Wild Science
Dear Mr Jacobs,
Further to your request on the 23 March 2010, I hereby attach our report analysing the quality of Wild Science’s Flight School. As discussed with you during our meeting last month, we have paid particular attention in our analysis to quality of design and quality of conformance.
The report provides a detailed evaluation of the Flight School product in terms of performance, features, reliability, conformance, durability, serviceability, aesthetics, and perceived quality.
Our investigations suggest that the current product is not meeting consumer quality standards. However, as outlined in our report, there are a number of options available to improve Flight Schools’ quality. We recommend that Wild Science continues to produce Flight School, with consideration given to the recommendations provided in this report.
We have proposed a number of ways in which product quality can be enhanced that will assist in improving customer satisfaction and the sales of Flight School. None of these proposals, we believe, will affect product cost and availability but several suggestions hold promise of further improving customer satisfaction. We discuss these points in detail in the report.
Thank you for affording us this opportunity to work with you on this project. I will be glad to discuss any questions you may have at our meeting next week.
Yours sincerely
Tegan Case- Director
Flight School: An Evaluation of Product Quality
Executive Summary
This report aims to evaluate the quality of Wild Science’s Flight School. Flight School is a model glider kit that is sold worldwide that aims to integrate science and learning with toys.
The information for this report was compiled using written and electronic articles. Extensive research has been carried out on the current product to identify the areas of strength and weaknesses. This process identified that the Flight School performed poorly on five of the eight dimensions of quality.
In order to improve final product quality, Wild Science needs to ensure products are reliable and durable and that inputs used in production meet specified standards. Also greater scrutiny on completed products needs to take place in order to ensure zero defects and complete glider kits. In order to improve serviceability and durability of the Flight School glider, Wild Science should consider including replacement components in the product kit. Or alternatively, investigate the option to sell repair kits. In order to improve customer satisfaction with the product it is also recommended that Wild Science amend the product instruction manual so that diagrams match the word descriptions to assist consumers in assembling the glider. In addition to this Wild Science should consider the option to include step-by-step video instructions on the CD that is already included with the kit.
By addressing the issues raised in this report Wild will be able to further improve the quality of their Flight School product and improve customer satisfaction and sales.
Introduction
1.1 Authorisation
This report has been commissioned by Mr Mark Jacobs of Wild Science to evaluate and provide guidance on the quality of their product Flight School by critiquing the product from a customer’s perspective of the product and through a literature review. This report has been prepared in accordance with the agreement between Wild Science and Case Consultants.
1.2 Limitations
The preparation and outcomes of this report have been based on information that is freely available to the public. Privately held information may render the results of this report to be of little consequence to evaluating the quality of Flight School. This report is solely for the use of Wild Science and any reliance on this report by third parties shall be at their risk as it may not contain sufficient information for their purposes.
1.3 Scope of Report
This report evaluates the quality of Wild Science’s Flight School Product in order to identify any weaknesses and areas of improvement. This report highlights that the current product is failing to meet the eight dimensions of quality. As a result a range of suitable solutions have been proposed to assist in improving quality. The information contained within this report has been presented in a range of formats including figures, tables and dot points to allow for ease of understanding and communication of the data. Information contained within this report has been sourced from a wide selection of peer reviewed journal articles and official Wild Science publications.
2.0 Literature Review
The importance of quality to the success of business operations has been thoroughly discussed and examined by many authors. The current literature covers a wide and varying array of issues; however this review will focus on only three main areas – what is quality and how do customers gauge quality. These themes have been presented in a variety of different contexts but this review will focus on their application to physical products.
