Skip to main content
Top

2015 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

Preference Measurement in Complex Product Development: A Comparison of Two-Staged SEM Approaches

Authors : Jörgen Eimecke, Daniel Baier

Published in: Data Science, Learning by Latent Structures, and Knowledge Discovery

Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Since many years, preference measurement has been used to understand the importance that customers ascribe to alternative possible product attribute-levels. Available for this purpose are, e.g., compositional approaches based on the self-explicated-model (SEM) as well as decompositional ones based on conjoint analysis (CA). Typically, in SEM approaches, customers evaluate the importance of product attributes one by one whereas in decompositional approaches, they evaluate possible alternative products (attribute-level combinations) followed by a derivation of the importances. The SEM approaches seem to be superior when products are complex and the number of attributes is high. However, there are still improvement possibilities. In this paper two innovative two-staged SEM approaches are proposed and tested. The complex products under study are small remotely piloted aircraft systems (small RPAS) for German search and rescue (SAR) forces.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Literature
go back to reference Akaah, I. P., & Korgorgaonkar, P. K. (1983). An empirical comparison of the predictive validity of self-explicated, huber-hybrid, traditional conjoint, and hybrid conjoint models. Journal of Marketing Research, 20(2), 187–197.CrossRef Akaah, I. P., & Korgorgaonkar, P. K. (1983). An empirical comparison of the predictive validity of self-explicated, huber-hybrid, traditional conjoint, and hybrid conjoint models. Journal of Marketing Research, 20(2), 187–197.CrossRef
go back to reference Dorsch, M. J., & Teas, R. K. (1992). A test of the convergent validity of self-explicated and decompositional conjoint measurement. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 20(1), 37–48.CrossRef Dorsch, M. J., & Teas, R. K. (1992). A test of the convergent validity of self-explicated and decompositional conjoint measurement. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 20(1), 37–48.CrossRef
go back to reference Eckert, J., & Schaaf, R. (2009). Verfahren zur Präferenzmessung – Eine Übersicht und Beurteilung existierender und möglicher neuer Self-Explicated-Verfahren. Journal für Betriebswirtschaft, 59(1), 31–56.CrossRef Eckert, J., & Schaaf, R. (2009). Verfahren zur Präferenzmessung – Eine Übersicht und Beurteilung existierender und möglicher neuer Self-Explicated-Verfahren. Journal für Betriebswirtschaft, 59(1), 31–56.CrossRef
go back to reference Green, P. E., Goldberg, S. M., & Montemayor, M. (1981). A hybrid utility estimation model for conjoint analysis. Journal of Marketing, 45(1), 33–41.CrossRef Green, P. E., Goldberg, S. M., & Montemayor, M. (1981). A hybrid utility estimation model for conjoint analysis. Journal of Marketing, 45(1), 33–41.CrossRef
go back to reference Green, P. E., & Krieger, A. M. (1993). Conjoint analysis with product positioning applications. In Eliashberg, J. & Lilien, G. (Eds.), Handbook in operations research and management science (Vol. 5, pp. 467–515). Amsterdam: Elsevier. Green, P. E., & Krieger, A. M. (1993). Conjoint analysis with product positioning applications. In Eliashberg, J. & Lilien, G. (Eds.), Handbook in operations research and management science (Vol. 5, pp. 467–515). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
go back to reference Green, P. E., & Srinivasan, V. (1990). Conjoint analysis in marketing: New developments with implications for research and practise. Journal of Marketing, 54(4), 3–19.CrossRef Green, P. E., & Srinivasan, V. (1990). Conjoint analysis in marketing: New developments with implications for research and practise. Journal of Marketing, 54(4), 3–19.CrossRef
