There you have it, a great idea for a Meta Product, but will customers value it as much as you do? And are they willing to pay for it? Customer satisfaction is a major concern and prerequisite for competitiveness in today’s global markets. And getting insights into the link between product features and customer satisfaction is the challenge during product development projects. The Kano model could help us shine a new light on the feature analysis. The model is a two dimensional axis model that links product or service feature development to customer satisfaction during prototyping phase, thus after the fuzzy front end of idea generation. The x-axis displays the extent to which a quality element is provided and the y-axis displays the customer satisfaction.

The Kano model divides product or service features into five distinct categories, each of which affects customers in a different way: basic attributes, performance attributes, delighter attributes, indifferent attributes and reverse satisfaction attributes. The basic attributes are taken for granted when fully implemented, but result in disappointment when not fulfilled. A good example is that a window glass must not distort the view. The performance attributes display satisfaction according to the rate or amount that they are implemented. The gas usage of a car is an example, since the less usage the more satisfaction. The Delighters have no influence when not fully satisfied and surprise customers when implemented, like automatic wipers on a car when it starts raining. The indifferent attributes have no influence on the satisfaction whether implemented or not. The reverse attributes lead to dissatisfaction the more they are visible in a product. Products with a too high techie feel tend to dissatisfy customers.

Let’s take a look at how the Kano model can be applied to Meta Products. At first, we must recognize the fact that a Meta Product consists of three parts; the physical part, the web part and the connection between both. Features should thus be divided over both the three parts and the Kano’s attributes, as shown below.

Now, how to value the features of a Meta Product and thereby develop a business model? First, it is known that costumers are willing to pay for performance attributes as well as keeping out the reverse attributes. Next, delighters are money makers if very well implemented. Besides, the unexpected delighters are key to a successful product when not explicitly paid for. And last, the connection part of the product could be seen as merely a usage part and is thus related to the performance attribute. The basic and indifference attributes are no good for cash flows.

At this moment the Meta thing is new, but in the future Meta will be just a basic factor.

Interesting to note is that costumers’ expectations develop over time and thereby the relation between a type of feature and the Kano attributes changes as well. A great example is the remote control on television which was a delighter 30 years ago, but nowadays a basic factor. The field of Meta Products is relatively new and untamed and therefore the fact that it is Meta could now be seen as delighter itself. Yet, today’s delighter is tomorrow’s performer. My advice is therefore to continuously focus on development of new Meta areas.

Concluding, the Kano’s feature analysis gives new perspectives on developing Meta Products:

1. Do not lose focus on the threshold features of Meta Products
2. Search for delighters in the web part of the Meta Product that are better than existing web features
3. Carefully watch trends in features over time to continue feature updates and avoid feature degradation
4. Usage of the connection part is key to cash flow
5. Money makers are the delighters of the Meta Products