Use Kano Model to Clarify Product Needs

One of the easiest pitfalls in product planning is treating "all needs as core needs." Many teams collect piles of user feedback but can’t tell the difference between "what users need" and "what users want." In the end, they invest heavily in developing features that users don’t even care about. The Kano model and Kano analysis are exactly the core tools to solve this problem—they act like a "need filter," categorizing messy user feedback to help you identify the key features that truly boost user satisfaction, avoiding resource waste.

Whether you’re developing a new app, optimizing an e-commerce platform, or upgrading a physical product, the Kano model can help you find the "highest ROI" direction for needs. Just like HomeSmart, a U.S.-based smart home brand, which once shortened its new product development cycle by 40% and increased user satisfaction by 35% using this method. The core was using Kano analysis correctly and choosing the right survey tool.

1. HomeSmart’s Dilemma: Too Many Needs, No Clear Priority

HomeSmart specializes in smart home control panels. When planning to launch a new product in 2022, it collected a wide range of user needs: some wanted "voice control for multi-brand devices," others requested "energy consumption tracking," and still more hoped for "customizable panel wallpapers." The product team listed over 20 features to develop but struggled to set priorities—after all, R&D resources were limited, and it was impossible to implement everything.

Initially, the team used "user voting" to select features, asking users to pick their "top 3 most desired features" from over 20 options. However, the top-voted "customizable wallpapers" turned out to be a "nice-to-have" need; while the "cross-brand device compatibility," which actually influenced users’ purchasing decisions, received low votes because users didn’t realize its importance at the time.

Lily, the product manager, recalled: "We were like ‘headless chickens’ back then. We had plenty of needs in hand, but no idea which one would impress users. Later, we learned about the Kano model at an industry sharing session and realized we needed a professional needs analysis method, not just simple voting."

2. Categorizing Needs with Kano Model: First Understand the "Nature of Needs"

Instead of applying the Kano model blindly, Lily’s team first built an analysis framework in three steps to ensure accuracy:

Step 1: Design a kano questionnaire: For each feature to be developed, two questions were designed—one about "satisfaction when the feature is available" and another about "satisfaction when the feature is unavailable." Each question used a 5-point scale (1 = very dissatisfied, 3 = neutral, 5 = very satisfied). For example, regarding "voice control for multi-brand devices," the questions included "How satisfied would you be if the panel supports voice control for multi-brand devices?" and "How satisfied would you be if the panel does NOT support this feature?"

Step 2: Collect data with a professional survey tool: HomeSmart chose a platform that supports complex logic jumps. It not only distributed questionnaires automatically but also filtered out invalid responses (e.g., repeated submissions from the same user, contradictory answers). Finally, 1,200 valid questionnaires were collected, providing sufficient samples for Kano analysis.

Step 3: Categorize needs through Kano analysis: Based on users’ satisfaction scores for "feature availability/unavailability," the 20+ needs were divided into 5 categories—

Attractive Quality (users don’t expect it, but are delighted when it exists): e.g., "automatic device fault alerts"—users have no complaints when it’s absent, but satisfaction rises sharply when it’s present;

One-Dimensional Quality (the better the feature, the higher the satisfaction): e.g., "cross-brand device compatibility"—the more brands supported, the higher user satisfaction;

Must-Be Quality (must exist; dissatisfaction arises if absent): e.g., "local control when the panel is offline"—users are strongly dissatisfied if it’s absent, but not particularly delighted if it’s present;

Indifferent Quality (presence/absence doesn’t affect satisfaction): e.g., "customizable wallpapers"—users’ satisfaction barely changes whether it’s present or not;

Reverse Quality (presence causes dissatisfaction): e.g., "forced ad notifications"—most users stated "this feature would reduce purchase willingness."

After categorization, the team immediately clarified priorities: first develop "Must-Be Quality" (offline local control) and "One-Dimensional Quality" (cross-brand compatibility), postpone "Indifferent Quality" (customizable wallpapers), and cancel "Reverse Quality" (ad notifications)—the R&D direction became clear instantly.

3. From Analysis to Implementation: Validate Results with Needs Analysis

After setting priorities, HomeSmart didn’t start development directly. Instead, it conducted a second round of research using questionnaire design to further validate need details:

For "cross-brand compatibility," it followed up with "Which 3 smart home brands do you use most often?" (to ensure mainstream brands are prioritized during R&D);

For "offline local control," it asked "Which core functions do you want to control when offline?" (e.g., lights, air conditioners, excluding less commonly used "curtain motors").

For this research, they chose SurveyMars as their survey tool—not only because it supports custom design of kano questionnaire, but also because its built-in analysis tool automatically generates need categorization charts, eliminating the need for manual Excel sorting. Lily said: "SurveyMars’ data analysis feature saved us a week of work. We could even export a ‘Need Priority Report’ directly, which was very intuitive when presenting to the R&D team."

