’ or ‘non-existent’.

The proposed conceptual model consists of the followingphases: (i) data and information collection; (ii) data and informa-tion processing; and (iii) dissemination of data and information.First, the consumer data (demanded quality) must be gathered.The productive chain and manufacturing processes must bemapped to determine how the actors (or processes) influence thequality characteristics of the production process. It is possible toidentify the influence of each member of the productive chain inthe quality demanded by consumers. To systematize the influenceof the actors in the productive chain, Benner, Geerts, et al. (2003)use the ‘Quality Dependence Diagrams’ (QDD), a type of map ableto make connections between the required features and actors.

The scenarios are then determined for the realization of thedesired product. These scenarios are formulated sequentially bymeans of a systematic analysis of the options for each actor inthe productive chain. For each possible change made by an actor,the consequences for the other quality features and actors mustbe identified. To do this, decision trees are developed and targets

Productivechain actors

Relationship

Dem

ande

d qu

ality

Fig. 1. Matrix of information (Benner, Linnemann, et al., 2003; 2007).

are established for the members of the productive chain with afocus on demanded quality. A suitable scenario is determined inaddition to the targets. The necessary information is distributedto the production chain actors.

The previous work’s proposal was developed through an appli-cation for the production of healthy food. To simplify this, the con-struction of the conceptual model focused on improving anexisting product. In this application, two agents of the chain wereused: the broccoli cultivator and the plant processor.

The conceptual model proposed by Benner, Geerts, et al. (2003)as well as the studies presented in Table 1, were used as the basisfor developing a proposal for the development of organic productsusing the QFD.

Research methods

This work was conducted within the context of organic agri-culture. Organic agriculture is based on improving soil fertilitythrough a biological process of using organic matter, which isessential to plant health. This type of agriculture is opposed tothe use of soluble chemical fertilizers and genetically modifiedorganisms. Organic agriculture presents a set of well-definedstandards for production and marketing that are accepted bothnationally and internationally. Currently, the term ‘organic farm-ing’ is used in countries with Anglo-Saxon, Germanic and Latinlanguage origins. ‘Organic farming’ can be considered a synonymfor biological agriculture and includes the agricultural practices ofbiodynamic and natural agriculture (Darolt, 2010).

In Brazil, products of this type of agriculture are denoted as‘organic products’. Since 2010, all Brazilian organic products,except those sold directly by family farmers, are required to havea seal from the Brazilian System of Organic Conformity Assessment(SISORG). When designating ‘organic’ or ‘organic product’ on thelabel, the product must contain no more than 5% of non-organicingredients, which must be listed individually (Ministry ofAgriculture, Livestock and Supply, 2009).

The research procedures were divided into three steps. Step 1comprised a bibliographic search to identify and select relevantpublications; in particular, specific articles related to the use ofQFD in the development of organic food, as presented in the previ-ous section. The literature search was conducted by selecting pub-lications from 2002 (a 10-year period aimed at having an updatedset of publications; nevertheless, other relevant articles publishedprior to that time were also taken into consideration, e.g., Viaene &Januszewska, 1999) in the following databases: Scopus, the ISI-Web of Science, Science Direct, and Emerald. The term ‘QualityFunction Deployment’ was combined with the terms ‘agroecologic*

farming’, ‘agroecologic* product*’, ‘agriculture* product*’, ‘foodproduct*’, ‘agriculture*’; and ‘farming’. A Brazilian database (Scien-tific Electronic Library Online – <www.scielo.br>) was alsosearched, using the general terms ‘Quality Function Deployment’and ‘QFD’, without a set time period. In total, 37 articles wereretrieved. After excluding duplicated articles and checking thetitles and abstracts, 13 articles associated with the main subjectremained. The main criterion for article selection was having aclear development of food products using the QFD. Theoreticalstudies on QFD related to the subject were considered by checkingthe articles’ references.

