New Industrial Product Design and Evaluation Using Multiattribute Value Analysis

Increasingly, the design of successful new industrial products is related to careful market assessment. Traditionally, managers and researchers have studied their markets by examining a small number of product attributes that are common across a range of informed respondents. In many ways, these techniques fail to meet the challenges posed by today's often heterogeneous, highly competitive, fast moving industrial markets. Ralph Keeney and Gary Lilien introduce us to a technique they call multiattribute value analysis, both describing the procedure and describing a comprehensive example. Their approach introduces considerable flexibility to the process of market assessment. Technically, it permits the evaluation of many more attributes, value tradeoffs, and synergies among attributes than do more traditional methods. In addition, it permits nonlinear evaluation functions that may be idiosyncratic to the individual. Practically, their approach, illustrated with a detailed case application, is shown to have significant potential for aiding product design decisions.

[1]  Ronald Savitt,et al.  The “Wheel of Retailing” and Retail Product Management , 1984 .

[2]  John R. Hauser,et al.  Design and marketing of new products , 1980 .

[3]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Group Decision Making Using Cardinal Social Welfare Functions , 1975 .

[4]  C. Merle Crawford,et al.  New Product Failure Rates — Facts and Fallacies , 1979 .

[5]  Richard W. Olshavsky,et al.  Shortening of the PLC—AN Empirical Test , 1981 .

[6]  Rakesh K. Sarin,et al.  Measurable Multiattribute Value Functions , 1979, Oper. Res..

[7]  W. Edwards,et al.  Decision Analysis and Behavioral Research , 1986 .

[8]  G. Briscoe Some observations on new industrial product failures , 1973 .

[9]  Allan D. Shocker,et al.  Pretest Market Models: A Critical Evaluation , 1986 .

[10]  William L. Wilkie,et al.  Issues in Marketing's use of Multi-Attribute Attitude Models , 1973 .

[11]  Robert G. Cooper,et al.  The Performance Impact of Product Innovation Strategies , 1984 .

[12]  D. Wittink,et al.  Commercial Use of Conjoint Analysis: A Survey , 1982 .

[13]  David S. Hopkins,et al.  New-product winners and losers , 1980 .

[14]  R. Cooper,et al.  0 0 0 0 An Investigation into the New Product Process : Steps , Deficiencies , and Impact , 1986 .

[15]  Richard M. Johnson Trade-Off Analysis of Consumer Values , 1974 .

[16]  Robert G. Cooper,et al.  The Dimensions of Industrial New Product Success and Failure , 1979 .

[17]  Wesley J. Johnston,et al.  Industrial buying behavior , 1977 .

[18]  B. Zirger,et al.  A study of success and failure in product innovation: The case of the U.S. electronics industry , 1984, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

[19]  Donald R. Lehmann,et al.  The Importance of Halo Effects in Multi-Attribute Attitude Models: , 1975 .

[20]  R. Cooper New product success in industrial firms , 1982 .

[21]  E. Hippel,et al.  Lead users: a source of novel product concepts , 1986 .

[22]  Paul E. