Term
| The Basic New Product Process |
|
Definition
1: Opportunity Identification / Selection
2: Concept Generation
3: Concept/Project Evaluation
4: Development
5: Launch |
|
|
Term
| Activities that Feed Strategic Planning for New Products |
|
Definition
-ongoing marketing planning
-ongoing corporate planning
-special opportunity analysis |
|
|
Term
| Sources of Identified Opportunities |
|
Definition
an underutilized resource
a new resource
an external mandate
an internal mandate |
|
|
Term
| Stages of Concept/Project Evaluation |
|
Definition
screening (pretechnical evaluation)
concept testing
full screen
project evaluation (begin preparing product protocol) |
|
|
Term
| The first stages of the new product process are sometimes called _____ because the product concept is still ____. By the end of the project, most of the ____ should be removed. |
|
Definition
| The first stages of the new product process are sometimes called the fuzzy front end because the product concept is still fuzzy. By the end of the project, most of the fuzz should be removed. |
|
|
Term
| Techniques for Attaining Speed in a New Product Project |
|
Definition
-Accelerating product Development through Managing the Organization
-Intensify Resource Commitments
-Design for Speed
-Prepare for Rapid Manufacturing |
|
|
Term
| Accelerating product Development through Managing the Organization |
|
Definition
use projectization: project matrix and venture terms
use small groups to thwart bureaucracy
empower, motivate, and protect the team
destroy turf and territory
make sure supporting departments are ready
clear the tracks in shared departments |
|
|
Term
| Intensify resource Commitments |
|
Definition
| integrate channel members and customers, use parallel or concurrent engineering |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Computer-aided design
rapid prototyping
design-aided manufacturing
common components |
|
|
Term
| Prepare for Rapid Manufacturing |
|
Definition
use rollouts
invest in immediate market awareness
facilitate trial purchasing |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the individuals inability to spontaneously interject ideas without violating group etiquette or breaking the concentration of other members |
|
|
Term
| Key Characteristics for short-cycle-time firms |
|
Definition
-extensive user involvement early in the new products process
cross-functional teams are dedicated to the new product
suppliers are extensively involved
the firms adopt effective design philosophies and practices
the most adept firms are effective at organizational learning |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
successful mew services tend to come from firms that use a systematic process much like the new products process- the tools are fit
interactions may be more frequent since they are less expensive
unique, superior service, providing value and benefit as perceived by the customer, must be delivered, to achieve success
speed to market with services is important especially in enhancing repuation, image, and customer loyalty |
|
|
Term
| what about new-to-the-world products? |
|
Definition
the challenges are different, but the firstphase remains the same; opportunity identification and development of strategic statement
clear connection required between the radical innovation and the firm's strategic vision
the new products process is more explanatory: need to bring in Voice of the Customer (VOC)
lead users may be critical |
|
|
Term
| the probe-and-learn process for new-to-the-world products |
|
Definition
focused (limited-performance) prototypes
"lickety-stick" iterative process |
|
|
Term
| "lickety-stick" iterative process |
|
Definition
| non-linear, more flexible process in which dozens of prototypes may be tried ("lickety") before settling on one that cusomers like ("stick") |
|
|
Term
| dialogr's comptitive advantages |
|
Definition
advanced adaptive sampling
a scoring system to elicit honest feedback for idea screening by consumers
incentive points
decision metrics
test mining, analysis and clustering |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
a collaboration tool
dynamically creates alternatives
generates ideas
defines priorities |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
open-ended questions (the topic)
users post ideas
rate and comment on ideas of others
top 5 ideas updated and displayed |
|
|
Term
| How are ideas evaluated on dialogr? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
creates a collective knowledge base
informs members of the group
aids decision-making
builds community
convenient and saves time |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
technology advisory committee
sustainability committee
other slo chamber committies |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
cal poly foundation
orfalea college of business
hp
cal tech industries
pg&e |
|
|
Term
| who popularized traditional brainstorming and when? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| what was alex osborns job? |
|
Definition
| advertising executive and one of the founders of BBDO |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. Divergent Process
2. Convergent Process |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
give an open ended question and the groups goal is to generate as many ideas as possible
use extensive research |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
methods of idea selection
limited research |
|
|
Term
| Group's focus for divergent thinking |
|
Definition
-inital focus is on quantity of ideas
-suspend judgment, no criticism
-unusual ideas are welcome
-combine and improve on past ideas |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
-traditional, FTF
-nominal group technique, NGT
-virtual, VBS |
|
|
Term
| Traditional Brainstorming (FTF) |
|
Definition
face to face group discussion
idea sharing
moderate captures ideas
ideas pooled by moderator |
|
|
Term
| Nominal Group Technique Brainstorming (NGT) |
|
Definition
individual generation
no interaction among people
ideas posted by moderator |
|
|
Term
| Virtual Brainstorming (VBS) |
|
Definition
asynchronous idea sharing
no moderator
shared ideas posted by computer |
|
|
Term
| ___ groups are more productive and more satisfied than ___ groups. |
|
Definition
| VBS groups are more productive and more satisfied than FTF groups |
|
|
Term
| large ___ groups outperformed ____ groups |
|
Definition
| large VBS groups outperformed nominal groups |
|
|
Term
small ___ groups outperformed ___ groups
(small meaning less than 9 people) |
|
Definition
| small nominal groups outperformed VBS groups |
|
|
Term
| ____ groups are consistently poor |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| ____ outperforms ____ and ____ because... |
|
Definition
| VBS outperforms NGT and FTF because it is a synergy of shared ideas |
|
|
Term
virtual brainstorming has incentive to minimize...