Step 2 consisted of developing the QFD application by selectingliterature to form the basis for this work, as well as defining theQFD conceptual model (set of matrices) suitable for product devel-opment. From the publications identified in Step 1, the work ofBenner, Geerts, et al. (2003) was selected. This work is specific tothe development of food products using QFD, and the authorsadapted the method to be used in food products and emphasized

184 J. de Fátima Cardoso et al. / Food Quality and Preference 40 (2015) 180–190

the difficulties encountered in doing so. Their proposal was thebasis for the development of organic food; specifically, an organicjelly.

Step 3 comprised the development of the QFD proposal. Theapplication of QFD began by appraising the level of qualitydemanded by a small sample group of organic product consumersby means of a questionnaire composed of two open-ended ques-tions: one question was related to the product (jelly), and theother was related to the packaging. The sample was intentionalas it was previously identified that members were confirmedconsumers of organic products. The respondents were contactedin advance and confirmed that they were jelly consumers. Thestudy’s goals were presented to them, and they agreed to partic-ipate. From the demanded level of quality extracted from theanswers, a two-level tree diagram was drawn (Table 2) to detailthose qualities. The quality levels were evaluated by the consum-ers who attributed a degree of importance from 1 to 5, with 1being the least important, and 5 being the most important. Next,the quality characteristics were extracted from the demanded

Table 2Deployment of the quality elements and quality characteristics.

Demanded quality

Primary level – Jelly Secondary level – Jelly

Have good looking Have intense and vivid colour

Show natural fruit pigmentsHave fruit piecesHave a jelly consistency

Be tasty Have little sugarHave low acidity

Have taste similar to original fruitNon-existence of chemical products and

genetically modified productsHave natural products without preservatchemical additivesUse organic sugar

Be household production

Primary level – Package Secondary level – Package

Provide information on the origin of theproduct

Indicate the producer and its relationshiagroecological organizations

Demonstrate environmentalresponsibility

Refer to the quality of life of the producconsumerIndicate agroecological production

Present organic certification in accordanthe Brazilian rules

Enable to see the product Be in a transparent container (glass)

Allow reuse Be possible to use after consumption

Have the possibility to refill

Have an appropriate cover for reuse

Be recyclable

Have appropriate size Have low weight (around 250 g)Have low weight (around 250 g)Have small packages (less than 100 g)

Show appearance of the package Have a label of recyclable paperHave a printed label on the package itseHave a colour labelHave a label that refers to natureHave a simple labelPossess a brand

Be easy to open Possess a specific system for opening

quality, and the quality elements were defined, e.g., the physicaland chemical properties, the flavour, the environmental responsi-bility, the weight and the appearance. A two-level tree diagramwas drawn to group the quality characteristics. Based on the pre-vious data, a preliminary matrix of the QFD conceptual modelwas built by linking the main elements of the supply chain withthe demanded quality. In addition to consumers, subject expertswere consulted to collect information on the process of manufac-turing fruit jelly and the production supply chain. The degree ofinfluence of each actor was indicated by assigning 9 for ‘strongrelationship’, 3 for ‘poor relationship’, and blank for ‘no relation-ship’. The other matrices were built using the following:demanded quality versus characteristics of quality; productionprocess versus quality characteristics; and raw materials versusquality characteristics. For the relationships in those matrices, ascale of 9 (strong), 3 (moderate), 1 (weak), and blank (non-exis-tent) was used.

Quality element Quality characteristics (units –variables or attributes)

Physical properties Quantity of fruit pigments (%)Quantity of fruit pieces (%)Quantity of fruit pigments (%)Quantity of fruit pieces (%)Concentration of pectin (%)

Flavour Concentration of sugar (%)Concentration of sugar (%)Acidity (pH)Concentration of sugar (%)

ives and Chemical properties Limit of non-organic ingredients(5%)

Chemical properties Limit of non-organic ingredients(5%)

Environmental responsibility Origin from agroecologyagriculture (yes/no)

p with Environmental responsibility Origin from agroecologyagriculture (yes/no)

er and Environmental responsibility Origin from agroecologyagriculture (yes/no)Origin from agroecologyagriculture (yes/no)

ce with Certification stamp (yes/no)

Physical properties Recyclability and/or reuseabability(yes/no)

Physical properties Recyclability and/or reuseabability(yes/no)

