The A to Z of UX - K is for Kano: A guide to prioritising features to increase user satisfaction and delight
- UXcentric
- Sep 2
- 10 min read
Updated: Sep 5
Darren Wilson
Finding a strong topic for ‘K’ wasn’t easy (definitely the hardest so far!), but the Kano Model stood out as one to explore.
While not a tool that every team uses daily, it’s a powerful framework for understanding how different features affect user satisfaction.
The model helps answer a question that frustrates many product teams: why doesn’t building what users ask for always make them happy?
Japanese professor Dr. Noriaki Kano studied this exact paradox and developed the Kano Model. He found that satisfaction doesn’t increase in a simple, linear way as you add more features.
Dr. Kano first published his model in 1984, after observing that fixing complaints wasn’t enough to create loyalty. He reframed satisfaction in terms of emotional as well as functional response, showing that delight can be measured and prioritised.
Some are simply expected, others compete on performance, and a few create moments of true delight. His model remains a cornerstone of product strategy today.
Why the Kano model is important
You’ve done the research, you’ve listened to your users, and you’ve spent a frantic quarter building that one new feature everyone seemed to be asking for. You launch. And the reaction is a deafening… ‘meh’.
Product teams are under constant pressure to deliver more. More features, more releases, more “stuff.” But without a clear way to prioritise, this quickly leads to what many call featureitis: bloated products packed with things no one values.
The Kano Model gives teams a way to fight back. Instead of treating every feature request as equal, it provides a structured framework to separate the essentials from the differentiators and the distractions. This means product roadmaps become about focus and impact, not just volume.
It also helps when resources are limited. Few organisations can build everything they’d like. Kano helps teams make tough trade-offs, clarifying which features will make or break satisfaction, and which can safely wait.
Successful products aren’t the ones that deliver the most features, but the right ones. The Kano Model helps teams define what ‘right’ looks like. Simply adding more features doesn’t always lead to more satisfaction.
Dr. Kano’s work culminated in a simple but profound framework that has since become a cornerstone of product strategy: The Kano Model.
It provides a powerful antidote to building a ‘feature factory’. It gives teams a structured way to understand the difference between:
Features that are hygiene and fundamental to the experience
Features that improve satisfaction
Features that create true, unexpected delight
The real strength of the Kano Model is that it helps you look beyond functionality to understand emotion. It’s not just about what users say they want, but how they feel when a feature is present, or absent.
That emotional dimension is often what makes the difference between a product that works and a product that wins loyalty.
For product owners, designers, and stakeholders, it’s a strategic map for navigating the difficult terrain of "what should we build next?"
Why feature requests don’t tell the full story
"No matter how cool your technology is, people don’t use it for its own sake. They use it to achieve a goal."
Alan Cooper
Before diving into the model itself, we have to understand the problem it solves. Historically, product teams have relied on a straightforward question: “What features do you want?” or “How important is this feature to you on a scale of 1 to 5?”
The flaw in this approach is what’s often called the faster horse problem. As Henry Ford is apocryphally quoted as saying, If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.
"It’s not the customer’s job to know what’s possible."
Marty Cagan
Users are experts in their problems, but not in the solutions.
This linear way of thinking assumes that a feature that is ‘missing’ causes dissatisfaction, and adding it will create satisfaction. Dr. Kano proved this was a dangerous oversimplification.
Some features are so fundamental that their presence is completely ignored, but their absence would be a deal-breaker. Other features are delightful surprises that users would never think to ask for, but their inclusion can create passionate brand advocates.
The five Kano model categories
The Kano Model helps us move beyond simple feature lists by classifying potential features into five distinct categories based on how users react to their presence or absence. For most practical purposes, we focus on the three main items.
Image Credit - Interaction Design Foundation
1. Basic needs (Hygiene or Must-Haves)
These are the features that users absolutely expect and are considered hygiene. They are the cost of entry, the unspoken fundamentals of your product.
When they are present and working well, users don’t even notice them. They’re just part of the background hum of a functional product.
However, when they are missing or poorly implemented, the user experiences immediate and significant dissatisfaction.
Impact on satisfaction
Their presence does not increase satisfaction, but their absence causes extreme dissatisfaction.
Analogy
The brakes on a new car. You don’t buy the car because of the brakes, but you wouldn’t dream of buying it without them.
Examples
A ‘log in’ function for an account
The sound is working on a video conferencing app.