virtual brainstorming is excellent for... |
|
Definition
social loafing
large groups! |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
structures sessions to encourage novel ideas
new product development |
|
|
Term
| the immediate competition |
|
Definition
-Idealist
-BrandDelphi
-Idea Exchanges |
|
|
Term
| Convergent Thinking Chart |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Convergent thinking: challenges |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| convergent thinking: voting and rating models |
|
Definition
various dependent measurements
attractiveness, perceived quality, etc. |
|
|
Term
| adaptive idea screening for convergent thinking |
|
Definition
vbs can produce a very, very large number of ideas
screening all of the ideas may not be possible
need a screening algorithm |
|
|
Term
| adaptive screening picture |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
dialogr research: algorithms
best performing algorithms focus on... |
|
Definition
there are several screening algorithms for idea selection
simulations to compare and analyze their performance
best performing algorithms focus on the ideas that are the most likely to have been misclassified |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
myopic hit rate
myopic average
closest to threshold
misclassification minimization
misclassification minimization with random perturbations
maximize right tail
random
perturbation = mental disquiet, disturbance, or agitation |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| myopically maximizes the hit rate (number of estimated top m ideas in true top m) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| myopically maximizes the average probability of the estimated top m ideas |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| selects the ideas with the estimated probabilities closest to the threshold between the "top" and "bottom" groups |
|
|
Term
| misclassification minimization |
|
Definition
| selects the ideas most likely to have been misclassified as "top" or "bottom" |
|
|
Term
| misclassification minimization with random perturbations |
|
Definition
similar to misclassification minimization with the addition of random perturbations to the scores assigned to each other
perturbation- cause of mental disquiet, disturbance, or agitation
disquiet- lack of calm, peace, or ease |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| selects the ideas most likely to have a probability higher than a predefined threshold |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| alrorithms chart about hit rate |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| top 5 ideas for new products for young adults |
|
Definition
1. universal phone charger in public areas
2. auto ring to find lost cell phone
3. wallet with smart lock
4. waterproof cell phone
5. soundproofing paint |
|
|
Term
| what is the topic password? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. http://www.dialogr.com
2. locate topics to discuss
3. register/login using real name and a work email
4. select your topic
5. add your ideas
6. vote by rating the ideas of others
7. comments: provide reason for your ratings
8. return later and review, rate and comment on fresh ideas |
|
|
Term
| dialogr provides methods to... |
|
Definition
-Tap Group Wisdom
-Generate Ideas
-Evaluate Ideas
-Find the Best Ideas
-Build Consensus
-Aid Decision-Making |
|
|
Term
| once an idea is posted on dialogr, can it be changed? why? |
|
Definition
nope!
this prevents the idea creator from changing the idea after another participant has rated it |
|
|
Term
| suggestions for developing a topic |
|
Definition
-topic question should be clear and easily understood
-avoid closed-ended questions...the topic question should encourage a range of suggestions and a variety of ideas
-seek simplicity
-some questions yield underlying issues
(what is preventing the usa from becoming 100% energy independent?)
-some questions yield a range of solutions
(what can be done to promote greater reliance on solar power?)
-some questions consider strengths (or weaknesses) of a solution
(what are the disadvantages of fuel efficient automobiles?) |
|
|
Term
| creative thinking strategies |
|
Definition
-find many ways to look at a problem
-make thoughts visible
-produce
-make novel combinations
-force relationships
-think in opposites
-think metaphorically
-prepare yourself for chance |
|
|
Term
| example of "killer phrases" |
|
Definition
it simply wont work
you can't be serious
lets shelve it for the time being
its probably too big for us
i agree, but...
we've done it the other way for some time
where are we going to get the money for that?
etc. |
|
|
Term
| Barriers to Firm Creativity |
|
Definition
cross-functional diversity
allegiance to functional areas
social cohesion
role of top management |
|
|
Term
| cross-functional diversity |
|
Definition
| diversity leads to more creative stimulation but also to problem solving difficulties |
|
|
Term
| allegiance to functional areas |
|
Definition
| team members need to have a stake in the team's success, or won't be loyal to them |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| if interpersonal ties among team members are too strong, candid debate may not occur, resulting in less innovative ideas |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| management should encourage the teams to be adventurous, otherwise only incremental changes will occur |
|
|
Term
| required inputs to the creation process |
|
Definition
form
technology
benefit/need |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the physical thing created, or, for a service, the set of steps by which the service will be created |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the source by which the form is to be attained |
|
|
Term
benefit/need
____ permits us to develop ____ that provides _____ |
|
Definition
benefit to the customer for which the customer sees a need or desire
technology permits us to develop a form that provides the benefit |
|
|
Term
| patterns in concept generation |
|
Definition
customer need -> firm develops technology -> produced form
firm develops technology -> finds match to need in customer segment -> produces form
firm envisions form -> develops technology to product form -> tests with customer to see what benefits are delivered
Note: the innovation process can start with any of the three inputs |
|
|
Term
| what is a product concept? |
|
Definition
a verbal or prototype statement of what is going to be changed and how the customer stands to gain or lose
Rule: you need at least two of the three inputs to have a feasible new product concept, and all three to have a new product |
|
|
Term
| how many inputs do you need to have a feasible new product concept? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| how many inputs do you need to have a new product? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| why do you need a product concept and not just an idea? |
|
Definition
its needed to judge whether it is a worthy development
potential customers do not have enough information to judge the worthiness of an idea: the product concept gives them the required information
ex. Would a taxi operator like cards with 10 cents per mile operating cost? (need)
not if it used Caterpillar tractor technology instead of wheels! (need plus technology) |
|
|
Term
| new product concepts and the new product (picture) |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| the designer decaf example |
|
Definition
benefit: consumers want decaffeinated espresso that tasted identical to regular
form: we should make a darker, thicker, turkish-coffee-like espresso
technology: there's a new chemical extraction process that isolates and separates chemicals from foods; maybe we can use that for decaffeinating espresso coffee
Why would each of these taken individually not be a product concept? |
|
|
Term
is this a concept?
learning needs of computer users can be met by using online systems to let them see training videos on the leading software packages |
|
Definition
yes!
good concept need and technology clear |
|
|
Term
is this a concept?
a new way to solve the in-home training/educational needs of PC users |
|
Definition
no!
need only; actually more like a wish |
|
|
Term
is this a concept?
lets develop a new line of instructional videos |
|
Definition
no!
technology only, lacking market need and form |
|
|
Term
| methods of generating product concepts |
|
Definition
two broad categories of methods:
1. gathering ready-made product concepts
2. using a managed process run by the new products team |
|
|
Term
| best sources of ready-made new product concepts |
|
Definition
new product employees
end users
resellers, suppliers, vendors
competitors
the invention industry (investors, etc.)
idea exploration firms and consulting engineers
miscellaneous |
|
|
Term
| miscellaneous categories for ready-made new product concepts |
|
Definition
consultants
advertising agencies
marketing research firms
retired product specialists
industrial designers
other manufacturers
universities
research laboratories
governments
printed sources
international
internet |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
an important source of new product ideas
customers associated with a significant current trend
they have the best understanding of the problems faced, and can gain from solutions to these problems
in many cases, have already begun to solve their own problems, or can work with product developers to anticipate the next problem in the future |
|
|
Term
| target customer characterization: brief description of the buyer |
|
Definition
"before": day-in-the-life
"after": day-in-the-life |
|
|
Term
| "before": day in the life |
|
Definition
-scene/situation
-desired outcome
-attempted approach
-interfering factors
-economic consequences |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
new approach
enabling factors
economic rewards |
|
|
Term
| hearing the voice of the customer...you should use... |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
identify the different types of problems to be solved by product users or potential users
observe users and develop a detailed description of what functionality the product offer provides them
develop concrete examples of the potential future products |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
market research methods in npd
(graph) |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| the challenge of new technology |
|
Definition
there is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things.