Physical propertiesEnvironmental responsibility

Recyclability and/or reuseabability(yes/no)

Physical propertiesEnvironmental responsibility

Recyclability and/or reuseabability

Physical propertiesEnvironmental responsibility

Recyclability and/or reuseabability(yes/no)

Weight Packing weight 300 gPacking weight (g)Packing weight (g)

Appearance Recyclable paper label (yes/no)lf Recyclable paper label (yes/no)

Colourful label (yes/no)Informative label (yes/no)Recyclable paper label (yes/no)Brand label (yes/no)

Physical properties Sealing wax for opening thepackage (yes/no)

J. de Fátima Cardoso et al. / Food Quality and Preference 40 (2015) 180–190 185

Results and discussion

The proposed conceptual model of this work is composed offour matrices, shown in Fig. 2. The product chosen to be developedwas an organic fruit jelly.

To construct Matrix 1 (Fig. 3), a questionnaire with two open-ended questions was submitted to the consumers of organic prod-ucts to inquire what characteristics an organic fruit jelly shouldhave in regards to the product itself and its packaging. From theirresponses, a tree was drawn (with two levels) to detail thedemanded quality. The tree was later sent to consumers to assigna degree of importance to the quality characteristics on a scale of1–5 (1 being ‘not important’ and 5 being ‘very important’). It wasthen possible to define the remaining matrices (quality planning,sales points, and the relative absolute weight).

The relationships between demanded quality and the produc-tive chain were evaluated using the following scale: 9 = ‘strong’,3 = ‘weak’ and, blank = ‘non-existent’. The farmer and the producer,followed by the suppliers of seeds and sugar, are the actors withthe greatest responsibility to meet the demanded quality. Thetransportation of raw material is important because organic prod-ucts cannot be mixed with non-organic products due to the risk ofcontamination. As for the actors in the productive chain, the tar-gets should be defined to achieve the target quality for the finalproduct.

1

PC

DQ

Matrix 1: DQ (demanded quality) x PC(productive chain) Matrix 2: DQ (demanded quality) x QCPP(quality characteristics of the final product) Matrix 3: QCPP (quality characteristics ofthe final product) x PP (productive process) Matrix 4: QCPP (quality characteristics ofthe final product) x RM (raw material)

Fig. 2. Conceptual model

To develop the quality demanded by consumers (on the pri-mary and secondary level), the quality elements were createdand used to derive the quality characteristics of the final product(Table 2). Matrix 2 was then built (Fig. 4). This matrix connectsthe demanded quality to the quality characteristics using the fol-lowing scale: 9 = ‘strong relationship’, 3 = ‘moderate’, 1 = ‘weakrelationship’ and blank = ‘non-existent’ or ‘zero’. The target qualityof the final product was defined based on this matrix.

Matrix 3 (Fig. 5) includes the quality characteristics and theproduction process. The results of this matrix show that the grind-ing and concentration (cooking) stages of the production processare responsible for obtaining the quality characteristics of the jelly.This finding indicates that for each 10 l of fruit, 3 min of grindingare required. In the process of concentration (the method of pro-cessing in a pen pan), the cooking time should be a maximum of90 min, and the spoon test or another test should be used to ensurean adequate cooking time.

Matrix 4 (Fig. 6) was related to the raw materials and qualitycharacteristics. The fruit and sugar are the elements with the great-est influence on the characteristics of quality, followed by the pec-tin and acid. With respect to the fruit, the degree of maturity is ofparamount importance. The suitable time (days) for maturing thefruit is variable with the type of fruit and climatic conditions suchas temperature and rainfall. It is not possible to define an exacttime for this stage, and the farmer sets the harvest time based on

2

3PP

4RM

QCPP

for organic products.

Fig. 3. Matrix 1 – Demanded quality versus productive chain.

186 J. de Fátima Cardoso et al. / Food Quality and Preference 40 (2015) 180–190

Fig. 4. Matrix 2 – Demanded quality versus quality characteristics.

