Anda di halaman 1dari 12

Regents University London

Managing Processes and Projects


Module code: MGT701.R

Module Leader: Desmond Kapofu

Course work 2

Case study: Europa Airlines

Student name: Bruno Negri


Student ID: S00806636
Word Count: 2250

Table of Contents:

1.0 Executive Summary


2.0 Introduction
3.0 Main Body
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Bibliography

Quality Management
1.0 Executive Summary

Europa Airlines faces in-flight quality problems. One of the most recent
and significant problem is the failure of its oven equipment. It is
imperative to note that most of the companys aircrafts are over five
years old, and the management had to request a vendor to replace the
catering equipment. The equipment included ovens for cooking a
variety of hot foods for passengers, flight crew, and cabin crew. The
firm awarded the tender after an e-auction. However, as mentioned,
the current equipment is in a deplorable state. For this reason, Europa
Airlines wishes to resolve the issue with Ozland Flight Equipment
(OFE). However, the latter company is unwilling to participate because
Europa Airlines rewired some of the equipment. As a matter of fact, its
management wrote to Europa Airlines that the product warranty is
invalid by virtue of the rewiring. Therefore, OFE claims that Europa
Airlines should send the equipment to them and the latters cost for
inspection for quality. The purpose of this document is to resolve the
issue at the earliest opportunity and prepare an ideal action plan to
address the quality problem adequately.
Supplier Requirements

Shipment of all faulty ovens to OFE


Full quality check of all faulty ovens
Europa Airlines to cater for the cost of quality checks

Recommendations
Replace all ovens immediately if they are steam-based
Request OFE to do a preliminary test of the aircraft once more and
Replace the old ovens with new, compatible ones customised for
the company

2.0 Introduction
Is QFD the right tool to be used at this time?

Organization at the instant needs to take the decision based on two


options available to them:
Spend 3,000 on each of their aircraft equipment re-wiring and
make sure that the issue is resolved, bypassing the current
warranty. It will be a hefty expenditure but a quicker resolve to the
problem.
Send back all the equipments to OFE for a complete validation
check. The validation testing will be carried out by OFE at the
expense of Europa Airlines. Meanwhile, the Organization will have to
think of alternatives for providing hot food to their passengers on all
but three aircrafts which have been rewired. This is expected to be a
lengthy affair and may prove extremely costly to the Organization
keeping in view the time lag and arrangement for substitute
heating.
Voice of Customers will help the Organization in clarifying their
situation to the travellers and take the right decision at this moment as
well.
The QFD (quality function deployment) benchmarking model is a
systematic model that helps companies to improve both products and
the quality of their services. It provides a system to design a product or
service based on customer needs. In the hospitality industry, the
customer is the most important person in the business because he or
she is the source of income. Consequently, the creation and
maintenance of a product or service must involve all members of the
supplier or producer and user organisation. In this case, the supplier of
ovens is OFE while the user is Europa Airlines. Veritably, a company
must produce high-quality goods and services in all areas of
manufacturing to increase its competitiveness and create loyalty. It is
one of the most advanced total control metrics that ensure quality
management at the organisation. In this case, the vendor is OFE while
the immediate customer is Europa Airlines. As mentioned, QFD is the
acronym for Quality, Function, and Deployment (Bouchereau and

Rowlands 1999, p. 249). Quality translates to meeting the


requirements of the end user. In this case, the end users are the cabin
crew, flight crew, and both first and business class travellers. In
addition, Function defines the activities the company must do to meet
the mentioned quality while Deployment encompasses a broadening or
extension of methodologies that entail the implementation of the
strategy. In the case of Europa airlines, the flight crew needs better
ovens to prepare hot meals for customers, themselves, and the cabin
crew. Although ovens are a non-technical part of the aircraft and
cannot affect flights directly, they are still a part of the airplanes. It is
imperative to note that they bring customer and employee
dissatisfaction. As a matter of fact, the cabin crew keep issuing threats
of a major strike if the management cannot fix the issue. QFD
benchmarking is indispensable to quality management at Europa
Airlines to create customer and employee satisfaction along with
streamlining internal processes.

