Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Perceptual Mapping: Mdpref: MBA 651 - Measurement and Analysis
Perceptual Mapping: Mdpref: MBA 651 - Measurement and Analysis
Perceptual Mapping: Mdpref: MBA 651 - Measurement and Analysis
Positioning:
Scott M. Smith
Scott M. Smith
* Company A * Company B
1. Company provides adequate insurance coverage for my car. 2. Company will not cancel policy because of age, accident experience, or health problems. 3. Friendly and considerate. 4. Settles claims fairly. 5. Inefficient, hard to deal with. 6. Provides good advice about types and amounts of coverage to buy. 7. Too big to care about individual customers. 8. Explains things clearly. 9. Premium rates are lower than most companies. 10. Has personnel available for questions all over the country. 11. Will raise premiums because of age. 12. Takes a long time to settle a claim. 13. Very professional/modern. 14. Specialists in serving my local area. 15. Quick, reliable service, easily accessible. 16. A good citizen in community. 17. Has complete line of insurance products available. 18. Is widely known name company. 19. Is very aggressive, rapidly growing company. 20. Provides advice on how to avoid accidents.
Scott M. Smith
(Plain)
Common
Slow
Easy setup
Toshiba 1960CT
Performance
IBM 701 C
Butterfly Good Value Light
Elegant
Looks
Scott M. Smith
Note that in this matrix the columns become the vectors in the map and rows are the points in the map Compute average ratings of each brand on each attribute. Submit data to a suitable perceptual mapping technique (e.g., MDPREF or Factor Analysis). Interpret the underlying key dimensions of the map using the directions of the individual attributes. Explore the implications of how consumers view the competing products.
Scott M. Smith
How to Develop A Perceptual Map of Market Segments Using Attribute Ratings (INDSCAL, PREFMAP)
Generate an Brand by Attribute matrix of inputs consisting of each consumer segments (S1, S2,...) Ratings of each brand on each of the attributes (A1, A2, A3,....) for each brand (named).
A1 Dell 710XN 6 S1 Compaq 8100 4 Toshiba Construct 3 Dell 710XN S2 Compaq 8100 Toshiba Construct
A2 3 3 6
A3 7 4 2
A4 ............... A15 2 2 1 5 7 7
Note that in this matrix the columns become the vectors in the map and rows are the points in the map Compute average ratings of each brand on each attribute. Submit data to a suitable perceptual mapping technique (e.g., MDPREF or Factor Analysis). Interpret the underlying key dimensions of the map using the directions of the individual attributes. Explore the implications of how consumers view the competing products.
Scott M. Smith
Scott M. Smith
Technical adequacy What percentage of variance in the raw data is captured in the map? What percentage of the variance of each attribute is captured in the map? Managerial interpretation What underlying dimensions characterize how consumers view the products? What is the competitive set associated with the new concept? How well is the new concept positioned with respect to the existing brands? Which attributes are related to each other?
Scott M. Smith
Example Input Data for MDPREF Vector Model Input matrix has attributes on rows and objects on columns
B1 Attractive Light Unreliable Plain Battery life Screen Keyboard Roomy Easy service Expandability Setup Common Value Preference 5.1 6.0 3.4 1.5 3.3 3.5 2.6 5.5 4.5 5.5 5.6 4.1 3.5 7.4 B2 3.6 3.5 4.1 4.1 4.9 5.3 3.5 4.3 4.9 4.3 3.5 3.5 4.8 3.4 B3 3.5 5.0 4.5 2.9 4.3 3.4 2.5 5.4 3.3 5.4 5.6 3.3 4.4 4.8 B3 5.4 3.9 2.1 2.3 4.1 6.4 3.4 3.1 5.0 3.1 5.4 2.9 3.6 6.6 B4 3.9 3.3 4.5 4.5 3.9 5.4 3.8 3.4 4.4 3.4 2.5 4.0 3.6 4.4 B5 4.8 5.3 2.7 2.7 3.0 5.2 3.3 3.3 4.5 3.3 4.2 4.3 2.7 7.4 B6 5.2 5.0 4.5 3.5 3.5 3.3 2.8 4.7 3.3 4.7 5.2 2.2 3.2 7.1 B7 4.0 2.5 3.7 4.3 6.2 6.0 5.0 3.5 4.7 3.5 3.3 4.2 4.7 3.8 B8 5.2 5.5 2.5 2.2 3.5 3.3 4.3 4.3 3.8 4.3 5.8 3.3 3.5 6.9 New 4.0 2.5 3.8 5.2 4.0 4.8 4.7 4.2 4.5 4.2 2.5 4.2 4.0 3.3
Scott M. Smith
Low battery life Keyboard Toshiba Expandability Elegant Distinct Avant-Garde Fast operation Sanyo TI Good design
Preference
Scott M. Smith
Attribute data
Nonattribute data
Similarity
Preference
Factor analysis
Correspondence analysis
Discriminant analysis
MDS
Scott M. Smith
Assumption The attributes on which the individuals' perceptions of objects are based, can be identified Methods Used to Reduce the Attributes to a Smaller Number of Dimensions Factor Analysis Discriminant Analysis Correspondence Analysis Multidimensional Preference Mapping
Scott M. Smith
Discriminant Analysis :
Used to classify the objects or people into predefined groups (user-non user) based on their attributes Discriminant function based on independent variables is used to predict the category
Correspondence Analysis :
Used for convenience of collection of data in binary form (frequency counts) Selection of some attributes or listing of user perceived attributes to reduce attributes
Scott M. Smith
BUT suppose a whole group of variables provide information that represents this underlying phenomena.