In the end, HomeSmart focused on developing 6 core features, shortening the R&D cycle from 12 months to 7 months. After launch, user satisfaction with the new product was 35% higher than the previous generation. The "cross-brand compatibility" feature received a 92% positive review rate and even drove repeat purchases from existing users—many users commented in feedback: "Finally, I don’t have to replace my old home devices to use your panel."

4. 3 Keys for Using Kano Model: Don’t Overcomplicate Simple Things

Many people think the Kano model is "professional and complex," but in fact, small teams or individual developers can use it easily. The key is to remember three points:

First, don’t overdo questionnaire design: Analyze 5-8 needs at a time. Too many will make users lose patience when filling out the questionnaire, leading to inaccurate data. Each need only requires two satisfaction questions ("feature present/absent"); no extra follow-ups are needed to avoid lengthy questionnaires.

Second, choosing the right survey tool is crucial: Prioritize tools that support "scale scoring," "logic jumps," and "automatic analysis," such as SurveyMars. It can automatically filter invalid data and generate Kano analysis charts, eliminating the need to learn complex statistical methods.

Third, "validate implementation" after Kano analysis: Don’t treat analysis results as final conclusions. Like HomeSmart, use a second round of research to refine need details and ensure the developed features truly match user scenarios—for example, if users say "energy consumption tracking is needed," you should also clarify whether it’s "daily tracking" or "device-specific tracking" to avoid deviating from the development direction.

5. Conclusion: Kano Model Is Not "Mystery," but a "Rational Decision-Making Tool"

Many people think "product development relies on intuition," but HomeSmart’s case proves that the Kano model and Kano analysis can turn need decision-making from "experience-based" to "data-driven." It doesn’t require you to dismiss user feedback, but helps you identify the "highest ROI" direction among numerous needs, avoiding "futile efforts."

Whether you’re a large company or a small team, if you want your product to better fit user needs, the Kano model is a tool worth trying. And a survey tool like SurveyMars can lower the barrier to use：https://surveymars.com/116—you don’t need to understand professional statistics or spend heavily on consulting firms. You can complete the entire process from questionnaire design and data collection to Kano analysis on your own.

After all, a good product isn’t "built by piling up features," but "created by choosing the right needs"—and that’s the core value of the Kano model.

Q1: Does SurveyMars have pre-built Kano model survey templates, or do I need to design one from scratch?

A: SurveyMars offers 3+ ready-to-use Kano model templates for common use cases (product features, service improvements, app functions). Each template includes the core Kano question pairs: a "functional" question (e.g., "If this feature exists, how do you feel?") and a "dysfunctional" question (e.g., "If this feature doesn’t exist, how do you feel?"), with 5-point satisfaction scales. You just add your specific features (e.g., "app dark mode") and publish—no need to build Kano question logic from scratch.

Q2: How does SurveyMars automatically conduct Kano analysis, or do I need to calculate results manually?

A: SurveyMars auto-runs Kano analysis once you collect responses—no manual work needed. The platform uses the Kano evaluation matrix to categorize each feature into 5 types: Must-Be (basic needs), One-Dimensional (satisfaction links to quality), Attractive (delighters), Indifferent (no impact), or Reverse (dissatisfiers). Results show in the "Kano Analysis" tab as a table and visual chart, with each feature labeled by category (e.g., "dark mode: Attractive") and response counts for clarity.

Q3: Can I customize the Kano model’s satisfaction scale (e.g., adjust labels) in SurveyMars?

A: Yes, but with guardrails to keep analysis accurate. The default Kano scale uses standard labels: "I like it," "I expect it," "I’m neutral," "I can live with it," "I dislike it." Free and paid users can edit label wording (e.g., "I’m satisfied" instead of "I like it") to match your audience’s language, but you can’t change the 5-point structure—this ensures the Kano evaluation matrix works correctly. SurveyMars will flag if you try to remove scale points, as it would break category calculations.

Q4: Can I add open-ended questions to my Kano survey in SurveyMars to explain feature categorizations?

A: Absolutely—this is recommended to add context to Kano analysis. After the Kano question pair for a feature, add an open-ended prompt (e.g., "Why do you feel this way about [feature]?"). In the "Kano Analysis" tab, click any feature’s category (e.g., "Must-Be") to view linked open-ended responses. For example, if "battery life" is labeled Must-Be, you can read comments like "My phone needs to last all day" to understand why it’s a basic need—helping prioritize improvements.

Q5: Can I use Kano analysis in SurveyMars for non-product use cases (e.g., service improvements, event planning)?

A: Yes—Kano analysis in SurveyMars works for any scenario where you want to prioritize needs. For service teams, use it to categorize support features (e.g., "24/7 chat: Must-Be" vs. "personalized follow-ups: Attractive"). For events, apply it to attendee needs (e.g., "free Wi-Fi: Must-Be" vs. "VIP lounge: Attractive"). The templates are flexible—just replace "product features" with your focus area (e.g., "service perks") and the Kano model and analysis will adapt to your use case.