Because the innovation has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions, and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new. |
|
|
Term
| technology adoption cycle: customer profile |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| early market characteristics: innovators/visionaries |
|
Definition
horizontal references
"leading edge" value system
customer assumes system integration responsibility
customization via direct access to the developers
competition between categories of solutions |
|
|
Term
| mainstream market characteristics: pragmatists and conservatives |
|
Definition
vertical references
"long haul" value system
vendor assumes system integration responsibilities
proven relationships with established companies
direct competition exists- validates leadership, creates price pressure
good price and good service |
|
|
Term
| the chasm- a "non-market" characteristics |
|
Definition
early market becomes saturated
no credible pragmatist references
who's the customer? visionaries or pragmatists?
whats the application
the wait-and-see lull (revenue stalls, long sale cycles)
how wide and deep is the chasm? |
|
|
Term
| the chasm-- a "non-market" picture |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| reference problems-- visionaries vs pragmatists |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
target niche market segment in a vertical application area who has a compelling reason to buy
focus resources on the niche
deliver a "whole" product with assistance of partners
develop the infrastructure to credibly influence pragmatists
establish competitive references, but clearly position your advantages |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
significant advantage for new product relative to existing products or means
new product is compatible with existing values, past experiences and needs of adopters
new product is easy to understand and use
new product may be easily tried
results from using the product are easily visible and communicable |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
credible sources for product claims: testimonials and references from influencers,objective study results
backwards compatibility designed into products
simple interfaces to perform basic product functions
customer migration assistance and training
easy trial: point-of-purchase trial and trial periods
facilitate communications: develop word-of-mouth |
|
|
Term
Innovation
it is often difficult to understand customer needs when it is most critical-- _____.
Generally the more _____the product, the more difficult it is to ______
Customer needs, product evaluations, and usage behaviors change with _______
___________ IS KEY! |
|
Definition
it is often difficult to understand customer needs when it is most critical-- early in product design.
Generally the more innovative the product, the more difficult it is to "know the customer"
Customer needs, product evaluations, and usage behaviors change with product experience
CUSTOMER LEARNING IS KEY! |
|
|
Term
| framework for dynamic innovative markets |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| dynamic innovative markets |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| market entry strategies: product launch experiments |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| probe and learn process-- what are the benefits and costs? |
|
Definition
benefits
-resolve uncertainty of market and technology
-better identify target markets
-improve ability to create and deliver value
costs
-time consuming
-costly investments; opportunity costs
-risk of competitive imitation |
|
|
Term
| information acceleration (i/a) |
|
Definition
a market research methodology wherby information about a new product still in development can be simulated and presented to potential customers
(developed at MIT) |
|
|
Term
| information acceleration process |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| what is conjoint analysis? |
|
Definition
review
simulates shopping choices
technique to determine how people value different features (attribute levels) that define a specific product or service |
|
|
Term
perspective
(conjoint analysis powerpoint) |
|
Definition
information processing model
-understand how people process information
-products are viewed as bundles of attributes
-products are viewed as bundles of benefits |
|
|
Term
| information processing model |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
puts the determinant attributes together into sets, whole sets or combination of sets-- hypothetical products
respondents rank (or rate) these the hypothetical products in order of preference
decompose ranks or ratings to find the optimal level of each attribute |
|
|
Term
| salsa example of conjoint analysis |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
-full factorial design
3 x 3 x 2 = 18 hypothical products
-need for fractional designs
3 x 3 x 2 x 5 x 6 x 7 = 3,780 hypothetical products!!