FACTOR ANALYSIS looks for the phenomena underlying the observed variance and covariance in a set of variables. These phenomena are called factors or principal components.
Scott M. Smith
Factor Analysis
Two variable situation
Correlation Matrix Correlation OW1RQ1 OW1RQ2 OW1RQ3 OW1SAD1 OW1SAD2 OW1SAD3 OW1RQ1 1.000 .594 .551 .099 .233 .204 OW1RQ2 .594 1.000 .511 .189 .168 .230 OW1RQ3 .551 .511 1.000 .169 .207 .180 OW1SAD1 .099 .189 .169 1.000 .685 .666 OW1SAD2 .233 .168 .207 .685 1.000 .676 OW1SAD3 .204 .230 .180 .666 .676 1.000
Scott M. Smith
FA
Communalities OW1RQ1 OW1RQ2 OW1RQ3 OW1SAD1 OW1SAD2 OW1SAD3 Initial .464 .423 .363 .562 .577 .544 Extraction .702 .632 .538 .756 .774 .704
OW1RQ1 OW1RQ2 OW1RQ3 OW1SAD1 OW1SAD2 OW1SAD3
PCA
Communalities Initial 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Extraction .959 .975 .999 .911 .890 .999
Scott M. Smith
What Happens
Computing Factors
Eigenvalue/N of items
Total Variance Explained Initial Eigenvalues % of Variance Cumulative % 46.700 46.700 27.634 74.334 8.389 82.723 7.393 90.117 5.426 95.543 4.457 100.000 Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Total % of Variance Cumulative % 2.802 46.700 46.700 1.658 27.634 74.334 .503 8.389 82.723 .444 7.393 90.117 .326 5.426 95.543 .267 4.457 100.000
Component 1 2 3 4 5 6
An Eigenvalue is an index of the strength of the factor. An eigenvalue reports the amount of variance accounted for by the factor. It is the sum of the squared loadings (correlations between the variables and the factor).
Scott M. Smith
What happens
Factor Loadings
Component Matrixa Component 3 4 -.119 -.447 -.408 .325 .548 .166 .026 .238 .089 -.231 -.117 -.028
Scott M. Smith
Real Example
To further examine attendance success at offshore US and domestic Japanese trade shows, and to explore the role of prior trade show attendance success in generating interest in that show in the future, an orthogonal principal components factor analysis was conducted. All factors with Eigenvalues of 1.0 or greater were retained in the final solutions, yielding four-factor solutions for both the US and Japanese shows, explaining 74 percent and 78 percent of each set of variables common variance, respectively. With factors identified, factor scores were then regressed upon a measure of future interest for each respective trade show[1]. Therefore, the results from factor analyses presented in Tables IV and V are useful in two predominant ways:
(1) to identify underlying dimensions of Japanese attendance objective success at a US and domestic show; and (2) to address effectively issues of multicollinearity between independent variables (trade show success ratings) when exploring the impact of success of prior trade show attendance on interest in future attendance.
Because a factor is a qualitative dimension, the researcher is required to name each factor based on an interpretation of the variables loading most heavily on it.
Scott M. Smith
Scott M. Smith
Scott M. Smith
3.
4. 5.
Are the final communalities large when the number of factors is small?
Is it useful? Think of why you did the analysis to begin with.
OR
Dont evaluate, just accept it as reality. Try using theory to validate
1. 2.
Scott M. Smith
Scott M. Smith
Scott M. Smith
If the list of attributes is not accurate and complete, the study will suffer accordingly Respondents may not perceive or evaluate objects in terms of underlying attributes May require more dimensions to represent them than the use of flexible models
Scott M. Smith
Preference Data An ideal object is the combination of all customers' preferred attribute levels Location of ideal objects is to identify segments of customers who have similar ideal objects, since customer preferences are always heterogeneous
Scott M. Smith
The appropriate number of dimensions required to locate the objects can be obtained plotting the stress values against the number of dimensions
Scott M. Smith
Scott M. Smith