3.0 Main body


Over the past decade, quality management and improvement have
proved to be the cornerstone of competitiveness for manufacturing
companies in the world. A firm can stay at the top of the
manufacturing chain if it deploys correct strategies and corrective
programs to streamline their activities at the base level. Firstly, it
should adopt the just-in-time concept to enable just-in-time
purchasing. Secondly, an integration of statistics in the manufacturing

process quality control initiatives is indispensable. Thirdly, the firm can


take advantage of the systems of employees to improve the
productivity and quality of these individuals as well as ensure business
continuity. Fourthly, it must meet customer requirements for the
manufacturing, design, and delivery of new products. Such products
must be of an exceptionally high quality, and the delivery must be in
less time and at a much lower cost than that of direct competitors
(Halpern & Graham 2013, p. 15). In most cases, the ability to deliver
products and services at a short time poses a challenge to most firms.
Fifthly, the company should make it difficult for other businesses to
manufacture and launch a similar product. Although some companies
believe that price differentiation is enough, it is advisable to develop a
product that can serve the company for a long period and raises the
barriers to entry. However, it is not easy, because customers needs
and demands keep changing, products have short life cycles; there are
increased company-level demands for profits, new communications
systems, and the proliferation of improved technology (Tolpa 2012, p.
64).
In the case that involves OFE and Europa Airlines, there are issues with
ovens in the latter's airplanes. As mentioned, the ovens in some
aircraft are dysfunctional because of a problem with the wiring
mechanism. Although it is relatively easy to point an accusing finger at
OFEs executives and claim that the ovens have warranties, there are
several issues that come into focus. For instance, most of the aircraft
are five years old and might be incompatible with the new ovens. On
the contrary, the design of these ovens should allow them to operate in
a challenging working environment. However, the harsh cleansers in
the plane, moisture, and high usage make it increasingly difficult to
design an oven that can work in such an environment. For example,
moisture and cleansers can cause cracking and corrosion. At this point,
it is pointless for OFE to introduce new ovens in their product line
because of the possibility of a cost overrun, project magnitude, and the
limited timeframe. Furthermore, such an introduction is one-sided
because it will ensure the market growth and competitiveness of OFE
at the expense of Europa Airlines.
It is imperative to note that some of the ovens in use gave the tag,
OKRC KOREA. It implies that these gadgets do not suit Europa
Airlines, a non-Korean firm. Apparently, OFE feels that they are
applicable to both organisations. According to OFE's executives, history
indicates that the company manufactured complete catering
equipment for Qantas, Air New Zealand, and South African Airways
(Halpern & Graham 2013, p. 50). However, these firms were distinct

from Europa Airlines because of their location and needs. One might
assert that the situation might have been different if OFE
manufactured complete catering equipment for Europa Airlines.
Instead, OFE made only one product for the catering department at
Europa Airlines, ovens. As a matter of consequence, the management
experimented with OKRC KOREA ovens on the basis of their fitting
into the compartments Boeing left for them.
Several aircraft catering-department-equipment manufacturing
companies seem to deflect from traditional methods of product
development to new, innovative ways of production. These companies
deploy improved strategies on the basis of a group and involve
customers in their business decisions (Burghouwt 2007, p. 36). For
instance, quality function deployment (QFD) is the integration between
manufacturing, engineering development, purchasing, design,
marketing, and production methodologies. The method involves a twopronged inquiry. Firstly, the company should conduct correspondence
and interviews with the quality manager and consult the corporate
managers of purchasing, engineering, and quality at OFE. Secondly,
they should use personal experiences from various employees with
experience in oven fixing and repair (Zaim & evkli 2002, p. 34). For
instance, it is imperative to consult a consultant from Boeing, or
employees from Qantas, Air New Zealand, and South African Airways to
understand more about oven-related issues in Boeing aircraft. As
mentioned, the customer is the most significant person in the business
(Politis 2005, p. 51). Therefore, the firm must find a way to satisfy its
consumers.
QFD serves three purposes in a company. Firstly, it allows consumers to
get high-quality, low-cost products quickly. Secondly, it gives the firm
customer feedback about the current equipment and allows it to chart
its future from the available customer-specific data. Therefore, it can
improve on the products with the deployment of strategies it
formulates on the basis of the market data and consumer feedback it
collects (Zairi & Youssef 1995, p. 15). Europa Airlines should expect to
understand the needs of its customers better, improve developmental
initiatives with little changes, increase performance, and define
products on the basis of the needs of customers. The company can
deploy QFD to achieve the most desirable outcomes and retain
consumers if they perform user needs segmentation and identify ways
to achieve desirable outcomes (Jaiswal 2012, p. 30).
Therefore, the QFD process involves working procedure, customer and
design requirements, aircraft component characteristics, and
operational requirements. It also entails proper three forms of planning

