Analysis of Kano's Quality Attributes for Smart Car: An Exploratory Study

스마트카의 Kano 품질속성 분석에 관한 탐색적 연구

  • Received : 2016.02.24
  • Accepted : 2016.04.22
  • Published : 2016.04.30


Smart car is a vehicle which maximizes convenience, safety, and user experience. The traditional vehicle style will be replaced by a smart car. The objective of this paper is to find essential quality attributes that consumers want. We provide a method to select a best smart car reflecting their preference based on the quality attributes. We derive Kano's quality attributes by an exploratory survey and show an example to implement their decision using the Analytic Hierarchy Process method. As a result, the quality attributes were classified into two groups of attractive quality and indifference quality. The respondents evaluated that the safety of smart cars was more important than the convenience and user experience. However, the smart car was required more functions related to the convenience criteria. These results will provide important implications for smart car design.


Smart Car;Kano's Quality Attributes;Analytic Hierarchy Process;Selection of Smart Car


  1. 김승천.노광현 (2011), "스마트 자동차 기술동향 ", 정보과학회지, 9, 13-18. (Kim, S.C. and Noh, K.H. (2011), "Technology trend of smart car", Journal of Korean Institute of Information Scientists and Engineers, 9, 13-18.)
  2. 이재관 (2013), "스마트카 개발동향 및 당면과제", 정보화통신, 11, 32-38. (Lee, J.K. (2013), "Smart car development trend and urgent tasks", Information and Telecommunications, 11, 32-38.)
  3. 전황수 (2012), "스마트카 기술 및 서비스 동향", 전자통신동향분석, 27(1), 147-157. (Jeon, H.S. (2012), "Smart car technology and service trends", Electronics and Telecommunications Trends, 27(1), 147-157.)
  4. 주영섭 (2011), "자동차 스마트화 기술 및 발전 전략", 한국자동차공학회 스마트카 기술 및 전략 심포지엄, 9월 21일, 9-30. (Joo, Y.S. (2011), "Smart car technology and development strategy", Symposium of smart car technology and strategy in The Korean Society of Automotive Engineers, Sept 21, 9-30.) [국외 문헌]
  5. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988), "The flow experience and its significance for human psychology", In M. Csikszentmihalyi and I. S. Csikszentmihalyi(Eds). Optimal Experience : Psychological Studies of Flow in Consciousness, Cambridge, MA : Cambridge Univ. Press, 15-35.
  6. Elliott, A. M. (2011), The future of the connected car".
  7. Igbaria, M., Parasuraman, S., and Baroudi, J. J. (1996), "A motivational model of microcomputer usage", Journal of Management Information Systems, 13(1), 127-143.
  8. Kano, N., Seraku, N., Takahashi, F., and Tsuji, S. (1984), "Attractive quality and must-be quality", Journal of the Japanese Society for Quality Control, 14(2), 39-48.
  9. Mifsud, J. (2011), "The difference and relationship between usability and user experience"., (Retrieved on December 1, 2014).
  10. Mikulic, J. and Prebezac, D. (2011), "A critical review of techniques for classifying quality attributes in the Kano model", Managing Service Quality, 21(1), 46-66.
  11. Nielsen, J. (1996), "Usability metrics : tracking interface improvement", IEEE Software, 13(6), 12-14.
  12. 곽동용.이소연.윤현정 (2009), "V2X 네트워킹 기술 표준화 동향", TTA Journal, 제124호, 70-74. (Gwak, D.Y., Lee, S.Y., and Yoon, H.J. (2009), "V2X networking technology standards", TTA Journal, 124, 70-74.)
  13. 김상국 (2014), "IoT/M2M 기술환경하에서 커넥티드카 급격한 시장기대", KISTI Market Report, 4(2), 3-6. (Kim, S.K. (2014), "Rapid market expectation of connected car based on IoT/M2M technology environment", KISTI Market Report, 4(2), 3-6.)
  14. Parasuraman, A., Zeithml, A., and Berry, L. L. (1985), "A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research", Journal of Marketing, 49, 41-50.
  15. Pitt, L. F., Watson, R. T., and Kavan, C. B. (1995), "Service quality: A measure of information systems effectiveness", MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 173-187.
  16. Saaty, T. L. (1990), Multicriteria Decision Making: The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation. RWS Pub.
  17. Saaty, T. L. (1980), The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, New York.
  18. Teo, Thompson, S. H., Srivastava, S. C., and Jiang, L. (2008-9), "Trust and electronic government success: An empirical study", Journal of MIS, 25(3), 99-131.
  19. Triantaphyllou, E. (2000), Multi-criteria Decision Making Methods: A Comparative Study(Applied Optimization), Springer-Science-Business Media.
  20. Ullah, A. M. M. S. and Tamaki, J. (2011), "Analysis of Kano-model-based customer needs for product development", Systems Engineering, 14(2), 154-172.
  21. Venkatesh, V. and Davis, F. D. (1996), "A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: Development and test", Decision Sciences, 27(3), 451-481.
  22. Walden, D. (1993), "Kano's methods for understanding customer-defined quality", Center for Quality of Management Journal, 2(4), 2-36.
  23. Zhao, M., and Dholakia, R. R. (2009), "A multi-attribute model of web site interactivity and customer satisfaction: An application of the Kano model", Managing Service Quality, 19(3), 286-307.


Supported by : 경성대학교