-create smaller but balanced design
fractional design |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| conjoint analysis: graphical output |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
information integration is linear
consumer decisions are attribute-based
if the weights and attribute levels are known, then consumer choice can be predicted |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
full profile (factional factorial designs)
uses linear regression
adaptive conjoint (sawtooth)
choice based conjoint (sawtooth) |
|
|
Term
| is cja better than other methods? |
|
Definition
regression/economic modeling
direct importance ratings |
|
|
Term
| regression/economic modeling |
|
Definition
analyze "real data"
e.g., actual purchases, regress product features on sales data
three major problems:
-innovation
-consideration set
-multicollinearity |
|
|
Term
| innovation and consideration sets |
|
Definition
product features in past sales data are old
difficult to test innovative product features if the feature is not present in the sales data
past data may have myopic consideration set
(myopic: lacking tolerance or understanding; narrow-minded) |
|
|
Term
| product attributes and sales data |
|
Definition
price, quality and warranty tend to be correlated, co-dependent, co-linear
multicollinearity occurs when attributes are correlated in the data set
most real markets have some degree of multicollinearity |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| if quality and warranty are perfectly correlated how do we know if people choose a product based on warranty alone, independent of quality? |
|
|
Term
| quick fixes for interpretation problems? |
|
Definition
dropping a variable is not a realistic solution
neither is creating an index
ex. the average fo the two correlated variables
solution: use cja and avoid multicollinearity!!
respondents evaluate hypothetical products
-experimental choice setting
-balanced designs |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
choice based conjoint:
-golf study
-interpretation of results
-pricing and branding
comparison with cja and direct importance ratings |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| choice based conjoint graph |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| attribute importance scales |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| direct importance ratings vs cja |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
direct importance ratings vs cja
(charts) |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| conjoint analysis-- graphical output |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| conjoint analysis-- relative importance of attributes |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
write concept statements
identify attributes
identify attribute levels
create balance product design
pre-test concept test
collect data
analyze the data
interpret the data and make recommendations |
|
|
Term
| conjoint analysis was first developed when? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| T/F: conjoint analysis reflects the ideas that buyers evaluate a product based on its multiple conjoined features |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| T/F: conjoint analysis uses respondents' stated ratings for attribute levels to predict their overall preference for total product concepts |
|
Definition
false!
respondents are not asked to rate individual levels. they are asked only to rate the overall product concepts |
|
|
Term
| T/F: conjoint analysis encourages respondents to express preferences and tradeoffs rather than allowing them simply to indicate that all features are equally desirable |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| T/F: conjoint analysis shows respondents many product concepts and asks them to rate or rank them based on preference |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
when selecting a series of tradeoff questions to ask respondents...
(conjoint analysis tutorial) |
|
Definition
Optimal design plans show each level within an attribute an equal number of times
|
|
|
Term
| T/F: when selecting a series of tradeoff questions to ask respondents you restrict the set of product concepts to those that buyers are likely to see in the real world |
|
Definition
false!
Such a set of concepts might not have level balance or have the levels vary independently to support efficient estimation of parameters |
|
|
Term
| T/F: when selecting a series of tradeoff questions to ask respondents, it is important that every possible product combination be represented |
|
Definition
false!
Such a design could potentially have thousands of possible product concepts! Only a carefully selected subset is generally needed. |
|
|
Term
| T/F: regarding part worth utilities and importance, the part worth utility of a specific level describes how much value it contributes to the overall preference of a product concept (relative to other levels within the same attribute) |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| T/F: regarding part worth utilities and importance, an attribute's importance is the average preference (utility) for levels within that attribute |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| T/F: regarding part worth utilities and importance, importance scores are determined by examining just the extreme (most and least preferred) levels within each attribute |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| T/F: market simulators are more sophisticated than part worth utilities, but the output is often more difficult for managers to understand |
|
Definition
false!
The output (Shares of Preference) are percentages that sum to 100%, which are easier for managers to understand. Plus, what-if simulations involving realistic market scenarios are more concrete and meaningful to them. |
|
|
Term
| T/F: market simulators can be built using a spreadsheet |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| T/F: market simulators can be used to investigate the market's reception to nearly an unlimited number of product scenarios |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| T/F: the "shares of preference" usually closely match real-world market shares for most product categories |
|
Definition
false!
