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 OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dariush Mohamadi Zanjirani, Khodanazar Farokhnejad

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Internet Banking and CommerceSame topicQuality Function Deployment in Product DesignFrench-language works237,207