Understanding Kano's three groups of requirements: standard/base, performance, and excitement.

Outline (skeleton)

• Hook: Why saying “more features equal happier customers” isn’t always true.

• Quick intro to Kano: three buckets that reveal how customers really feel about features.

• The three groups:

• Standard/Base: the must-haves that set the stage.

• Performance: the features where more is better.

• Excitement: delighters that surprise and spark delight.

• How to use Kano in practice:

• How to identify which bucket a feature belongs to.

• Simple ways to map features to priorities.

• Real-world analogies and quick examples:

• A mobile app, a SaaS dashboard, or a consumer device.

• Practical tips and common missteps.

• Takeaway: a feature-priority mindset that stays flexible.

• Quick note tying back to the idea that the answer to the “which group?” question is D: standard/base, performance, excitement.

Kano in plain language: three buckets that make sense of what customers actually notice

Let me explain it this way. We all know a product needs a certain baseline to even feel usable. But not every feature is created equal when it comes to happiness. Kano’s model helps teams sort ideas into three simple groups. Yes, it can feel a little abstract at first, but once you see it in action, it clicks.

The three groups, in plain terms

1. Standard/Base needs

These are the non-negotiables—the things customers assume will be there. When they’re missing, you’ll hear about it loud and clear. When they’re present, they’re hardly noticed because they’re expected. Think of a mobile app that requires a login, a clean and readable interface, or a basic level of security. If these basics work, users don’t gush; they just keep using the product. If they’re clunky or absent, satisfaction falls off a cliff.

2. Performance needs

These are the straight-up levers. The more you do here, the more customers notice and the happier they become. There’s a direct relationship: better performance equals higher satisfaction. Examples: faster load times, smoother transitions, more accurate search results, better battery life in a device. These aren’t surprises, but they’re the things customers actively compare. A small improvement can yield a noticeable boost in delight; a big improvement can lift perceived value dramatically.

3. Excitement needs

Here’s where the wow comes from. These features aren’t expected, so their absence doesn’t upset anyone; their presence can spark delight. They set you apart and can turn occasional users into advocates. Think of a smart app that suggests tasks in a clever way, a camera feature that auto-styles photos, or a rare UI interaction that feels “fresh and clever.” If you never add them, fine—people still get by. If you add them, some users become fans for life.

How to apply Kano without turning your backlog into chaos

• Start with the baseline. Before you worry about bells and whistles, make sure the standard/base needs are solid. If a product can’t function well without them, everything else is a moot point. It’s the difference between a usable tool and an unreliable one.

• Layer in performance. Once the basics are rock-solid, look for the features that improve efficiency, speed, accuracy, and reliability. These are the bets that move the needle in most user journeys. Prioritize improvements here because they correlate strongly with user satisfaction.

• Sprinkle in delights. Reserve some room for the unexpected. You don’t need a hundred of these, just a few selectively chosen ones that align with your audience’s passions. Delighters can create strong word-of-mouth and long-term loyalty, but use them sparingly so they don’t distract from the core experience.

A practical, concrete example you can relate to

Imagine you’re shaping a SaaS dashboard for team collaboration. Here’s how Kano naturally plays out:

• Standard/Base: secure login, reliable data syncing, clear navigation, accessible color contrast, and basic mobile support. If any of these are flaky, users notice immediately and may abandon the product.

• Performance: faster report generation, real-time updates, minimal latency during collaboration, and intuitive bulk actions. These are the things that people tell you matter when their workflows are tight and deadlines loom.

• Excitement: a smart notification center that learns a team’s activity pattern, a one-click insight generator that surfaces meaningful metrics, or a playful, yet useful, data viz theme that feels fresh. These features don’t replace the core functions, but they can turn a good product into something memorable.

A smaller, more familiar example—your device or app on a personal level

Let’s look at a consumer product, like a meditation app. The standard/base needs include reliable audio playback and simple timers. The performance needs cover things like clean onboarding, fast lesson loading, and accurate progress tracking. The excitement needs could be features that feel almost magical—guided sessions that adjust to your mood, or a surprise, adaptive soundscape that changes with the time of day. If the app never adds such delights, people still use it; if it does, they might recommend it to friends.