Most of the time, there are significant differences between simulated and actual market shares. The differences are often due to violations of simulator assumptions like equal information, equal distribution, and sufficient time on the market for products to reach maturity. |
|
|
Term
| T/F: even if we have included the right attributes and levels and constructed a valid questionnaire, we shouldn't expect that the simulated "shares of preference" will closely match real-world market shares |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| attributes are assumed to be... |
|
Definition
independent
(brand, speed, color, price, etc.) |
|
|
Term
| It is important in a conjoint analysis design plan that the attributes vary independently from one another, because... |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| each attribute has varying ___ |
|
Definition
degrees or "levels"
in conjoint analysis, each attribute must have at least two levels |
|
|
Term
| attributes like brand and color are known as |
|
Definition
| nominal or categorical attributes |
|
|
Term
| attributes like price and speed are known as |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
Which of the following are true statements regarding formulating attribute lists in conjoint analysis?
Ideally, attributes should be chosen that are independent of one another
Attribute levels should be able to freely combine without creating utterly impossible combinations
If two levels are not likely to occur together in the real world, they always should (NOT) be prohibited from appearing together
Ideally, all attributes should include the same number of levels, though it is often difficult to enforce this in practice |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| part worth utilities are ____ that ____ |
|
Definition
| part worth utilities are numeric values that reflect how desirable different features are |
|
|
Term
| the higher the utility... |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| In some cases, part worth utilities can be positive or negative values. The interpretation is the same (higher numbers are better). |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| To project which ice cream option this respondent would choose, we simply add up the part worth utility values for the levels associated with each option. The option with the highest utility is said to be "chosen." |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Market simulators are very powerful ____. But to use them wisely, you must be aware that ______. |
|
Definition
| Market simulators are very powerful tools. But to use them wisely, you must be aware that they make a number of assumptions. |
|
|
Term
| Because each brand and product feature is equally available in the conjoint survey, we assume... |
|
Definition
| Because each brand and product feature is equally available in the conjoint survey, we assume equal distribution |
|
|
Term
Which of the following best describes the typical steps to conducting market simulations in the context of conjoint analysis?
1. Construct a market scenario using attributes and levels studied
2. Sum the part worth utilities for the competing product concepts
3. Assign choice for each respondent to the product concept with the highest overall utility
4. Summarize the choices across respondents as "shares of choice" |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| strengths of conjoint analysis |
|
Definition
-ability to handle a wide variety of problems, including pricing
-simplicity of study execution and computation
-the technique leads to individual-level utilities |
|
|
Term
| weaknesses of conjoint analysis |
|
Definition
-with more than about 6 attributes, it can become complicated for respondents
-sorting or rating cards doesn't come natural for many respondents
-since it uses a rating or ranking scale, the estimated part worths are not naturally scaled to be predictive of choice probabilities |
|
|
Term
| traditional full profile conjoint |
|
Definition
| Works well when the number of attributes is no more than about six, and if the sample size is particularly small (say, less than about 100). |
|
|
Term
| adaptive conjoint analysis (aca) |
|
Definition
| Often considered when there are too many attributes to study using the other techniques. But, not considered a good tool for pricing research, because it often understates the sensitivity of respondents to price. |
|
|
Term
| choice-based conjoint (cbc) |
|
Definition
| Argued to best mirror real-world purchase processes and to have the highest validity of the three. But, requires larger sample sizes to stabilize estimates. Also, it is sometimes difficult for respondents to deal with more than about six attributes in CBC questionnaires. |
|
|
Term
| Which of the following are generally considered strengths of Traditional Full-Profile Conjoint? |
|
Definition
| relative simplicity of study design and analysis |
|
|
Term
| Which of the following are generally considered strengths of Adaptive Conjoint Analysis (ACA)? |
|
Definition
Ability to study many attributes without fatiguing/confusing respondents
The trade-off questions tend to be more focused and relevant to the respondent than non-adaptive techniques |
|
|
Term
| T/F: It is generally felt that CBC questions more closely mimic real-world decisions than ratings-based approaches |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| ____questionnaires are more difficult to design and analyze than ____ |
|
Definition
| CBC questionnaires are more difficult to design and analyze than Card-Sort Conjoint |
|
|
Term
Which of the following best describes the typical steps to conducting market simulations in the context of conjoint analysis?
1. Construct a market scenario using attributes and levels studied
2. Sum the part worth utilities for the competing product concepts
3. Assign choice for each respondent to the product concept with the highest overall utility
4. Summarize the choices across respondents as "shares of choice" |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| which algorithm performs best? |
|
Definition
| misclassification minimization with random perturbations |
|
|