J. de Fátima Cardoso et al. / Food Quality and Preference 40 (2015) 180–190 187

the type of fruit and climatic characteristics of the location inwhich the fruit is cultivated. It was not possible to indicate thequality characteristic units that are related to this aspect, such as‘presence of pigments of the fruit’. The values of control were alsonot listed. The sugar, pectin and acid in the jelly must be organic.The label is also important in the quality characteristics.

The proposed conceptual model takes into consideration theaspects of developing food products highlighted by Benner,Linnemann, et al. (2003). Food is a product subject to the amend-ments of productive chain players and the raw materials used. In

this sense, the QFD is a method that makes it possible to determinethese influences to promote the determination of goals and controlparameters with the objective of ensuring the quality of the finalproduct as required by the customer.

It is worth noting that the product development team using theQFD must be multifunctional as suggested by Cheng and de MeloFilho (2007), covering the functions of marketing, R&D, and manu-facturing engineering. In this study some experts were consultedduring the stages of proposed application construction. However,this proposed application of QFD can be used in a company after

Fig. 5. Matrix 3 – Productive process versus quality characteristics.

Fig. 6. Matrix 4 – Raw material versus quality characteristics.

188 J. de Fátima Cardoso et al. / Food Quality and Preference 40 (2015) 180–190

setting up a multifunctional team to ensure the effectiveness of themethod, as recommended by Cauchick Miguel (2005).

Another important limitation is related to the quality targets.The values and process parameters indicated in the matrices werenot tested because this is a pilot work and was not developed in acompany. There was no access to laboratories to perform the testsneeded. The values shown are references that should be reviewedwhen real-life applications are employed.

This proposal differs from the conventional application of QFDbecause it considers the actors of the productive chain in the firstmatrix, assigning them the responsibility of being concerned withthe qualities required by customers. This application focused on adifferent type of organic food, which has features beyond those tra-ditionally required in food, such as socio-environmental responsi-bility. The replacement of objective values with intervals-objectives in the projected quality is another relevant differencein the application of the method because the ingredients remainphysiologically active and may be subject to change.

Conclusions

The objective of the study was to demonstrate an application ofQFD for the development of organic products. The development oforganic fruit jelly was presented. Studies that used QFD specificallyin the development of organic products were not found in the lit-erature. The proposal was then based on a conceptual model fromthe literature, as well as from other studies that used QFD in thedevelopment of food products. It was observed that the applicationof QFD to develop food products lacks certain adaptations, consid-ering that the food ingredients have natural variations in composi-tion. The many interactions between the ingredients and theinfluence of the productive processes on the functional propertiesof the product, as well as the influence of the productive chainon the ingredients, ensure that the development of food productshave different variables than that of a non-food product. Therefore,the conceptual QFD model used in this study might fit the develop-ment of other food products.

J. de Fátima Cardoso et al. / Food Quality and Preference 40 (2015) 180–190 189

The modification in the first matrix containing the members ofthe productive chain is crucial to ensure the qualities required bythe consumer. The QFD method will usually require adjustmentsin food products, and the inclusion of the productive chain, theconsideration of the changes that the food may undergo in the pro-duction process and the natural variations in the food product arerelevant points in this adaptation. The conceptual model composedof four matrices is fundamental to fulfil the demanded qualitybecause the productive chain, the productive process, and theraw material showed a strong influence on the quality characteris-tics of the final product. It is possible to assert that in the qualityelement, socio-environmental responsibility is essential for devel-oping an organic product, as this dimension comprised one-third ofthe relative weight of the planned quality.

The consumption of organic food has been increasing globallyas people become more concerned with health and environmentalissues. For food to be certified as organic it must meet certaindemand criteria, such as specific legislative requirements, inclu-sion of the type of seedlings to be used, production, transportation,addition of ingredients during the manufacturing process, and pro-cessing of the final product. In this sense, the QFD can benefit therelationship with the consumer by identifying the qualitiesrequired of an organic product, linking them with the productivechain, extracting the characteristics of quality and establishingrelationships with the productive process and raw material.

Although this work has consulted experts for the proposed QFDapplication by a company, it is suggested that the use of a cross-functional team with representatives from different functionalareas should be considered to ensure the effectiveness of themethod. In this study, the values and parameter values have notbeen tested. The values presented in this study are for referenceonly. For the effective application of this proposition in the devel-opment of organic fruit jellies, authentic data might be consideredin future studies.