Investing heavily in improving basic features yields diminishing returns. Your effort is better spent elsewhere once they are ‘good enough’.
2. Satisfiers (Performance)
This is where the linear model of satisfaction rings true. The more you provide, the more satisfied your users become.
By nature, these features are also easily measurable and comparable to other experiences.
These are the features that users are very conscious of and are often the basis on which they compare competing products. When you ask people what they want in a product, they will most likely list satisfiers.
Impact on satisfaction
Satisfaction is directly proportional to how well you execute the feature. More is better.
Analogy
Battery life on a smartphone. Ten hours is good, but a twenty-hour battery is twice as good. The better the performance, the higher the satisfaction.
Examples
The speed of a file transfer or the number of integrations with other software.
The accuracy of a search engine's results.
These are the features where you directly compete with others in your market. Investing here provides a clear, measurable return on satisfaction.
3. Delighters (Exciters)
These are the unexpected treasures. They are the features that users don’t expect and would never think to ask for. Because they are not expected, their absence causes no dissatisfaction whatsoever.
However, their presence can create a significant, positive emotional response, a ‘wow’ moment that builds loyalty and generates positive word-of-mouth.
As the renowned UX leader Jared Spool has often highlighted in his talks, these delighters are key to creating a superior user experience. They are the source of user delight.
Impact on satisfaction
Their absence causes no dissatisfaction, but their presence can dramatically increase satisfaction.
Analogy
The first time a hotel left a complimentary, high-quality chocolate on your pillow. You didn't expect it, but it made your stay feel special.
Examples
The first time Google Maps automatically rerouted you around traffic.
Spotify’s "Discover Weekly" playlist, which creates a perfect set of new songs for you.
Delighters are where true innovation lies. They are often what separates a beloved product from a merely functional one.
"The surprising truth is that attractive things actually work better. When we are in a good mood, we are more creative, better at solving complex problems."
Don Norman
To keep our attention, products benefit from having a constant stream of novelty. These delightful features provide that novelty, creating memorable moments that build loyalty.
Balance matters here. Great products succeed not by maximising one category, but by covering the basics, competing strongly on performance, and sprinkling in just enough delight.
The other two categories, indifferent and reverse features, are also identified in the analysis and are crucial for knowing what to avoid building.
4. Indifferent features
As the name suggests, these are features that users are completely apathetic about. Their presence doesn’t increase satisfaction, and their absence doesn’t decrease it. They are simply background noise.
While they may seem harmless, indifferent features are dangerous because they are a primary source of wasted effort and product bloat.
They are often the result of an internal "good idea" that was never validated with users. Identifying these features allows a team to confidently remove them from the backlog and focus on what truly matters.
Impact on Satisfaction
None. Users do not care one way or the other.
Analogy
The colour of the rental car you're given. As long as it works, most people don't care if it's silver, grey, or black. It's an attribute that has no real impact on their experience.
Example
In a banking app, while a feature showing the current weather on the login screen might be technically possible, most users would likely classify it as Indifferent. It doesn't help them manage their finances and just adds clutter to the interface.
Indifferent features are particularly dangerous because they waste precious development time without improving the user experience.
Spotting and eliminating these early is one of the most practical benefits of the Kano Model.
5. Reverse features
This category is arguably the most critical to identify. Reverse features are those that actively cause dissatisfaction for some users. Essentially, the more you invest in this feature, the less satisfied a segment of your users becomes.
These often arise when a feature intended to be helpful is perceived as intrusive, or when a "simplified" feature removes control from expert users.
Actively avoiding or removing these features can be one of the easiest ways to improve a user's experience.
Impact on Satisfaction
Their presence actively decreases satisfaction.
Analogy
Automatic 'help' wizards in software for expert users. For a beginner, they might be helpful, but for an expert who knows the shortcuts, they are intrusive pop-ups that slow them down and cause frustration.
Example
On a news website, a feature that automatically plays a video with sound on every article page would be a classic Reverse feature for many users.
While the product team might think it increases engagement, it actually frustrates users and may cause them to leave the site.
One of Kano’s most practical insights is that emotion and functionality must align.
No amount of delight can make up for a missing basic expectation, and no baseline functionality will inspire loyalty without moments of surprise and delight. It’s this interplay that makes the model such a powerful prioritisation tool.
