White Paper:
Asymmetry in Product Features: Use of the Kano Method
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
The presence or absence of product features strongly affect consumer satisfaction with the design. Comparing these features using asymmetry analysis can help identify satisfiers and dissatisfiers from among the features of a product. The Kano method is similar but results in categorizing each respondent's answers. TRC presents this essential method of deciding new product features in detail.
Research in psychology and practical experience in marketing research suggest that product features are not always perceived to be symmetric. That is, there isn’t always a smoothly increasing (or decreasing) relationship between product feature performance and its effect on the consumer.
A good way to understand this may be to look at a feature that is linear, say, gas mileage for a car. Generally as gas mileage increases, satisfaction with the car increases proportionately, and vice versa. Now consider something like heated seats in a non-luxury car. If it is not available it is unlikely to cause any dissatisfaction, while its presence can be a pleasant surprise. Such a feature is often referred to as a satisfier. The opposite of that is a dissatisfier (i.e.) one whose absence causes dissatisfaction, but whose presence does not increase satisfaction. An example of such a feature may be keyless entry in a car. Therefore, one could say that these types of features are asymmetric since their impact on satisfaction and dissatisfaction is not equal.
The focus of asymmetry analysis is to identify satisfiers and dissatisfiers from among the features of a product. By definition, satisfaction with a product is an experience and can only be measured when a consumer has used the product. What do we do when such features need to be identified before the product is used (i.e.) in the development of a new product? The Kano method provides similar results and can therefore be very useful in the new product development process.
The Kano method is named after Professor Noriaki Kano from Japan and is based on his work on product quality and, in particular, customer defined quality. While its terminology and approach are different, its essence is very similar to that of asymmetry analysis. In the Kano method, features are seen as belonging to one of several categories. For our purpose the relevant categories are One-Dimensional, Must-Have (also called Must-Be), Attractive and Indifferent. Table 1 shows the relevant categories in each system and their similarities.
While the two methods are clearly similar they differ in how the results are obtained. In asymmetry analysis, satisfaction data are analyzed in a regression framework to identify satisfiers and dissatisfiers. In the Kano method, the questions are asked in such a way that respondent answers would indicate what category a feature should fall into. No multivariate analysis is used. A feature is essentially seen as working (functional) or not working (dysfunctional). (See Figure 1)
Respondents are asked to indicate how they would feel if the feature were functional and how they would feel if it were dysfunctional. The response scale has five categories ranging from Delight to Dislike. Given that the original scale was in Japanese, the exact translation of the scale is sometimes confusing. Therefore, modified versions of the original scale have often been used. For the functional and the dysfunctional aspects of each feature, the respondents indicate their liking. Compiling the results in a Kano evaluation table provides the classification of features.
The Kano table is a five-by-five matrix between the two scales and one way of interpreting the categories is shown in Table 2.
Responses that fall into the empty cells are questionable. The categorization of the other cells is not always clear cut, but the general pattern is evident. When a respondent likes the functional aspect of a feature and does not have strong feelings about the dysfunctional aspect, it is an Attractive feature. In the opposite case it is generally a Must-Have feature. When they generally don’t have strong feelings on either side, its an Indifferent feature.
Each respondent’s answers are thus categorized and the proportion of responses that fall into each category are summarized. Given that there are inherent differences between people, the same feature might be looked at differently by different people. This may indicate that there are some preference-based segments in the market.
An Example
A Kano analysis was conducted in the healthcare market using a web panel. Respondents indicated their preference for the features of a healthcare insurance product. Proportions of respondents who fall into each category are shown in Table 3.
Percentages should be read across and add up to 100% horizontally. For example, Accurate/Timely Claims is classified as a Must-Have feature by 61% f respondents, as an Attractive feature by 9%, as a One-Dimensional feature by 23% and as an Indifferent feature by 8%. There is more of a consensus on some features than others. Features such as Extensive Doctor List and Extensive Hospital List, as well as Claims payments, are classified by many people as Must-Have’s or One–Dimensional. But there are clearly segments in the market when it comes to features such as Dental or Vision coverage. It would make sense for the health insurance company to study these segments more closely to see if they are worthy of pursuing by offering specific plans or add-ons.
In Conclusion
Kano analysis works better with features that are either present or absent. Features on a continuum can be included if phrased appropriately. When trying to build a new product, it generally makes sense to start with Must-Have features, add One-Dimensional features and then add Attractive features if possible. Of course, one must understand if there are economically viable segments in the market that place a premium on Attractive features. In such cases variations of the product could be used to target them.
This article was written by Rajan Sambandam of TRC, a full-service market research provider located in Fort Washington, PA.
