Therefore, let's break it up into separate parts and consider them one at a time.

To
start, a key part is the list of customer requirements on the left side of the figure.
Next, note the technical requirements, listed vertically near the top. The key
relationships and their degree of importance are shown in the center of the figure.
The circle with a dot inside indicates the strongest positive relationship; that is, it
denotes the most important technical requirements for satisfying customer
requirements. Now look at the “importance to customer” numbers that are shown
next to each customer requirement (3 is the most important). Designers will take
into account the importance values and the strength of correlation in determining
where to focus the greatest effort.

Next, consider the correlation matrix at the top of the “house.” Of special interest is
the strong negative correlation between “paper thickness” and “roll roundness.”
Designers will have to find some way to overcome that or make a trade-off decision.

On the right side of the figure is a competitive evaluation comparing the supplier's
performance on the customer requirements with each of the two key competitors (A
and B). For example, the supplier (X) is worst on the first customer requirement and
best on the third customer requirement. The line connects the X performances.
Ideally, design will cause all of the Xs to be in the highest positions.
Across the bottom are importance weightings, target values, and technical evaluations. The
technical evaluations can be interpreted in a manner similar to that of the competitive
evaluations (note the line connecting the Xs). The target values typically contain technical
specifications, which we will not discuss. The importance weightings are the sums of values
assigned to the relationships (see the lower right-hand key for relationship weights). The 3 in
the first column is the product of the importance to the customer, 3, and the small (Δ) weight,
1. The importance weightings and target evaluations help designers focus on desired results.
In this example, the first technical requirement has the lowest importance weighting, while
the next four technical requirements all have relatively high importance weightings.