How the Kano model works
So, how do you find out which category a feature falls into? You can’t just ask. Instead, the Kano methodology relies on a specific style of questionnaire.
For each feature, you ask the user a pair of questions:
Functional question
How would you feel if you had this feature?
Dysfunctional question
How would you feel if you did not have this feature?
Answers range from "I like it" to "I dislike it" for both types of questions.
By cross-referencing the answers to this pair of questions, you can categorise the feature for that user.
Another reason teams like the Kano Model is its practicality. At its simplest, it requires only a short survey, making it lightweight and accessible even without specialist research tools.
That makes it especially useful when resources are limited but the need for clarity is high.
When should you use the Kano model?
Kano analysis is especially valuable when:
Time and resources are limited
It’s a quick method (often just an email questionnaire) that doesn’t require specialist researchers.
You need to prioritise
It highlights which features are essential, which add competitive performance, and which can safely wait.
You want to delight customers
It helps uncover unexpected ‘surprise and delight’ features that create moments of loyalty and advocacy.
You’re refreshing an existing product
It’s a proven way to reassess features against shifting customer expectations.
The benefits are clear
As well as saving resources by preventing wasted development, it identifies priority areas for improvement and focuses investment on features that increase satisfaction.
Limitations to keep in mind
Survey results are largely quantitative and need thoughtful analysis to interpret, and running the process manually can be hard to manage without the right tools.
The Kano model in five easy steps
Choose the features to test
Start with a short, focused list (5–10 features).
Make sure they represent a mix of basics, improvements, and potential innovations.
Frame paired questions
For each feature, ask the paired questions:
Functional:
"How would you feel if you had this feature?”
Dysfunctional:
"How would you feel if you didn’t have this feature?”
Use a five-point scale
I like it that way
I expect it that way
I am neutral
I can live with it that way
I dislike it that way
Run the survey with real users
Recruit actual customers or close prospects.
Remember, you don’t need thousands of responses. Even a small sample of 15–20 real users can surface clear patterns that reveal where to focus effort.
Keep the survey short (10–15 mins max) for reliable answers.
Categorise the responses
Cross-check answers to place each feature into:
Basic needs
Satisfiers
Delighters
Indifferent
Reverse
Once you’ve gathered responses, the next challenge is how to interpret them. Not every answer will make sense. Some participants give contradictory responses (for example, saying “I like it” whether a feature is present or absent). These are usually set aside as questionable.
For the rest, teams can use different approaches to group results. The simplest is to place each feature into a category based on the majority view, while more advanced methods look at the spread of responses or even calculate how much satisfaction a feature creates when present versus how much dissatisfaction its absence would cause.
Once responses are cleaned up, teams need a way to bring the data together across all participants.
Revisit regularly
Today’s 'Delighter' becomes tomorrow’s 'Satisfier', and eventually a 'Basic Need'.
Re-run Kano surveys at intervals (e.g., annually or post-launch) to keep up with shifting expectations.
A word of warning
One of the most critical insights from the Kano Model is that feature categories are not static.
Over time, customer expectations evolve. The 'Delighter' that wowed everyone last year becomes a 'Performance' feature this year, and will likely become a 'Basic Need' feature the year after.
Think about the rear-view camera in a car. Initially, it was a delightful, high-end surprise. Then, it became a competitive performance feature. As such, brands would compete on screen size and clarity.
In recent years, it's been a regulated, standard-issue feature. It is now a 'Basic Need'. Its presence is expected, and its absence would be negatively impactful.
This means that teams must continually re-evaluate their product and the market to ensure they are keeping up with baseline expectations while also searching for the next source of delight.
Final thoughts
The Kano Model is a strategic technique for your toolbox.
It encourages teams to think more deeply about the why behind a feature, not just the what.
Used continuously, it becomes a competitive advantage: a way to keep pace as expectations shift, prevent featureitis, and make smart trade-offs about what to cut, what to compete on, and where to innovate.
By understanding the difference between the different types of features, you can allocate your resources more effectively, build a more strategic roadmap and create products that don't just function but truly resonate with users.
"When we’ve fulfilled our users’ functional needs, we can begin to build a deeper connection by addressing their emotional needs. That’s where the magic happens."
Aaron Walter
If you’d like help applying the Kano Model to prioritise your roadmap and cut through featureitis, let’s talk.
Get in touch with the author
Darren Wilson
Managing Director at UXcentric
07854 781 908