Other content shared by TRC
Better Questions For Segmentation: Use of MAX-DIFF
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
Using Maximum Difference Scaling as a method in designing surveys may ensure more useful results in your market research. It is a comparative method based on importance that sidesteps the problems associated with traditional importance scales. TRC explains the mechanics behind this method through a detailed example in this white paper. Read Article »
Database Scoring with Object Based Segmentation
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
Segmentation created from company databases are often lacking the rich segmentation schemes formed by attitudinal surveys. A new approach is Object based segmentation that uses database variables at the basis for forming attitudinal segments, leaving both markets classifiable with clear demographic segments. TRC compares traditional segmentation analysis with Object based. Read Article »
Conjoint Analysis versus Self-Explicated Method: A Comparison
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
Determining feature importance in a product can be divided into two techniques - top-down methods where a customer evaluates the whole product at once, and bottum-up methods where features are evaluated individually or in sets. The former method, Conjoint Analysis, is more common while the latter method, Self-Explicated Method, is not widely used but has practical advantages. TRC compares the two methods in this white paper. Read Article »
Product Configurator
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
To help customers purchase the right product, companies often use product configurators - tools that let customers design their purchase before ordering. This method is employed as a market research technique, similar to conjoint analysis but without some of the constrictions. This white paper from TRC explains an appropriate use of the product configurator method. Read Article »
Market Segmentation: One Method, Four Examples
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
Effective market segmentation requires an understanding of the market and the skilled art of finding the appropriate segments. TRC gives four examples of this method's application with results. Read Article »
How to Measure the Value of a Brand
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
Brand name evokes an inherent value; finding a way to reliably measure that value is crucial in determining product development. A technique called discrete choice conjoint analysis is described in this paper by TRC. Read Article »
Deriving Value from Research: the Use of Conjoint Analysis for Product Development
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
Marketing research has been used by firms over the last several decades to provide information for decision making. Over time, increasingly sophisticated statistical methods have been developed and deployed in the service of this goal. This article focuses on one such method - conjoint analysis - and its application to product development. Read Article »
Cluster Analysis Gets Complicated
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
Segmentation studies using cluster analysis have become commonplace. However, the data may be affected by collinearity, which can have a strong impact and affect the results of the analysis unless addressed. This article investigates what level presents a problem, why it's a problem, and how to get around it. Simulated data allows a clear demonstration of the issue without clouding it with extraneous factors. Read Article »
Identifying Feature Importance: A Comparison of Methods
by TRC
Understanding what customers want is fundamental to the new product development process as well as to the process of keeping existing products fresh and relevant. To be successful in this area we need to be able to correctly identify what features are important to consumers. Feature importance can be measured using a variety of methods of differing effectiveness. In this paper we will deal with the following methods: Importance Scales, Pick data, Pairwise Comparisons, and Max-Diff. Read Article »
Monadic Price Testing vs. Price Laddering
by TRC
Compares two popular pricing methods to understand the difference in take rate information. Read Article »
New Product Development: Stages and Methods
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
TRC identifies the best methods for each stage of the product development process, from Idea Generation through Feature Development, Product Development and Product Testing. Read Article »
Understand Choice in Banking: Use of Discrete Choice Conjoint Analysis
by TRC
Conjoint analysis provides incentive for survey respondents to determine which features must not be omitted in their final purchase. The method closely mirrors decision-making in the real world, and as shown by TRC in this white paper, is applicable to many situations including how customers choose their bank. Read Article »
Want better product ideas? Try smart incentives
by Rajan Samandam, TRC
Idea generation from survey respondents is strongly dependent on incentive. Introducing competition strengthens the quantity and quality of creative responses. TRC provides examples of smart incentives in this white paper. Read Article »
An alternative method of reporting customer satisfaction scores
by Rajan Sambandam and George Hausser of TRC
Though customer satisfaction evaluations are widely used, reporting of these scores has varied from one study to another. This is likely the result of each method’s advantages and disadvantages, as well as the personal preferences and habits of the researcher. In this article we review various reporting methods and outline our method with an example. Read Article »
Identifying the Key Drivers of Brand Image
by TRC
Measuring brand image requires looking at direct effects as well as indirect effects of a company's performance. TRC compares traditional multiple regression with SatiscanTM, a method that can review all possible path models. Read Article »
Improving Call Satisfaction: A Case Study
by TRC
TRC presents a case study of analyzing and improving a call center as an on-going data collection process. Read Article »
Improving Claim Satisfaction: A Case Study
by TRC
A case study on applying full-service market research to help an insurance company improve their client satisfaction with claim handling. Read Article »
Non-Response Bias In Survey Sampling
by TRC
Market research accounts for many scenarios to ensure high quality of data. One of the most overlooked problems is non-response bias. TRC describes ways to reduce its effects through survey design and data adjustment in this white paper. Read Article »
Segmentation Success
by Michael Sosnowski, TRC
This paper explains the basic building blocks of the segmentation process and its implementation. Read Article »
Survey of Analysis Methods Part I
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
Practical marketing research deals with two major problems: identifying key drivers and developing segments. In this two-part series TRC looks at key driver analysis and segmentation. Read Article »
Survey of Analysis Methods Part II
by Rajan Sambandam, TRC
This is Part II of a series looking at aspects of practical marketing research: identifying key drivers and developing segments. This content describes specific segmentation methods: cluster analysis, neural networks, self-organizing map (SOM), and mixture models. Included is a discussion on ideas for developing good segments. Read Article »
Validating Satiscan Using A Split Sample Approach
by TRC
TRC's SatiscanTM model is tested for validity using call center data and a split sample approach. This shows that SatiscanTM produces similar models when run on random halves of an energy industry dataset. Read Article »
Satiscan and Regression Analysis: A Comparison
by TRC
The comparison shows the advantages of SatiscanTM, an analytical method from TRC, over regression in identifying the correct and cost efficient action steps. Read Article »
TURF: New Methods for Implementation
by Westley Ritz, TRC
TURF is a long-established and quite useful marketing research tool, but not everyone is familiar with how it works, or with the latest developments that can make TURF even more effective. The purposes of this paper are twofold: (1) to explain the technique and (2) to describe the latest methods for implementation. Read Article »
Product Configuration: A Research Approach for the Times
by Rajan Sambandam & Pankaj Kumar, TRC
The marketplace has shifted in the last decade with the ability of consumers to configure the product they want. This white paper explains the basics of configuration, an approach that mimics the real world of customer driven product design to obtain insight into consumer decision-making. Read Article »
Product Configuration: Evidence for Effectiveness
by Rajan Sambandam & Pankaj Kumar, TRC
This white paper looks at the examples from one product configuration study, the kinds of information that can be derived and the possibilities provided by statistical analysis. Read Article »