go back to reference Green, R. E., Krieger, A. M., & Agarwal, M. K. (1993). A cross validation test of our models for quantifying multiattribute preferences. Marketing Letters, 4(4), 369–380.CrossRef Green, R. E., Krieger, A. M., & Agarwal, M. K. (1993). A cross validation test of our models for quantifying multiattribute preferences. Marketing Letters, 4(4), 369–380.CrossRef
go back to reference Höpfl, R. T., & Huber, P. H. (1970). A study of self-explicated utility models. Behavioral Sciences, 15(5), 408–414.CrossRef Höpfl, R. T., & Huber, P. H. (1970). A study of self-explicated utility models. Behavioral Sciences, 15(5), 408–414.CrossRef
go back to reference Meissner, M., Decker, R., & Adam, N. (2011). Ein empirischer Validitätsvergleich zwischen adaptive self-explicated approach (ASE), pairwise comparison-based preference measurement (PCPM) und adaptive conjoint analysis (ACA). Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft, 81, 423–446.CrossRef Meissner, M., Decker, R., & Adam, N. (2011). Ein empirischer Validitätsvergleich zwischen adaptive self-explicated approach (ASE), pairwise comparison-based preference measurement (PCPM) und adaptive conjoint analysis (ACA). Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft, 81, 423–446.CrossRef
go back to reference Myers, J. H. (1999). Measuring customer satisfaction: Hot buttons and other measurement issues. Chicago: American Marketing Association. Myers, J. H. (1999). Measuring customer satisfaction: Hot buttons and other measurement issues. Chicago: American Marketing Association.
go back to reference Netzer, O., & Srinivasan, V. (2011). Adaptive self-explication of multi-attributed preferences. Journal of Marketing Research, 48(1), 140–156.CrossRef Netzer, O., & Srinivasan, V. (2011). Adaptive self-explication of multi-attributed preferences. Journal of Marketing Research, 48(1), 140–156.CrossRef
go back to reference Pullman, M. E., Dodson, K. J., & Moore, W. L. (1999). A comparison of conjoint methods when there are many attributes. Marketing Letters, 10(2), 125–138.CrossRef Pullman, M. E., Dodson, K. J., & Moore, W. L. (1999). A comparison of conjoint methods when there are many attributes. Marketing Letters, 10(2), 125–138.CrossRef
go back to reference Sattler, H. (2006). Methoden zur Messung von Präferenzen für Innovationen. Zeitschrift für betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung, 54(6), 154–176. Sattler, H. (2006). Methoden zur Messung von Präferenzen für Innovationen. Zeitschrift für betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung, 54(6), 154–176.
go back to reference Scholz, S., Meissner, M. & Decker, R. (2010). Measuring consumer preferences for complex products: A compositional approach based on paired comparisons. Journal of Marketing Research, 47(4), 685–698.CrossRef Scholz, S., Meissner, M. & Decker, R. (2010). Measuring consumer preferences for complex products: A compositional approach based on paired comparisons. Journal of Marketing Research, 47(4), 685–698.CrossRef
go back to reference Srinivasan, V. (1988). A conjunctive-compensatory approach to the self-explication of multiattributed preferences. Decision Sciences, 19(2), 295–305.CrossRef Srinivasan, V. (1988). A conjunctive-compensatory approach to the self-explication of multiattributed preferences. Decision Sciences, 19(2), 295–305.CrossRef
go back to reference Srinivasan, V., & Park, C. S. (1997). Surprising robustness of the self-explicated approach to customer preference structure measurement. Journal of Marketing Research, 34(2), 286–291.CrossRef Srinivasan, V., & Park, C. S. (1997). Surprising robustness of the self-explicated approach to customer preference structure measurement. Journal of Marketing Research, 34(2), 286–291.CrossRef
go back to reference Torgerson, W. S. (1958). Theory and method of scaling. New York: Wiley. Torgerson, W. S. (1958). Theory and method of scaling. New York: Wiley.
Metadata
Title
Preference Measurement in Complex Product Development: A Comparison of Two-Staged SEM Approaches
Authors
Jörgen Eimecke
Daniel Baier
Copyright Year
2015
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44983-7_21

Premium Partner