It is hypothesized that the proposed application has contributedto the adaptation of the QFD method for the development of foodproducts; specifically, organic products. This study highlights thatthe market for this type of product is growing, and it is reasonablefor companies to develop products from the viewpoint of the con-sumer. The application of QFD reflects the voice of the customer inthe development of the production phase.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the Brazilian research agencies CAPES andCNPq for providing financial support for this research project. Theyalso appreciate the assistance of Elsevier English editing servicesfor language review. Finally, the authors thank the reviewers fortheir great work and their suggestions and recommendations toimprove the paper.

Appendix A. Supplementary data

Supplementary data associated with this article can be found, inthe online version, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.09.012.

References

Akao, Y. (1990). Quality Function Deployment: Integrating customer requirements intoproduct design. Cambridge, MA: Productivity Press.

Akao, Y. (1996). Introduction to quality deployment. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil:Fundação Christiano Ottoni (in Portuguese).

Arbos, K. A., de Freitas, R. J. S., Stertz, S. C., & Carvalho, L. A. (2010). Organicvegetables safety: Sanitary and nutritional aspects. Food Science and Technology(Campinas), 30(1), 215–220.

Bech, A. C., Engelund, E., Juhl, H. J., Kristensen, K., & Poulsen, C. S. (1994). QFood-optimal design of food products. MAPP Working Paper No. 19. Aarhus, Denmark:The Aarhus School of Business.

Benner, M. (2005). The chain information model: A systematic approach for foodproduct development (Doctoral dissertation). Wageningen, Netherlands:Wageningen University.

Benner, M., Geerts, R. F. R., Linnemann, A. R., Jongen, W. M. F., Folstar, P., & Cnossen,H. J. (2003). A chain information model for structured knowledge management:Towards effective and efficient food product improvement. Trends in FoodScience & Technology, 14(11), 469–477.

Benner, M., Linnemann, A. R., Jongen, W. M. F., & Folstar, P. (2003). Quality FunctionDeployment (QFD) – Can it be used to develop food products? Food Quality andPreference, 14(4), 327–339.

Bevilacqua, M., Ciarapica, F. E., & Marchetti, B. (2012). Development and test of anew fuzzy-QFD approach for characterizing customers rating of extra virginolive oil. Food Quality and Preference, 24(1), 75–84.

Carnevalli, J. A., & Cauchick Miguel, P. A. (2008). Review, analysis and classificationof the literature on QFD – Types of research, difficulties and benefits.International Journal of Production Economics, 114(2), 737–754.

Carnevalli, J. A., Cauchick Miguel, P. A., & Calarge, F. A. (2010). Axiomatic designapplication for minimising the difficulties of QFD usage. International Journal ofProduction Economics, 125(1), 1–12.

Carnevalli, J. A., Sassi, A. C., & Cauchick Miguel, P. A. (2004). QFD application inproduct development: Survey of its use and perspectives for future research.Gestão & Produção, 11(1), 33–49 (in Portuguese).

Cauchick Miguel, P. A. (2005). Evidence of QFD best practices for productdevelopment: A multiple case study. International Journal of Quality &Reliability Management, 22(1), 72–82.

Cheng, L. C. (2003). QFD in product development: Methodological features and aguide to intervention. Produção on Line, 3(2) (in Portuguese).

Cheng, L. C., & de Melo Filho, L. R. (2007). QFD in managing product development. SãoPaulo: Blücher (in Portuguese).

Darolt, M. R. (2010). The main currents of the organic movement and itspeculiarities. In M. R. Darolt (Ed.), Organic agriculture: Inventing the future(pp. 18–26). Londrina: IAPAR.

Demiryurek, K. (2010). Analysis of information systems and communicationnetworks for organic and conventional hazelnut producers in the Samsunprovince of Turkey. Agricultural Systems, 103(7), 444–452.

