An Integrated Fuzzy QFD Methodology for Customer Oriented Multifunctional Power Bank Design

  • Gülçin BüyüközkanEmail author
  • Merve Güler
  • Esin Mukul
Part of the Studies in Systems, Decision and Control book series (SSDC, volume 279)


Due to the intense global competition and rapid advances in technology, companies are forced to continually invest into the new product development (NPD). The main reason for NPD is offering new value to customers. In this context, customer-oriented product development is crucial. The purpose of the article is to propose a new method for determining and prioritizing the most important design requirements for customer-oriented product design. Quality Function Deployment (QFD) tool is selected for this purpose; since it efficiently considers customer needs. Fuzzy logic is applied thanks to its ability to represent uncertain information. It enables decision makers (DMs) to assess different elements with linguistic term sets. A case study about power banks is illustrated to test the usefulness of the method. Power banks are saviors when one has no access to power outlets, and are gradually entering our lives as accessories. However, there are various power bank models in the market and manufacturers desire to produce the most satisfying power banks for their customers. Therefore, in this chapter, an integrated fuzzy QFD and fuzzy multi criteria decision making (MCDM) method are implemented for customer-oriented multifunctional power bank design. We applied the fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) technique to determine the customer needs’ weights and the fuzzy QFD technique to find the most important design requirements in multifunctional power bank design. The results of the case study are shared in the final section of the chapter.



The authors would like to thank the industrial experts for their support, as well as acknowledge the grants of Galatasaray University Research Fund (Projects Numbers: 19.402.001, 19.402.003 and 19.402.006).


  1. 1.
    Bottani, E., Rizzi, A.: Strategic management of logistics service: a fuzzy QFD approach. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 103(2), 585–599 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Haselton, B.: CNBC Tech. Apple isn’t alone: 2018 was the ‘worst year ever’ for smartphone shipments, IDC says. Accessed March 2019
  3. 3.
    Liu, L., Tang, W., Chen, B., Deng, C., Zhong, W., Cao, X., Wang, Z.: A self-powered portable power bank based on a hybridized nanogenerator. Adv. Mater. Technol. 3, 1700209 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Minghao, C., Yang, Y., Yuwen, H.: Portable power bank, dare to ask where the road is–Survey of the Capital University student charging treasure. In: 2017 7th International Conference on Social Network, Communication and Education (SNCE 2017). Atlantis Press (2017)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    He, F.: USB port and power delivery: an overview of USB port interoperability. In: 2015 IEEE Symposium on Product Compliance Engineering (ISPCE), pp. 1–5. IEEE (2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Suen, C.Y.B., Chan, K.T., Hung, T.K., Lee, C.C.: Remote monitoring on capacity of portable power bank in testing laboratories. In: IECON 2017-43rd Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, pp. 4734-4739. IEEE (2017)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Buyukozkan, G., Ertay, T., Kahraman, C., Ruan, D.: Determining the importance weights for the design requirements in the house of quality using the fuzzy analytic network approach. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 19(5), 443–461 (2004)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    dos Reis Benatto, G.A., Espinosa, N., Krebs, F.C.: Life‐cycle assessment of solar charger with integrated organic photovoltaics. Adv. Eng. Mater. 19(8), 1700124 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Palczynska, B.: Radiated emissions measurements of a portable power bank in a GTEM cell. In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Environment and Electrical Engineering and 2017 IEEE Industrial and Commercial Power Systems Europe (EEEIC/I&CPS Europe), pp 1–6. IEEE (2017)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Thakur, P., Kool, A., Hoque, N.A., Bagchi, B., Khatun, F., Biswas, P., Das, S.: Superior performances of in situ synthesized ZnO/PVDF thin film based self-poled piezoelectric nanogenerator and self-charged photo-power bank with high durability. Nano Energy 44, 456–467 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Moo, C.S., Wu, T.H., Hou, C.H., Hsieh, Y.C.: Balanced discharging of power bank with buck-boost battery power modules. In: 2014 International Power Electronics Conference (IPEC-Hiroshima 2014-ECCE ASIA), pp. 1796–1800. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hou, C.H., Yen, C.T., Wu, T.H., Moo, C.S.: A battery power bank of serial battery power modules with buck-boost converters. In: 2013 IEEE 10th International Conference on Power Electronics and Drive Systems (PEDS), pp. 211–216. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wu, T.H., Moo, C.S., Hou, C.H.: A battery power bank with series-connected buck–boost-type battery power modules. Energies 10(5), 650 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Xie, L., Li, J., Cai, S., Li, X.: Design and experiments of a self-charged power bank by harvesting sustainable human motion. Adv. Mech. Eng. 8(5), 1687814016651371 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Khoo, L.P., Ho, N.C.: Framework of a fuzzy quality function deployment system. Int. J. Prod. Res. 34(2), 299–311 (1996)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kahraman, C., Ertay, T., Büyüközkan, G.: A fuzzy optimization model for QFD planning process using analytic network approach. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 171(2), 390–411 (2006)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bevilacqua, M., Ciarapica, F.E., Giacchetta, G.: A fuzzy-QFD approach to supplier selection. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 12(1), 14–27 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Liu, H.C., Quan, M.Y., Shi, H., Guo, C.: An integrated MCDM method for robot selection under interval-valued Pythagorean uncertain linguistic environment. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 34(2), 188–214 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Aboutorab, H., Saberi, M., Asadabadi, M.R., Hussain, O., Chang, E.: ZBWM: the Z-number extension of best worst method and its application for supplier development. Expert Syst. Appl. 107, 115–125 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Liu, A., Xiao, Y., Ji, X., Wang, K., Tsai, S.B., Lu, H., Wang, J.: A novel two-stage integrated model for supplier selection of green fresh product. Sustainability 10(7), 2371 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Peng, J.G., Xia, G., Sun, B.Q., Wang, S.J.: Systematical decision-making approach for quality function deployment based on uncertain linguistic term sets. Int. J. Prod. Res. 56(18), 6183–6200 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tian, Z.P., Wang, J.Q., Wang, J., Zhang, H.Y.: A multi-phase QFD-based hybrid fuzzy MCDM approach for performance evaluation: a case of smart bike-sharing programs in Changsha. J. Clean. Prod. 171, 1068–1083 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tsai, J.Y., Ding, J.F., Liang, G.S., Ye, K.D.: Use of a hybrid MCDM method to evaluate key solutions influencing service quality at a port logistics center in Taiwan. Brodogradnja: Teorija i praksa brodogradnje i pomorske tehnike 69(1), 89–105 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Van, L., Yu, V., Dat, L., Dung, C., Chou, S.Y., Loc, N.: New integrated quality function deployment approach based on interval neutrosophic set for green supplier evaluation and selection. Sustainability 10(3), 838 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yu, L., Wang, L., Bao, Y.: Technical attributes ratings in fuzzy QFD by integrating interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets and Choquet integral. Soft. Comput. 22(6), 2015–2024 (2018)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Akbaş, H., Bilgen, B.: An integrated fuzzy QFD and TOPSIS methodology for choosing the ideal gas fuel at WWTPs. Energy 125, 484–497 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Alkhatib, S.F.: Strategic logistics outsourcing: upstream-downstream supply chain comparison. J. Glob. Oper. Strat. Sourc. 10(3), 309–333 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hsu, C.H., Chang, A.Y., Luo, W.: Identifying key performance factors for sustainability development of SMEs—integrating QFD and fuzzy MADM methods. J. Clean. Prod. 161, 629–645 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pamučar, D., Mihajlović, M., Obradović, R., Atanasković, P.: Novel approach to group multi-criteria decision making based on interval rough numbers: hybrid DEMATEL-ANP-MAIRCA model. Expert Syst. Appl. 88, 58–80 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Roy, M.K., Ray, A., Pradhan, B.B.: Non-traditional machining process selection-an integrated approach. Int. J. Qual. Res. 11(1) (2017)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Arsenyan, J., Büyüközkan, G.: An integrated fuzzy approach for information technology planning in collaborative product development. Int. J. Prod. Res. 54(11), 3149–3169 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ignatius, J., Rahman, A., Yazdani, M., Šaparauskas, J., Haron, S.H.: An integrated fuzzy ANP–QFD approach for green building assessment. J. Civ. Eng. Manag. 22(4), 551–563 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Anusha, C., Parappilly, J.J., Sangaiah, A.K.: A new MCDM approach integrating QFD, dematel with TOPSIS for exploring the effect of social network usage on academic performance. IIOAB J. 6(4), 32–42 (2015)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Büyüközkan, G., Çifçi, G.: An extended quality function deployment incorporating fuzzy logic and GDM under different preference structures. Int. J. Comput. Intell. Syst. 8(3), 438–454 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Büyüközkan, G., Güleryüz, S.: Extending fuzzy QFD methodology with GDM approaches: an application for IT planning in collaborative product development. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 17(4), 544–558 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wang, C.H.: Using quality function deployment to conduct vendor assessment and supplier recommendation for business-intelligence systems. Comput. Ind. Eng. 84, 24–31 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Karsak, E.E., Dursun, M.: An integrated fuzzy MCDM approach for supplier evaluation and selection. Comput. Ind. Eng. 82, 82–93 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Dursun, M., Karsak, E.E.: Fuzzy decision approach based on QFD and FWA for selection of medical suppliers. Proc. World Congr. Eng. 2, 1–3 (2015)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Li, M., Jin, L., Wang, J.: A new MCDM method combining QFD with TOPSIS for knowledge management system selection from the user’s perspective in intuitionistic fuzzy environment. Appl. Soft Comput. 21, 28–37 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Onut, S., Tosun, S.: An integrated methodology for supplier selection under the presence of vagueness: a case in banking sector, Turkey. J. Appl. Math. (2014)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ayağ, Z., Samanlioglu, F., Büyüközkan, G.: A fuzzy QFD approach to determine supply chain management strategies in the dairy industry. J. Intell. Manuf. 