The Integration of the Kano Model and SERVQUAL into the House of Quality for Developing Occupational Safety and Health Training Program

  • Mohd Saiful Izwaan Saadon
  • Zainol Mustafa
  • Khairul Za’im Kamarulzaman
Conference paper


Knowledge on occupational safety and health (OSH) management system is very important to any industrial organization in order for them to make sure that the safety and health elements in their organization are well maintained and according to the law. It is very important for the industrial management and workers to know and understand the correct OSH knowledge and concept. Because of that it is very important for them to attend sufficient and relevant OSH training in order for them to attain the OSH knowledge. These trainings must be effective and have sufficient impact. For that purpose a new method is used in this research. The Kano model and SERVQUAL have been integrated into the house of quality (HOQ) for the purpose of developing an OSH training course that would satisfy not only the requirement and needs of the industry but also unexpected factors towards the trainee who attends the course. By using this method we can see that the level of understanding for the training participant using this new model is higher compared to the level of understanding for the participant from the conventional OSH training program that has been conducted by the training provider. With the increment in the level of understanding, the level of effectiveness for doing OSH-related job for the training participant would also be different. We can prove this by using Kirkpatrick’s Evaluation Model, whereby we would evaluate the trainee from the conventional OSH training program against the newly developed OSH training program. The evaluation would be based on their level of understanding and the level of effectiveness of doing OSH-related jobs in their respective workplace.


Service Quality Intellectual Capital Quality Function Deployment Training Provider Training Participant 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support received in the form of fundamental research grant scheme FRGS/1/2013/SG04/UKM/02/4 from the Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia.