Devadasan, S. R., Kathiravan, N., & Thirunavukkarasu, V. (2006). Theory and practiceof total quality function deployment: A perspective from a traditional pump-manufacturing environment. The TQM Magazine, 18(2), 143–161.

dos Santos, G. C., & Monteiro, M. (2004). Organic system of food production.Alimentos e Nutrição, 15(1), 73–86 (in Portuguese).

Guivant, J. S. (2003). Supermarkets and the promotion of organics: Appealing toego-trip life-stile. Ambiente & Sociedade, 6(2) (in Portuguese).

Hauser, J. R., & Clausing, D. (1988). The House of quality. Harvard Business Review,66(5/6), 63–73.

Hofmeister, K. R. (1991). Quality function deployment: Market success throughcustomer driven products. In E. Graf & I. S. Saguy (Eds.), Food productdevelopment: From concept to the market place (pp. 189–210). New York: VanNostrand Reinhold.

Holmen, E., & Kristensen, P. S. (1996). Downstream and upstream extension ofhouse of quality. MAPP Working Paper No. 19. Aarhus, Denmark: University ofAarhus.

Kristianto, Y., Ajmal, M. M., & Sandhu, M. (2012). Adopting TQM approach to achievecustomer satisfaction: A flour milling company case study. TQM Journal, 24(1),29–46.

Lager, T. (2005). The industrial usability of quality function deployment: A literaturereview and synthesis on a metalevel. R&D Management, 35(4), 409–426.

Lobley, M., Butler, A., & Reed, M. (2009). The contribution of organic farming to ruraldevelopment: An exploration of the socio-economic linkages of organic andnon-organic farms in England. Land Use Policy, 26(3), 723–735.

Louden, F. N., & Macrae, R. J. (2010). Federal regulation of local and sustainable foodclaims in Canada: A case study of Local Food Plus. Agriculture and Human Values,27(2), 177–188.

Maxey, L. (2006). Can we sustain sustainable agriculture? Learning from small-scaleproducer–suppliers in Canada and the UK. Geographical Journal, 172(3),230–244.

Miguel, A. C. A., Spoto, M. H. F., Abrahão, C., & da Silva, P. P. M. (2007). Consumerprofile evaluation by quality function deployment for a pineapple. Ciência eAgrotecnologia, 31(2), 563–569 (in Portuguese).

Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Supply – Brazil & Department of Agricultureand Livestock Development and Cooperatives (2009). Organic products: The eyeof the consumer. Brasília: MAPA/ACS (in Portuguese).

Park, S. H., Ham, S., & Lee, M. A. (2012). How to improve the promotion of Koreanbeef barbecue, bulgogi, for international customers. An application of qualityfunction deployment. Appetite, 59(2), 324–332.

Pinto, A. L. D., & Paiva, C. L. (2010). Developing a functional ready to bake dough forpies using the Quality Function Deployment (QFD) method. Food Science andTechnology, 30, 36–43 (in Portuguese).

Retamales, J. B. (2011). World temperate fruit production: Characteristics andchallenges. Revista Brasileira de Fruticultura (special), 121–130 (in Portuguese).

Ribeiro, J. L., Echeveste, M. E., & Danilevicz, A. F. (2000). The use of QFD to optimizeproducts, processes and services. Porto Alegre: FEENG (in Portuguese).

Rosado Junior, A. G., Lobato, J. F. P., Echeveste, M., Gerber, A. S., Yang, S., & Rossini, K.(2011). Identification of demand characteristics in the production of sires using

190 J. de Fátima Cardoso et al. / Food Quality and Preference 40 (2015) 180–190

a conceptual model of quality function deployment: A case study. RevistaBrasileira de Zootecnia-Brazilian Journal of Animal Science, 40(1), 210–220.

Trauger, A. (2007). Un/re-constructing the agrarian dream: Going back-to-the-landwith an organic marketing co-operative in south-central Pennsylvania, USA.Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 98(1), 9–20.

Viaene, J., & Januszewska, R. (1999). Quality function deployment in the chocolateindustry. Food Quality and Preference, 10, 377–385.

Waisarayutt, C., & Tutiyapak, O. (2006). Application of quality function deploymentin instant rice noodle product development. Kasetsart Journal-Natural Science,40, 162–171.