According to Garvin (1984) there are five distinct approaches to defining quality. The transcendent approach states that quality cannot be defined precisely but can be recognised through experience (Tuchman 1980, p. 38). On the other hand the product-based proposed that ‘quality is a precise and measurable variable’ and as a result products can be ranked and compared in terms of their relative quality (Abbott 1955, p. 126-7). User-based definition, as originally defined by Edwards (1968, p. 37), states that ‘quality is the degree to which a specific product satisfies the wants of a specific consumer’. Manufacturing- based approach defines quality in terms of how well the product conforms to its design specifications (Crosby 1979). According to Feigenbaum (1983, p. 1) the value based definition ‘quality is the degree of excellence at an acceptable price and the control of variability at an acceptable cost’.
According to Garvin (1987) there are eight dimensions to evaluating product quality. The dimensions are performance, features, reliability, conformance, durability, serviceability, aesthetics, and perceived quality. However, research into consumer perceptions has revealed that, when evaluating the quality of a product, customers consider two main factors – quality of design and quality of conformance (Widrick et al 2002). Quality of design refers to the fit between a product’s design and customer needs (Mergen et al 2000). The quality of design depends on the quality of the insights gained about the consumer and the depth of understanding of their requirements; the quality of the process used to translate these consumer insights and requirements into a product and/or service that provides value to the consumer; and the continuous improvement of the design process (Meirovich 2006). Quality of conformance deals with how well the design requirements are satisfied, including the uniformity, dependability and cost requirements. Quality of conformance is determined by the minimisation of variance from design requirements for the good (Meirovich 2006, p. 205). A study conducted by Anderson & Sullivan (1993) found that customer satisfaction and behavioural intention are also strongly influenced by customers’ perceptions of performance. As a result Mergen et al (2000) proposed that, not only is it important to focus on quality of design and quality of conformance, but it is also essential to review the quality of performance. The three components are related because low Quality-of-Performance leads to changes in the Quality-of-Design and/or Quality-of-Conformance. Similarly, poor Quality-of-Conformance requires better quality control techniques or changes in the design (Mergen et al 2000).
This literature review establishes that quality is a perceptual concept and needs to be interpreted to meet the situations need. In order to gauge a customer’s perception of the quality of a product there are three main areas that need to be considered – quality of design, quality of conformance and quality of performance. By ensuring there three areas are being met can improve the customer perception of product quality.
3.0 Flight School Evaluation
3.1 Product Background
Flight School is a model glider kit from the Wild Science Company that aims to not only provide instructions on building a glider but provide information to assist with understanding the aerodynamics behind flying. This is a relatively low priced model glider kit at $15.00 with high end models selling for up to $500.According to the packaging the product is suitable for ages 8 years plus. The Flight School kit contained plastic, metal, wood and foam glider components; kite string; glue; flight log book; illustrated instructions; and an interactive CD.
The activities that are included on the Flight School CD have been designed to meet certain elements of the UK National School Curriculum.
3.2 Product Evaluation
In order to evaluate the Flight School product, three kits were purchased from different stores in Toowoomba. The participants aged 8, 12 and 16 each built a model glider according to the instructions and then tested its flying abilities. At the end of the process each participant answered questions, based on Garvin’s eight dimensions of quality, and this has formed the basis of the evaluation in this report. Appendix A provides the feedback from each participant on the product.
