MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2601552291

INTRODUCTION TO PROCESS PLANNING OF SERVICE BY USING QUALITY FUNCTION DEVELOPMENT CASE STUDY: ELECTRONIC BANKING SERVICES

2016· article· en· W2601552291 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicQuality Function Deployment in Product Design
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality function deploymentConfidentialityComputer scienceTable (database)Service (business)Quality (philosophy)Process (computing)Function (biology)Index (typography)Process managementComputer securityBusinessMarketingDatabaseWorld Wide WebNew product development
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Today, organizations are faced with unique challenges in the customers’ service sector. The current study intends to design the process of providing electronic services with the choice of electronic banking service for testing the proposed approach (using Quality Function Deployment). Design/methodology/approach: In this regard, a four-stage approach based on quality home design was used, which initially relates the needs of customers from bank electronic services to basic requirements of these services, and finally extends them to physical conditions and characteristics of equipment required for this category of services. The data needed in the study process were collected by the 196 customers or the QFD team and validated by content analysis. Findings: This article is an introduction to the relations between the most important factors of service providing process design in electronic banking industry. The study discussed and supports the requirement for creating the infrastructure needed to electronic banking which is aligned with the needs of bank customers. In this case study, after performing the calculations of QFD tables, the relative weights of identified indicators were obtained. Accordingly, among the customers’ needs, the need for security and information confidentiality had the utmost importance. The index of being economic had the highest priority in the Table 1. The indices of confidentiality and performance with equal weights had the best priorities in the Table 2. The indices of approving the transactions and orders and ease of use with an equal weight had the highest priorities in the Table 3. Finally, the indices of updating and systems development had the best priorities in the QFD has Table 4. Originality/value: In this study the new way for process planning of electrical banking service has adopted to have more accurate prioritization of customer needs. The road of designing have extended from customers' needs and functions of e-banking services to the dimensions of service quality, e-banking services features and terms indicators of providing banking e- services. In fact the study seeks to explain and differentiation of the key concepts involved in the design of service process and Service designer should have special attention to prioritize of these factors.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.399
Threshold uncertainty score0.469

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it