Talk:House of Quality
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Unwieldy for complex systems - discussion requested[edit]
As a (now retired) Systems Engineer, I've found that the House of Quality concept, while useful, becomes extremely unwieldy as the complexity of a system increases. I'd like to hear more commentary about that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.188.183.91 (talk) 02:08, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- 68.188.183.91 - Do you mean the general nature of it's harder to do everything with complex systems, or do you mean the process becomes harder much faster than the rate of complexity ? Markbassett (talk) 17:37, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Different example diagrams[edit]
Simpler diagrams are out there. Should we use? If so, then how ?
The diagram shown seems rather intense for an explanatory article and an unusual one too. The QFD tables seem to take their 'House' name from the triangular roof-like top areas, but not usually like this one. I have also seen a simplified example with customer priorities on left (1-looks good; 2-inexpensive; 3-lasts long time; 4- holds heavy weight), engineering measures across the top with simple 'X' for if it applies to that row, and far-right rankings (1 to 5) of a few competitors at that priority. (see also Otto & Wood, Product Design Techniques in Reverse Engineering and New Product Development 2001; Salt & Rothery Design for Electrical and Computer Engineers 2002)
Doing Bing I see house of quality diagram has many variations. Some of them are simple, some are involved -- so seems there are easier diagrams. Should the article have a different diagram, additional simple diagrams, what ? Please discuss Markbassett (talk) 18:57, 14 January 2016 (UTC)