24(6), 1111–1122 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Büyüközkan, G., Çifçi, G.: An integrated QFD framework with multiple formatted and incomplete preferences: a sustainable supply chain application. Appl. Soft Comput. 13(9), 3931–3941 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Dursun, M., Karsak, E.E.: A QFD-based fuzzy MCDM approach for supplier selection. Appl. Math. Model. 37(8), 5864–5875 (2013)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Wey, W.M., Chiu, Y.H.: Assessing the walkability of pedestrian environment under the transit-oriented development. Habitat Int. 38, 106–118 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Büyüközkan, G., Çifçi, G.: A new incomplete preference relations based approach to quality function deployment. Inf. Sci. 206, 30–41 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Wang, C.H., Chen, J.N.: Using quality function deployment for collaborative product design and optimal selection of module mix. Comput. Ind. Eng. 63(4), 1030–1037 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Büyüközkan, G., Berkol, Ç.: Designing a sustainable supply chain using an integrated analytic network process and goal programming approach in quality function deployment. Expert Syst. Appl. 38(11), 13731–13748 (2011)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Liu, H.T.: Product design and selection using fuzzy QFD and fuzzy MCDM approaches. Appl. Math. Model. 35(1), 482–496 (2011)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Bhattacharya, A., Geraghty, J., Young, P.: Supplier selection paradigm: An integrated hierarchical QFD methodology under multiple-criteria environment. Appl. Soft Comput. 10(4), 1013–1027 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Feyzioğlu, O., Büyüközkan, G.: An integrated group decision-making approach for new product development. Int. J. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 21(4), 366–375 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Büyüközkan, G., Feyzioğlu, O., Ruan, D.: Fuzzy group decision-making to multiple preference formats in quality function deployment. Comput. Ind. 58(5), 392–402 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Büyüközkan, G., Feyzioğlu, O.: Group decision making to better respond customer needs in software development. Comput. Ind. Eng. 48(2), 427–441 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Ertay, T., Büyüközkan, G., Kahraman, C., Ruan, D.: Quality function deployment implementation based on analytic network process with linguistic data: an application in automotive industry. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 16(3), 221–232 (2005)Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Chan, L.K., Kao, H.P., Wu, M.L.: Rating the importance of customer needs in quality function deployment by fuzzy and entropy methods. Int. J. Prod. Res. 37(11), 2499–2518 (1999)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Akao, Y., King, B., Mazur, G.H.: Quality Function Deployment: Integrating Customer Requirements into Product Design, vol. 21. Productivity Press, Cambridge, MA (1990)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Hauser, J.R., Clausing, D.: The House of Quality, pp. 1–13. Harvard Business Review (1988)Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Zadeh, L.A.: Fuzzy sets. Inf. Control 8, 338–353 (1965)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Ross, T.J.: Fuzzy Logic with Engineering Applications. Wiley (2005)Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Wu, H., Tzeng, G., Chen, Y.: A fuzzy MCDM approach for evaluating banking performance based on balanced scorecard. Expert Syst. Appl. 36(6), 10135–10147 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Kulak, O., Kahraman, C.: Fuzzy multi-attribute selection among transportation companies using axiomatic design and analytic hierarchy process. Inf. Sci. 170, 191–210 (2005)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Saaty, T.L.: The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill, New York (1980)Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Büyüközkan, G.: Determining the mobile commerce user requirements using an analytic approach. Comput. Stand. Interfaces 31(1), 144–152 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Büyüközkan, G., Çifçi, G., Güleryüz, S.: Strategic analysis of healthcare service quality using fuzzy AHP methodology. Expert Syst. Appl. 38(8), 9407–9424 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Büyüközkan, G.: Multi-criteria decision making for e-marketplace selection. Internet Res. 14(2), 139–154 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Büyüközkan, G., Çifçi, G.: A combined fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS based strategic analysis of electronic service quality in healthcare industry. Expert Syst. Appl. 39(3), 2341–2354 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Lee, A.R.: Application of modified fuzzy AHP method to analyze bolting sequence of structural joints. UMI Dissertation Service, A Bell & Howell Company (1999)Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Gergin, Z., Akbas, M., Akture, A.O., Yurt, M.F.: Kalite Fonksiyonu Göçerimi Yöntemiyle Müşterinin Marka Algısının Arttırılması: Taşınabilir Şarj Cihazları Üreten Bir Firmada Uygulama (2018)Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Zhu, Z., Johguchi, K., Mattausch, H.J., Koide, T., Hironaka, T.: Low power bank-based multi-port SRAM design due to bank standby mode. In: The 2004 47th Midwest Symposium on Circuits and Systems, MWSCAS’0 (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gülçin Büyüközkan
    • 1
    Email author
  • Merve Güler
    • 1
  • Esin Mukul
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Industrial EngineeringGalatasaray UniversityIstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations