A comparison of logarithmic goal programming and conjoint analysis to generate priority point vectors: an experimental approach

被引:1
作者
Natesan, Sumeetha R. [1 ]
Dutta, Goutam [1 ]
机构
[1] Indian Inst Management, Ahmadabad, Gujarat, India
关键词
Utility function; Vehicle insurance policy; Logarithmic goal programming; Conjoint analysis;
D O I
10.1007/s12597-021-00537-1
中图分类号
C93 [管理学]; O22 [运筹学];
学科分类号
070105 ; 12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
The utility of a service or product can be considered as an aggregation of utilities of multiple attributes, that the consumers consider while choosing a product. The two methods used to generate a linear utility function are the logarithmic goal programming model (LGPM) and the conjoint analysis method (CAM). In these two methodologies, the procedures used to collect data and generate the utility function differ significantly. This is possibly the first study to compare the two methods for determining the utility function of a product (here vehicle insurance policy). For this study we will be collecting the data from the same set of respondents (customers) for the same set of five different brands of the product (vehicle insurance policy) available in the market. The similarities and differences among LGPM and CAM approaches are examined to provide useful insights in terms of consistency in consumer behaviour while prioritizing their choices for a product. The study addresses if the priority order of consumer choices for a product remains the same or changes if the methodology changes. Moreover, we apply a multinomial logit choice model to derive a choice probability of the brands available in the market using both approaches.
引用
收藏
页码:518 / 549
页数:32
相关论文
共 24 条
[1]   PROCEDURES FOR SYNTHESIZING RATIO JUDGEMENTS [J].
ACZEL, J ;
SAATY, TL .
JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1983, 27 (01) :93-102
[2]   Generating consensus priority point vectors: a logarithmic goal programming approach [J].
Bryson, N ;
Joseph, A .
COMPUTERS & OPERATIONS RESEARCH, 1999, 26 (06) :637-643
[3]   COMMERCIAL USE OF CONJOINT-ANALYSIS - A SURVEY [J].
CATTIN, P ;
WITTINK, DR .
JOURNAL OF MARKETING, 1982, 46 (03) :44-53
[4]  
Chee, 2004, C P INT C GAM IND PU
[5]  
Dutta Goutam, 2015, International Journal of Revenue Management, V8, P153
[6]   Development of utility function for life insurance buyers in the Indian market [J].
Dutta, G. ;
Basu, S. ;
John, J. .
JOURNAL OF THE OPERATIONAL RESEARCH SOCIETY, 2010, 61 (04) :585-593
[7]  
Dutta G., 2011, INT J REV MANAG, V5, P277
[8]   CONJOINT-ANALYSIS IN MARKETING - NEW DEVELOPMENTS WITH IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH AND PRACTICE [J].
GREEN, PE ;
SRINIVASAN, V .
JOURNAL OF MARKETING, 1990, 54 (04) :3-19
[9]   CONJOINT ANALYSIS IN CONSUMER RESEARCH - ISSUES AND OUTLOOK [J].
GREEN, PE ;
SRINIVASAN, V .
JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH, 1978, 5 (02) :103-123
[10]   CONJOINT MEASUREMENT FOR QUANTIFYING JUDGMENTAL DATA [J].
GREEN, PE ;
RAO, VR .
JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH, 1971, 8 (03) :355-363