Why this three-bucket approach matters for teams

• It helps you talk clearly with stakeholders. Instead of arguing about “more features,” you can discuss which bucket a feature sits in and what a reasonable release plan looks like.

• It guides resource allocation. You protect essential base features first, then invest in performance improvements, and finally pick a handful of delights that align with user interests and business goals.

• It reduces roadmapping anxiety. You don’t have to decide in a vacuum whether something is critical. You assess its impact on satisfaction through the Kano lens, which often yields surprising clarity.

Common pitfalls and simple fixes

• Mistaking excitement for necessity. If you’re chasing a wow feature without a solid base, the product feels fragile. Fix: ensure the base is rock-solid before you experiment with delights.

• Mislabeling features. It’s easy to tag something as a performance or delight when users don’t actually value it that way. Fix: gather quick user feedback and let the data guide the categorization.

• Forgetting regional differences. What delights users in one market might feel ordinary in another. Fix: consider regional variants and test assumptions with diverse user groups.

• Overloading on delighters. A few well-chosen delights can pay off; too many can confuse the user and inflate the roadmap. Fix: pick curated, meaningful extras that reinforce your brand story.

A few practical tips to keep in your kit

• Name the buckets in your backlog: the Base, the Performance, and the Delight list. It’s a simple mental map that keeps discussions grounded.

• Use lightweight surveys to gauge perception. For example, ask users to rate how essential a feature is and how would they feel if it were absent. The divergence between those two answers often reveals the Kano category.

• Tie features to user journeys. See where speed, reliability, or surprise makes the biggest difference in the flow of work. Then layer your priorities around those touchpoints.

• Build with feedback loops. After releasing a set of features, check how user satisfaction shifts. If delighters aren’t moving the needle, reallocate resources toward base or performance.

A quick digression you might enjoy

Sometimes we talk about tools and models as if they’re distant cousins of our daily work. But the Kano model is really about human experience. It’s the same idea behind how a good barista remembers your preferred drink or how a streaming app surfaces a “just for you” recommendation. The goal isn’t to chase novelty for novelty’s sake; it’s to tune a product so that what people expect is reliably there, what helps them do their work is faster or easier, and what surprises them enough to smile is meaningful.

The core takeaway: the three buckets you’ll want to hold in mind

• Standard/Base: the baseline that keeps the door open for usage. No one loves these every day, but they’re missed when they’re gone.

• Performance: the direct, measurable improvements that players notice as they work better or faster.

• Excitement: the surprise that can turn casual users into fans and advocates.

The question you might see in a study session or a workshop, and the clean answer you can commit to when you’re organizing ideas, is this: Kano groups a requirement into standard/base, performance, and excitement. If you’re asked to pick from options, the right one will feel like a deceptively simple framework once you’ve seen it in action. The answer is Standard/base, performance, excitement.

Bringing it together in your day-to-day work

If you’re building something—be it a software feature, a product tweak, or a service enhancement—try this quick ritual:

• List the candidate feature.

• Ask two clarifying questions: “Is this a base need?” and “If we remove it, how unhappy would users be?” Then map the feature to Standard/Base, Performance, or Delight.

• Prioritize based on impact: protect the base features first, then optimize performance, then add a deliberate delight when it makes sense for the audience and budget.

The Kano model isn’t a magic wand. It won’t instantly convert a chaotic backlog into a neat ladder of priorities. But it does give you a humane, practical language to discuss value with teammates and users alike. It helps you balance the boring and the brilliant, the essential and the exciting, so your product feels reliable and fresh in equal measure.

If you’ve ever found yourself wrestling with “what should we build next?” this framework might become your go-to compass. It nudges you to ask not just what customers say they want, but what they’ll notice, what will ease their day, and what might delight them in a way they hadn’t even imagined. And that, in the end, is how products endure and teams stay energized.

A closing thought

The three groups—Standard/Base, Performance, and Excitement—are more than a categorization. They’re a reminder that value isn’t a single metric. It’s a balance between meeting expectations, delivering tangible improvements, and occasionally brightening the user’s world with something that feels almost serendipitous. Keep that balance in mind, and your requirements decisions will feel less like guesswork and more like thoughtful, human-centered design.