Ethiopian Journal of Science and Sustainable Development

e-ISSN 2663-3205 Volume 9(1), 2022

Journal Home Page: www.ejssd.astu.edu.et ASTU

Research Paper

Application of Quality Function Deployment in Customer Oriented Footwear

Development Process

Hailu Beyecha Deti, Habtamu Beri, Biftu Hailu, Kemal Temam

Mechanical Engineering Department, School of Mechanical, Chemical & Materials Engineering, Adama Science and

Technology University, P.O. Box: 1888, Adama, Ethiopia

Article Info Abstract

Article History:

Received 15 June 2021

Received in revised form

11 January 2022

Accepted 16 March 2022

The main purpose of this study was to develop the house of quality in footwear development

process. The study was conducted using quantitative research method. Both primary and

secondary data sources were used. The primary data sources were sampled using purposive

sampling method. The tools used for collecting the data were informant interview and

questionnaire. The secondary data were collected from previous research outputs that are

related to the application of quality function deployment in footwear development process. The

collected data were analyzed using Microsoft Excel 2016 and QFD Capture Professional

Edition 4.2.20. The analysis results revealed that the footwear produced by Ethiopian

companies fared below par in comparison to the footwear produced by Chinese and European

companies in terms of customer and technical perspectives. Therefore, Ethiopian footwear

manufacturing companies shall use the prioritized customer and technical requirements in order

to develop customer oriented footwear.

Keywords:

Customer orientation

Quality function deployment

House of quality

Footwear

1. Introduction

Nowadays, manufacturing industries, particularly

footwear manufacturing industries are operating in a

very competitive and dramatically changing

environment (United Nations, 2018; Alina and

Alexandra, 2018). In order to survive in such an

environment, the industries have to develop a better-

quality product with a reasonable cost and faster

delivery time (Alina and Alexandra, 2018). For

improving quality, reducing cost and shortening

delivery time of a product, manufacturing industries

were using different quality techniques (Radej et al.,

2017). Among the techniques, Quality Function

Deployment (QFD) was the one that was used by many

industries throughout the globe in order to enhance

customer satisfaction (Eshan, 2012; Alina and

Corresponding author, e-mail: beyechahailu@yahoo.com

https://doi.org/10.20372/ejssdastu:v9.i1.2022.381

Alexandra, 2018; Chatree et al., 2012). According to

Niguss Haregot and Kassu Jilcha (2019), firms can

improve quality of products, minimize costs and shorten

product development time through the introduction of

QFD.

QFD is an engineering method used to improve

quality by considering the voice of the customer (or

customer requirements) in the product development

process, according Akao (1990), the founder of QFD.

Moreover, QFD is a method used to transform customer

demands into design quality, to deploy the functions

forming quality, and to deploy methods for achieving

the design quality into subsystems and component parts,

and ultimately to specific elements of the manufacturing

process (Eshan, 2012). Additionally, QFD is a technique

http://www.ejssd.astu.edu/
https://doi.org/10.20372/ejssdastu:v9.i1.2022..........

Hailu Beyecha et al. Ethiop.J.Sci.Sustain.Dev., Vol. 9(1), 2022

used to improve quality of a product by focusing on the

requirements of the customer. QFD is further used to

translate customer requirements into technical

requirements of the product by considering benchmarks

and regulatory standards (Fiorenzo and Domenico,

2018). QFD is also considered as a method that is used

by applying a graphic model named as House of

Quality, HoQ (Akao, 1990; Karin and John, 1996;

Anusha, 2010; Sanchit and Vivek, 2015). The HoQ is a

type of conceptual map that offers the means for inter-

functional planning as well as communications during

the product development process (Praveen, 2016).

Moreover, HoQ is a QFD tool that is used to identify

customer requirements and determine technical

requirements in order to satisfy customer requirements.

On the contrary, QFD has not been well introduced

to the Ethiopian industries yet (Niguss Haregot and

Kassu Jilcha, 2019). As a result, the industries are less

competitive in the local and global markets due to poor

product quality and high product cost (Niguss Haregot

and Kassu Jilcha, 2019). Therefore, this is the rationale

for delving into the study as it is high time to introduce

customer oriented footwear development process

through the application of QFD.

