Question: I have been looking to develop some metrics for a UX project (which was also a [question](https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/37933/metrics-for-measuring-user-engagement-for-web-applications) I posted previoiusly), and have been reading about the [Kano](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kano_model) model and how it maps to different user behaviour/expectations. I was wondering whether it is practical to dissect the functions/features of a product based on user perception about the presence and absence of features (ref [here](http://www.mountaingoatsoftware.com/articles/i-didnt-know-i-needed-that)) and tallying up to see if there were more features that generated excited rather than expected or dissatisfied experiences.

There have been proposals of frameworks for evaluating user experience (e.g. Google's [HEART framework](http://research.google.com/pubs/pub36299.html)) but these models do not provide actual metrics or mapping to the components or categories that make up the whole user experience which we want to capture. I have found that the Kano model is one starting point from mapping product functions and features to particular aspects of the user experience, and would like to look for other ways to start filling in the rest of the gaps.

The question is, can the features of a software product or service be classified as one of the three categories and weighted to provide a value/metric for how users feel about a product. And is it practical to track and monitor this over the lifecycle the product to provide one aspect of the user experience?

Answer: 
Maybe not a direct answer to your question but thoughts that I hope can add some value. Anyway, I'd love to see some more answers to the question.

ISO 9241-11 "Usability"
=======================

> 
> "The extent to which a product can be used by specified users to achieve specified goals with **effectiveness**, **efficiency**, and **satisfaction** in a specified context of use."
> 
> 
> 

Kano
====

> 
> Differentiating product features of a product in **basic** attributes, **performance** attributes and **excitement** attributes.
> 
> 
> 

Potential correlation
=====================

* To fulfil the **basic need** the product needs to be **effective**.

*e.g. a task manager app needs to be able to store my tasks*
* A **performance need** might be the desire to achieve the goal in an **efficient** manner.

*e.g. the bespoke task manager app should enable me to add a task from anywhere in the app with just 2 clicks*
* The **excitement**, even though maybe not a feature itself, can increase the **satisfaction** and serve as differentiator over similar products that otherwise are also effective and efficient.

*e.g. the task manager has a beautiful designed UI and is hence a pleasure to use*
Kano Model is representation of metrics to assess user satisfaction with a product. Satisfaction is very important measure but user experience is one step ahead of it. The historical evolution is from service quality --> Customer Care and Satisfaction --> Customer Experience. UX/CX is holistic concept which takes usability measures, aesthetic, emotions, cognition and experiences. In short, Kano Model is good as long as your focus is to gauge user satisfaction. But for user experience, you need more factors, otherwise your model will be confounded.