Understanding the relationship between Kano model’s customer satisfaction scores and self-stated requirements importance

SpringerPlus

Table 1 Kano requirements categorization table (Hussain et al. 2015)

Requirements	M	O	A	I	R	Q	Total	Category
R1	11	14	16	06	03	–	50	A
R2	5	15	13	14	03	–	50	O
R3	07	22	11	07	02	01	50	O
R4	07	22	12	06	03	–	50	O
R5	04	18	06	18	04	–	50	O

Requirements	M %	O %	A %	I %	R %	Q %	Total %	Category
R1	22	28	32	12	06	–	100	A
R2	10	30	26	28	06	–	100	O
R3	14	44	22	14	04	02	100	O
R4	14	44	24	12	06	–	100	O
R5	08	36	12	36	08	–	100	O

A (attractive), O (one-dimensional), M (must-be); I (indifference), R (reverse); Q (questionable), R1–R5 (requirements)

Requirements	M	O	A	I	R	Q	Total	Category
R1	11	14	16	06	03	–	50	A
R2	5	15	13	14	03	–	50	O
R3	07	22	11	07	02	01	50	O
R4	07	22	12	06	03	–	50	O
R5	04	18	06	18	04	–	50	O

Requirements	M %	O %	A %	I %	R %	Q %	Total %	Category
R1	22	28	32	12	06	–	100	A
R2	10	30	26	28	06	–	100	O
R3	14	44	22	14	04	02	100	O
R4	14	44	24	12	06	–	100	O
R5	08	36	12	36	08	–	100	O

Requirements	M	O	A	I	R	Q	Total	Category
R1	11	14	16	06	03	–	50	A
R2	5	15	13	14	03	–	50	O
R3	07	22	11	07	02	01	50	O
R4	07	22	12	06	03	–	50	O
R5	04	18	06	18	04	–	50	O

Requirements	M %	O %	A %	I %	R %	Q %	Total %	Category
R1	22	28	32	12	06	–	100	A
R2	10	30	26	28	06	–	100	O
R3	14	44	22	14	04	02	100	O
R4	14	44	24	12	06	–	100	O
R5	08	36	12	36	08	–	100	O

Requirements	M	O	A	I	R	Q	Total	Category
R1	11	14	16	06	03	–	50	A
R2	5	15	13	14	03	–	50	O
R3	07	22	11	07	02	01	50	O
R4	07	22	12	06	03	–	50	O
R5	04	18	06	18	04	–	50	O

Requirements	M %	O %	A %	I %	R %	Q %	Total %	Category
R1	22	28	32	12	06	–	100	A
R2	10	30	26	28	06	–	100	O
R3	14	44	22	14	04	02	100	O
R4	14	44	24	12	06	–	100	O
R5	08	36	12	36	08	–	100	O