and deployment (Shahin, 2002, p. 18). Firstly, the product planning


phase involves the analysis of the needs of the customer and the
generation of new ideas for the product. In the case of Europa Airlines,
the ovens are dysfunctional. As a matter of consequence, the company
should evaluate the source of the problem and find possible solutions
to it. As mentioned, ovens endure environments with steam and
chemicals. Therefore, it is possible that the cabin crew at the company
failed to follow the rules and regulations about the usage and
maintenance of ovens. At this stage, it is also advisable to evaluate
similar products from other companies for feasibility with the current
situation (Madu 2006, p.46).
What is more, the company can remove all the ovens from the aircraft
and call upon the manufacturing manager of OFE to assess the
situation and offer alternatives such as a new customised product.
Secondly, the parts implementation phase entails an estimation of the
cost of manufacturing various parts of the oven and provision of
feasible design concepts (Malighetti, Paleari & Redondi 2009, p. 199).
However, this step is only applicable if the manufacturing manager at
OFE performs a test on the ovens and discovers that they need a minor
repair or replacement. Such a move would invalidate the assertion that
one or a number of parts need transportation to OFEs premises. In this
case, it means that the tests will confirm that the ovens are in a
working condition. It is imperative to count the losses Europa Airlines
will encounter if it fails to perform tests on the remaining equipment. It
is indispensable to note that there is a high probability that the
equipment will fail on the other aircraft as well. Interestingly, the
operational time for the ovens in question is a little less than a year.
Therefore, it is very surprising that, nine months after installation,
some of them are faulty and causing consumer dissatisfaction.
Thirdly, the process planning step involves the determination of the
present constraints in the product. OFE needs to deploy an interactive
process to aid in the evaluation of the flaws in their ovens. As
mentioned, some of the problems are in the wiring of the ovens.
However, OFE is in a better position to evaluate the source of the
problem. Lastly, the production planning phase is apposite to the
development of more strategies to bring the situation under control. In
this case, they need to find ways to prevent the recurrence of the
problem in the future (Yahia 2010, p. 631). It is indispensable that
Europa Airlines considers the customer experience when using the
companys ovens. As mentioned, the equipment does not affect the
internals of the aircraft and may not result in an emergency landing.
On the ovens create an inconvenience in the aeroplane while in mid-

air. The company can also make use of other methods for quality
improvement such as Taguchi Method tools.

4.0 Conclusion
In conclusion, the QFD model is imperative in solving critical issues, in
quality performance through a customer-centric initiative. The model
stresses the importance of quality, function, and deployment;
therefore, it is indispensable in quality management. In the case of
Europa Airlines and Island Flight Equipment, the former accuses the

latter for its malfunctioning ovens. As noted in the discussion, it is


imperative that OFE conducts stability tests on the equipment because
it installed ovens in all of Europa Airlines' aircraft. These tests will not
only satisfy the customer, but also provide a solution for the business
and help both companies to maintain a competitive advantage in their
respective markets.

5.0 Bibliography

Bouchereau, V. and Rowlands, H. (1999), Analytical approaches to QFD,


Manufacturing Engineer, Vol. 78,(6), December, pp. 249-254.

Burghouwt, G., (2007), Airline network development in Europe and its


implications for airport planning, Aldershot, Ashgate.
Halpern, N., & Graham, A., (2013), Airport Marketing, Routledge, New
York.
Jaiswal, S. E., (2012), A Case Study on Quality Function Deployment
(QFD),OSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering (IOSRJMCE)ISSN: 2278-1684Volume 3(6), (Nov-Dec. 2012), Pp. 27-35.
Madu, C. N., (2006), House of Quality (Qfd) in a Minute Quality
Function Deployment, Chi Pub.
Malighetti, P., Paleari, S., & Redondi, R., (2009), Pricing strategies of
low-cost airlines: The Ryanair case study, Journal of Air Transport
Management 15, 195203.
Politis, D. J., (2005) "QFD, organisational creativity and productivity",
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 22
Iss: 1, Pp.59 - 71
Shahin, A., (2002), Quality Function Deployment: A Comprehensive
Review, Pp. 1-25.
Tolpa, E., (2012), Measuring Customer Expectations of Service Quality:
case Airline Industry, Aalto University, Pp. 1-96.

<http://epub.lib.aalto.fi/en/ethesis/pdf/12898/hse_ethesis_12898.
pdf>
Yahia, Z. M, (2010), "Quality function deployment and its extensions",
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 27
(6), Pp. 616-640.
Zaim, M., & evkli, M., (2002),The Methodology of Quality Function
Deployment with Crisp and Fuzzy Approaches and an Application
in the Turkish Shampoo Industry, Journal of Economic and Social
Research 4 (1), Pp. 27-53.
Zairi, M., & Youssef, A. M., (1995), "Quality function deployment: a
main pillar for successful total quality management and product
development", International Journal of Quality & Reliability
Management, Vol. 12(6), Pp.9 23.