  1. 1.
    Akao Y (ed) (1990) Quality function deployment. Productivity Press, Cambridge (English translation)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amell TK, Kumar S, Rosser WJ (2001) Ergonomics, loss management and occupational injury and illness surveillance: a review. Int J Ind Ergon 28(2):69–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Atherley G, Booth R, Kelly M (1975) Workers’ involvement in occupational health and safety in Britain. Int Labour Rev 111(6):469–483Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berger C, Blauth R, Bolster C, Burchill G, Dumouchel W, Pouliot F, Richter R, Rubinoff A, Shen D, Timko M, Walden D (1993) Kano’s methods for understanding customer-defined quality. Cent Qual Manag J 2(4):3–36Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brown SW, Swartz TA (1989) A gap analysis of professional service quality. J Market 53(April):92–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Busacca B, Padula G (2005) Understanding the relationship between attribute performance and overall satisfaction: theory, measurement and implications. Market Intell Plan 23(6):543–561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cheng Lim P, Aquilano NJ, Jacobs FR (1999) An innovative framework for health-care performance measurement. Manag Serv Qual 9(6):423–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cohen L (1988) Quality function deployment: an application perspective from digital equipment corporation. Nat Product Rev 7(3):197–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ealey LA (1988) Quality by design. ASI Press, DearbornGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Garvin DA (1987) Competing on the eight dimensions of quality. Harv Bus Rev 6(November–December):101–109Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Garvin DA (1988) Managing quality: the strategic and competitive edge. The Free Press Macmillan Inc, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Graessel B (1993) Using quality function deployment to improve customer service. Qual Prog 26(November):59–63Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Griffin A (1992) Evaluating QFD’s use in US firms as a process for developing products. J Prod Innov Manag 9:171–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hales R (1994) QFD: a key enabling technology in today’s advanced product development environments. Ind Eng 26(12):10–11Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hauser JR, Clausing D (1988) The house of quality. Harv Bus Rev 66(3):63–73Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Steensma H, Groeneveld K (2010) Evaluating training using the “Four Levels Model”. J Work Learn 22(5):319–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hugenholtz NIR, Schreinemakers JF, A-Tajk MA, Van Dijk FJH (2007) Knowledge infrastructure needed for occupational health. Ind Health 45(1):13–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hunter MR (1994) Listening to the customer using QFD. Qual Prog 27(4):55–59Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nuñez I, Villanueva M (2011) Safety capital: the management of organizational knowledge on occupational health and safety. J Work Learn 23(1):56–71Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kano N, Seraku N, Takahashi F, Tsuji S (1984) Attractive quality and must-be quality. J Jpn Soc Qual Cont 14(2):39–48Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kano N (1995) Upsizing the organization by attractive quality creation. Proceedings of the First World Congress for Total Quality Management, 10–12 April 1995, Sheffield, pp 60–72Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kano N (2001) Life cycle and creation of attractive quality. Proceedings from Quality Management and Organizational Development (QMOD), Linkoping University, LinkopingGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    King B (1989) Better designs in half the time. GOAL/QPC, Lawrence, MSGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kirkpatrick DL (1994) Evaluating training programs: the four levels. Berrett-Koehler, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kogure M, Akao Y (1983) Quality function deployment and CWQC in Japan. Quality Progress, October, pp 25–9Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kuei CH, Lu MH (1997) An integrated approach to service quality improvement. Int J Qual Sci 2(1):24–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Landsbergis P, Cahill J, Schnall P (1999) The impact of lean production and related new systems of work organization on worker health. J Occup Health Psychol 4(2):108–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lilja J, Wiklund H (2006) Obstacles to the creation of attractive quality. TQM Mag 18(1):55–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Vonderembse MA, Raghunathan TS (1997) Quality function deployment’s impact on product development. Int J Qual Sci 2(4):253–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Matzler K, Hinterhuber HH (1998) How to make product development projects more successful by integrating Kano’s model of customer satisfaction into quality function deployment. Technovation 18(1):25–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Saadon MS (2012) Evaluation of occupational safety & health training courses in Pasir Gudang & Senai Industrial Area. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru, JohorGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Nielsen C, Hussi T, Schunder-Tatzber S, Roslender R, Ahonen G (2007) The interrelations between health and intellectual capital. In: Johanson U, Ahonen GA, Roslender R (eds) Work health and management control. Thompson Fakta AD, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Parasuraman A, Zeithaml VA, Berry LL (1985) A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research. J Market 49(Fall):41–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Parasuraman A, Zeithaml VA, Berry LL (1988) SERVQUAL: a multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. J Retail 64(Spring):12–40Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Raynor ME (1994) The ABCs of QFD: formalizing the quest for cost-effective customer delight. Nat Product Rev 13(3):351–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Redfern R, Davey CL (2003) Supply chain market orientation in new product development in the UK: a pilot case study. J Fash Market Manag 7(1):65–77Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Roy M (2003) Self-directed work teams and safety: a winning combination? Saf Sci 41(4):359–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Schulte PA, Lentz TJ, Anderson VP, Lamborg AD (2004) Knowledge management in occupational hygiene: the United States example. Ann Occup Hyg 48(7):583–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Shannon H, Robson L, Sale JM (2001) Creating safer and healthier workplaces: role of organizational factors and job characteristics. Am J Ind Med 40(3):319–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Starbuck M, Farjoun M (2005) Organization at the limit: lessons from the Columbia disaster. Blackwell Publishing, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Sullivan LP (1986) Quality function deployment. Quality progress, June, pp 39–50Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Sullivan LP (1988) Policy management through quality function deployment. Quality progress, June, pp 18–20Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Thompson J (1997) Employee health programmes: a model designed for a local company. J Work Learn 9(2):83–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Torp S, Moen BE (2006) The effects of occupational health and safety management on work environment and health: a prospective study. Appl Ergon 37(6):775–783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Van Vegchel N, De Jonge J, Landsbergis P (2005) Occupational stress in (inter)action: the interplay between job demands and job resources. J Organ Behav 26(5):535–560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Kim Y-P, Kim K-W, Yun D-G (2003) Exploration and development of SERVQUAL. Asn J Qual 4(1):116–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Zacharatos A, Barling J, Iverson D (2005) High-performance work systems and occupational safety. J Appl Psychol 90(1):77–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Zeithaml VA (1988) Consumer perceptions of price, quality and value: a means-end model and synthesis of evidence. J Market Res 52(July):2–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Zohar D (1980) Safety climate in industrial organizations: theoretical and applied implications. J Appl Psychol 65(1):96–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mohd Saiful Izwaan Saadon
    • 1
  • Zainol Mustafa
    • 2
  • Khairul Za’im Kamarulzaman
    • 3
  1. 1.Faculty of Science and TechnologyOpen University MalaysiaShah AlamMalaysia
  2. 2.Faculty of Science and TechnologyNational University of MalaysiaBangiMalaysia
  3. 3.Malaysian Institute of Industrial TechnologyKuala Lumpur UniversityJohor BahruMalaysia

Personalised recommendations