2. Methodology

In this study, a quantitative research method had

been employed. Both primary and secondary data were

collected and used in order to conduct the study. The

primary data were collected through informant

interview and questionnaire. The informant interview

was used to identify customer requirements with regard

to footwear from potential customers and lead sellers at

different areas of Adama city such as 'Amede', 'Franko'

and 'Mebrat Hail'. The questionnaire was used to

determine the importance to customer and customer

competitive assessment from the respondents' point of

view. The respondents were selected purposively based

on their experiences of using footwear made in Ethiopia,

China and Europe. Additionally, the secondary data

were collected so as to account for the regulatory

standards of footwear development process. The

secondary data were obtained from different literatures

and previous research outputs such as journals,

periodicals and articles.

The scale used for the design of the questionnaire is

the Likert Scale (Ankur et al., 2015) with the range from

one (1) to five (5); one (1) stands for the very low

importance and five (5) for the very high importance.

The questionnaire was distributed to the purposively

selected permanent workers of Adama Science and

Technology University (ASTU). Currently, there are

about 2,222 permanent workers in ASTU (IRCCD,

2020). Therefore, the sample size of the respondents

was determined by using simple random sampling

method with the Slovin's formula (Equation 1) (Thomas,

2013):

n =
N

1+N(e)2
(1)

where, n = sample size, N = total population and e =

sampling error at 90% level of confidence.

Therefore, n =
2,222

1+2,222(0.1)2
= 96

As a result, 120 questionnaires were distributed to

the respondents and finally 99 questionnaires were

properly filled and returned from the respondents. Thus,

the response shows that the data were strongly reliable

at 90% level of confidence.

With regard to the demographic characteristics of the

respondents, nearly 96% of the respondents were male

respondents and the remaining 4% were female

respondents. Additionally, the age range of the

respondents was varying from 26 – 59 years of age with

their education level of 35%, 54% and 11% that stand

for first degree, second degree and third degree,

respectively.

Then after, the data obtained from the questionnaire

were analyzed and presented by using the House of

Quality (HoQ) technique, the main analytical technique

used in the QFD (Yoji Akao, 1990). In HoQ, customer

requirements are translated into technical requirements

by considering the regulatory standards of footwear

development process. Therefore, QFD Capture

Professional Edition 4.2.20 was used to construct the

results of the study based on the steps that required for

the development of the HoQ (Praveen, 2016; Alina and

Alexandra, 2018). Additionally, Microsoft Excel 2016

was used to determine the average and percentage

results of the study through descriptive statistical

analysis method.

Hailu Beyecha et al. Ethiop.J.Sci.Sustain.Dev., Vol. 9(1), 2022

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Determination of Customer Requirements

Four primary and twenty secondary customer

requirements were generated based on the responses of

the customers and lead sellers of footwear that were

made in Ethiopia, China and Europe. Furthermore, the

average importance to customer and customer

competitive assessment were determined from the

responses of the respondents by approximating the

digits below 0.5 to the lower full number and higher 0.5

to the next full number with the range from 1 to 5. The

comparative percentage of the primary customer

requirements was also determined among the primary

customer requirements and the competitors as shown in

Table 1.

Table 1 shows the list of customer requirements with

the average results of the importance to customer and

customer competitive assessment of footwear that were

made in Ethiopia, China and Europe. In the importance

to customer, the primary customer requirements such as

performance, comfort, appearance and availability

weighs the value of 25.71%, 25.58%, 24.36% and

24.36%, respectively. In the customer competitive

assessment, European footwear weighs the highest

value in most of the primary customer requirements

such as comfort, appearance and performance with

40.00%, 39.58% and 37.50%, respectively. However,

Chinese and Ethiopian footwear weigh the same higher

value in the case of availability with 34.78%. Moreover,

Ethiopian footwear weighs higher value (33.65%) in the

case of performance when compared with the Chinese

footwear that weighs lower value (28.85%).

Table 1: Customer requirements, importance to customer and customer competitive assessment

#
Customer requirements Average

importance to

customer (1 – 5)

Average customer competitive

assessment

Ethiopia

(1 – 5)

China

(1 – 5)