Table 1: Flight School’s Quality Dimensions
| Quality Dimension |
Evaluation |
| Performance | The primary operating characteristic for Flight School is its ability to fly once constructed. According to product packaging and instruction booklet ‘the Flight School Glider should glide distances between 15 and 20m‘.In the three separate trials conducted with this product, two failed to glide at all and in the third trial the glider made several flights before breaking but did not exceed distances on 10m.Based on the results of the trial, Flight School failed to perform in the manner that was expected. |
| Features | The features of the Flight School product were the main reason this product was purchased. In this price bracket, competing brands only offered a basic glider kit whereas Flight School also included an interactive CD to learn about aerodynamics and how to fly your glider, an illustrated instruction manual as well as a flight log. To further improve the features of this product a video on how to construct the plane would be a great benefit to this product. |
| Reliability | After conducting three trials of Flight School there is a high probability of the product malfunctioning or failing within the first few flights. Based on this the product is not particularly reliable. In order to improve reliability Wild Science needs to review the production quality controls and to ensure the components that are being used in these kits meet quality requirements. |
| Conformanc | Based on the product evaluations, Flight School did not match the tester’s pre-established standards. Based on the packaging and other products from this brand the testers thought that this product would be easy to assemble and fly well. However these preconceptions were not met. They felt they were not receiving value in the purchase of this product. |
| Durability | The durability of the Flight School Glider is poor. The three product trials that were conducted saw the glider break on first flight on two occasions and on the fifth flight in the other trial. The kit does not contain any additional materials to assist with repairing the product even though the gliders all broke in the same place – the wings. Wild Science should consider including additional materials with the product or selling repair kits. Also consider using different materials in the product that are of a better quality. |
| Serviceability | Due to the nature of the product, comprised of many small components of light-weight material the product cannot be easily repaired, and as a result the company does not offer refunds due to glider breakages. The instruction manual states that “if there is any reason that you are unsatisfied with this product, please contact our customer service department to enable us to resolve your issues”. As one of the kits was missing its glue we attempted to contact the customer support centre. There was only one option available to contact Wild Science and that was to telephone their UK office. It is not feasible to call overseas to seek assistance because of the time zone differences and cost outweigh the price of the missing glue. Wild Science needs to investigate other options for customer assistance, such as a designated email address. |
| Aesthetics | The aesthetics of Flight School are subjective because they are a matter of personal judgement. The three testers of the product thought the product styling was of a high quality and like the fact that it could be customised to individual tastes. The product felt sturdier when compared to other gliders they had built. |
| Perceived Quality | In comparison to competing brands Flight School has a higher perceived level of quality. The packaging, the advertising and the Wild Science brand name make strong inferences about the quality of the product in contrast to competitors with basic packaging. |
4.0 Conclusions and Recommendations
The product evaluation revealed that Flight School rates poorly in five of Garvin’s eight dimensions of quality. The quality of Flight School’s performance was affected by low durability and reliability, not conforming to customers perceptions of the product and lack of serviceability. However Flight School rates highly in terms of the additional features it has over competitors and in aesthetics.
In order to improve the Flight School product offering it is advised that Wild Science take on board the following recommendations:
* Amend the product instruction manual so that diagrams match the word descriptions to assist consumers in assembling the glider. In addition to this Wild Science should consider the option to include step-by-step video instructions on the CD that is already included with the kit.
* Conduct a review of production processes and components. In order to improve final product quality, Wild Science needs to ensure products are reliable and durable and that inputs used in production meet specified standards. Also greater scrutiny on completed products needs to take place in order to ensure zero defects and complete glider kits.
* In order to improve serviceability and durability of the Flight School glider, Wild Science should consider including replacement components in the product kit. Or alternatively, investigate the option to sell repair kits.
5.0 List of References
Abbott, L 1955, “Quality and Competition: an essay in economic theory”, Univ. Press, New York
Anderson, E & Sullivan, M 1993, “The antecedents and consequences of customer satisfaction for firms”, Marketing Science, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 125-144
Crosby, PB 1979, “Quality is Free: The Art of Making Quality Certain”, New York, New American Library
Edwards, CD 1968, “The meaning of quality”, Quality Progress, October 1968
Feigenbaum, AV 1983, “Total Quality Control”, 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York
Garvin, DA 1984, ‘What does “product quality” really mean?’, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 26, Fall 1984, pp. 25-45
Meirovich, G 2006, “Quality of Design and Quality of Conformance: Contingency and Synergistic Approaches”, Total Quality Management, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 205-219
Mergen, E, Grant, D & Widrick, SM 2000, ‘Quality Management applied to higher education’, Total Quality Management, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 345-352
Tuchman, B 1980, “The Decline of Quality”, New York Times Magazine, 2 November, p. 38
Widrick, SM, Mergen, E & Grant, D 2002, “Measuring the dimensions of quality in higher education”, Total Quality Management, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 123-131