Europe

(1 – 5) Primary Secondary

Comfort

Soft and flexible 4 3 4 5

2 Allow free movement 4 4 4 5

3 Good fit on foot 5 4 4 5

4 Thermal comfortability 4 3 3 5

5 Light weight 4 3 4 4

Comparative percentage 25.58% 28.33% 31.67% 40.00%

Performance

Durable 4 4 3 5

7 Good adhesion of outsole 4 4 3 5

8 Not fabric fungi problem 5 4 3 5

9 Not make skin irritation 5 3 3 4

10 Protection against hazards 4 4 3 4

11 Slip resistance 4 4 3 4

12 Easy to lock and unlock 4 4 4 4

13 Easy to don/doff 4 4 4 4

14 Easy to polish 4 4 4 4

Comparative percentage 25.71% 33.65% 28.85% 37.50%

Appearance

Fashionable 4 3 4 5

16 Good look 4 3 4 5

17 Nice finish 4 4 4 5

18 Wide colour range 4 3 4 4

Comparative percentage 24.36% 27.08% 33.33% 39.58%

19
Availability

Wide size range 4 4 4 4

20 Reasonable price range 4 4 4 3

Comparative percentage 24.36% 34.78% 34.78% 30.43%

Hailu Beyecha et al. Ethiop.J.Sci.Sustain.Dev., Vol. 9(1), 2022

Table 2: Target value and sales point of customer requirements

#
Customer requirements Target value

(1 – 5)

Sales point

(1 – 2)

Primary Secondary

Comfort

Soft and flexible 4 2

2 Allow free movement 5 2

3 Good fit on foot 5 2

4 Thermal comfortability 4 2

5 Light weight 4 2

Comparative percentage 24.13% 27.38%

Performance

Durable 5 2

7 Good adhesion of outsole 5 2

8 Not fabric fungi problem 4 1.5

9 Not make skin irritation 4 2

10 Protection against hazards 4 1.5

11 Slip resistance 4 2

12 Easy to lock and unlock 5 1

13 Easy to don/doff 4 1

14 Easy to polish 4 1

Comparative percentage 23.77% 21.29%

Appearance

Fashionable 5 2

16 Good look 5 2

17 Nice finish 5 2

18 Wide colour range 5 2

Comparative percentage 27.42% 27.38%

19
Availability

Wide size range 5 2

20 Reasonable price range 4 1.5

Comparative percentage 24.68% 23.95%

The target value of customer requirements was

determined by approximating the digits below 0.5 to the

lower full number and higher 0.5 to the next full number

with the range from 1 to 5. Moreover, the sales point of

customer requirements was also determined with the

range from 1 to 2. The comparative percentage of the

primary customer requirements was also determined

among the primary customer requirements as shown in

Table 2.

Table 2 shows the results of the target value and sales

point of customer requirements that determined by

considering the need of customers. This table also shows

that the primary customer requirements such as

appearance, availability, comfort and performance

weighs the percentage target value of 27.42%, 24.68%,

24.13% and 23.77%, respectively. Moreover, the

primary customer requirements such as appearance,

comfort, availability and performance weighs the

percentage sales point of 27.38%, 27.38%, 23.95% and

21.29%, respectively.

3.2. Determination of Technical Requirements

Customer requirements were properly translated into

technical requirements through brainstorming and

reviewing different literatures of footwear development

process (Siriphan and Nopadon, 2012; Suzana et al.,

2020; Adul and Thanin, 2020; Lucie et al., 2020; Salto,

2016; Bitlisli et al., 2013; Muhammed et al., 2012).

Accordingly, three primary and twenty secondary

technical requirements were generated. Moreover, the

average degree of difficulty, target value and technical

competitive assessment were determined by

approximating the digits below 0.5 to the lower full

number and higher 0.5 to the next full number with the

Hailu Beyecha et al. Ethiop.J.Sci.Sustain.Dev., Vol. 9(1), 2022

range from 1 to 5. The comparative percentage of the

primary technical requirements was also determined

among the primary technical requirements and the

competitors as shown in Table 3.

Table 3 shows the technical requirements and the

results of the degree of difficulty, target value and

technical competitive assessment of footwear that made

in Ethiopia, China and Europe. The degree of difficulty

for the primary technical requirement such as

manufacturing, materials and design weighs 34.01%,

33.33% and 32.65%, respectively. The target value for

the primary technical requirement such as

manufacturing, materials and design weighs 34.60%,

33.20% and 32.16%, respectively. In the case of

technical competitive assessment, European footwear

weighs the highest value for the primary technical

requirement such as design, materials and

manufacturing with 44.87%, 44.78% and 41.67%,

respectively. Chinese footwear weighs the intermedium

value for the primary technical requirement such as

design, materials and manufacturing with 37.18%,

35.82% and 33.33%, respectively. Ethiopian footwear

weighs the lowest value for the primary technical

requirement such as manufacturing, materials and

design with 25.00%, 19.40% and 17.95%, respectively.

3.3. Development of QFD Model

QFD model of footwear development process was

developed using QFD Capture Professional Edition

4.2.20 based on the results of the customer and technical

requirements of the study as discussed in the Figures 1

to 4.

Table 3: Technical requirements, degree of difficulty and technical competitive assessment

Technical requirements Degree of

difficulty

(1 – 5)

Target

value

(1 – 5)

Technical competitive assessment

Primary Secondary
Ethiopia

(1 – 5)

China

(1 – 5)

Europe

(1 – 5)

1 Design Lasting and sewing design 3 4 3 4 5

2 Sewing pathway design 4 3 2 3 5

3 Locking system design 3 4 3 4 5

4 Style and colour design 3 4 2 5 5

5 Shape and size design 3 4 2 5 5

6 Sole tread design 4 3 1 4 5

7 Water and air permeability

design 4 4 1 4 5

Comparative percentage 32.65% 32.16% 17.95% 37.18% 44.87%

8 Materials Upper materials 3 4 3 4 5

9 In-sock materials 3 4 2 4 5

10 Insole materials 3 4 2 4 5

11 Outsole materials 4 3 1 4 5

12 Lining materials 4 4 3 4 5

13 Adhesive materials 4 4 2 4 5

Comparative percentage 33.33% 33.20% 19.40% 35.82% 44.78%

14 Manufacturing Preparation 3 4 3 4 5

15 Coupling and moulding 3 4 3 4 5

16 Tacking and trimming 4 4 3 4 5

17 Scouring and roughing 4 4 3 4 5

18 Ironing and lasting 3 4 3 4 5

19 Gluing and attaching 4 4 3 4 5

20 Finishing 4 4 3 4 5

Comparative percentage 34.01% 34.60% 25.00% 33.33% 41.67%

Hailu Beyecha et al. Ethiop.J.Sci.Sustain.Dev., Vol. 9(1), 2022

Figure 1 shows that there was a strong, moderate and

weak relationship between the customer and technical

requirements.

Figure 1: QFD results of relationship matrix, where, the (●) symbol stands for strong relationship, the (○) symbol

stands for moderate relationship, the (Δ) symbol stands for weak relationship and the blank space stands
for insignificant relationship between customer and technical requirements.

Hailu Beyecha et al. Ethiop.J.Sci.Sustain.Dev., Vol. 9(1), 2022

Figure 2: QFD results of interrelationship matrix, where, the (+) sign stands for synergetic interrelationship, the (-)

sign stands for compromise interrelationship and the blank space stands for insignificant interrelationship

between technical requirements.

Figure 2 shows that there was almost a synergy

interrelationship between the technical requirements.

Figure 3 shows the results of customer competitive

assessment. Customer requirements (WHATs) such as

good fit on foot, not make skin irritation, fashionable,

good look and wide color range weighs the highest

percent of importance rate with 6.9%, 6.9%, 6.4%, 6.4%

and 6.4%, respectively.

Hailu Beyecha et al. Ethiop.J.Sci.Sustain.Dev., Vol. 9(1), 2022

Figure 3: QFD results of customer competitive assessment

Figure 4 shows the results of technical competitive

assessment with maximize direction of improvement. In

the case of percent of importance, the technical

requirements (HOWs) such as lasting and sewing

design, sewing pathway design, shape and size design,

style and color design, and outsole materials weighs the

highest rate 9.6%, 9.1%, 8.1%, 7.9% and 7.7%,

respectively.

Hailu Beyecha et al. Ethiop.J.Sci.Sustain.Dev., Vol. 9(1), 2022

Figure 4: QFD results of technical competitive assessment

4. Conclusion

This study deals with footwear development process

using quality function deployment to meet customer

requirement. The findings of this study made it evident

that quality function development is a superb technique

that can help to deal with every aspect of footwear

development process. Thus, several customer and

technical requirements were generated with regard to

footwear development process based on the data

collected from the respondents and different literatures.

Additionally, potential values such as customer

competitive assessment, importance to customer, target

value, sales point, degree of difficulty and technical

competitive assessment were determined.

The result of the analysis of the customer and technical

requirements show that the footwear that were made in

Ethiopia had lower value when compared with the value

of the footwear that were made in China and Europe

except in the case of performance and availability. In the

case of QFD model, the customer and technical

requirements with the higher percentage of importance

(6.9% and 9.6%, respectively) demand higher attention

in the development process of footwear in comparison

with that of the lower percentage of importance (2.3%

and 1.6%, respectively).

As such, the study shows that Ethiopian footwear

needs quality improvement in order to satisfy both the

customer and technical requirements. As a result,

Ethiopian footwear manufacturing companies shall

strive more in order to cope up with Chinese and

European footwear manufacturing companies.

Therefore, the researchers would like to recommend the

introduction of quality function deployment, which has

been a proven technique for maintaining the quality of

footwear development process. Hence, concerned

stakeholders shall use the prioritized customer and

technical requirements in customer oriented footwear

development process.

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to thank all the respondents

who have participated in informant interview and

questionnaire.

Hailu Beyecha et al. Ethiop.J.Sci.Sustain.Dev., Vol. 9(1), 2022

Reference

Adul A. and Thanin S. (2020). Footwear Design Strategies for the Thai Footwear Industry to Be Excellent in the World Market,

Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 6(5):1-11.

Alina I. D. and Alexandra L. (2018). Application OF QFD Method in Fitness Footwear Production. Leather and Footwear

Journal, 18(2): 153-162..

Ankur J., Saket K., Satish Ch. And Pal D. K. (2015). Likert Scale: Explored and Explained. British Journal of Applied Science

& Technology, 7(4): 396-403.

Anusha U. (2010). Application of Quality Function Deployment in new product and service development, Masters Theses.

Bitlisli B., Adiguzel Z. A., Yeldiyar G., Kairanbekov G. and Kucukakin E. (2013). Upper Leathers in Shoe Manufacturing.

Journal of Industrial Technology and Engineering, 2(07): 37 – 41.

Chatree H., Thanate R. and Klangduen P. (2012). Application of a quality function deployment technique to design and develop

furniture products, Songklanakarin J. Sci. Technol., 34(6): 663-668.
Eshan S. J. (2012). A Case Study on Quality Function Deployment (QFD). IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering,

3(6): 27-35.

Fiorenzo F. and Domenico M. (2018). A new proposal to improve the customer competitive benchmarking in QFD. Quality

Engineering, 30(4): 730-761.

Karin B. and John A. (1996). Quality Function Deployment (QFD): A means for developing usable products, International

Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 18(4): 269-275.

Lucie S. Z., Lucie T. and Jan Z. P. (2020). A Sustainable Materials for Footwear Industry: Designing Biodegradable Shoes.

Journal of the Faculty of Technics and Technologies, 8(1):1-9.

Muhammed S. E., Ali O. K., Haris G. and Fehim F. (2012). Analysis of Shoe Manufacturing Factory by Simulation of Production

Processes: Southeast Europe. Journal of Soft Computing, 1(1): 120-127.

National Green Export Review of Ethiopia (2018): Leather and Sesame Seeds, United Nations Conference on Trade and

Development.

Niguss Haregot and Kassu Jilcha (2019). Quality Function Deployment Knowledge Transfer to Ethiopian Industries and How It

Can Be Implemented. Branna Journal of Engineering and Technology, 1(1): 1-19.

Praveen S. (2016). House of Quality: An Effective Approach to Achieve Customer Satisfaction & Business Growth in Industries.

International Journal of Science and Research, 5(9): 1365-1371.

Radej B., Drnovsek J. and Beges G. (2017). An overview and evaluation of quality‐improvement methods from the

manufacturing and supply‐chain perspective. APEM journal, 12(4): 388–400.

Salto A. C. (2016). Step to Sustainability, Unit 2 – Sustainable Materials and Components for Footwear, How to Implement

Sustainable Manufacturing in Footwear - New Occupational Profile and Training Opportunities, UN Lifelong Learning

Programme in coordination with CTCP Portugal, Project number: 539823-LLP-1-2013-1-PT-LEONARDO-LMP.

Sanchit K. and Vivek A. (2015). Study of Quality Function Deployment (QFD) in Service Industry. International Journal of

Advanced Engineering and Global Technology, 03(10): 1233-1244.

Siriphan P. and Nopadon S. (2012). Factors Determining Athletic Footwear Design: A Case of Product Appearance and

Functionality. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 36: 520 – 528.

Suzana K. M. et al. (2019). Merging Footwear Design and Functionality. AUTEX Research Journal, 20(4): 372-381.

Thomas P. R. (2013). Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics: Sample Size Determination and Power, John Wiley & Sons.

Yoji A. (1990). Quality Function Deployment: Integrating Customer Requirements into product design. Cambridge, Productivity

Press.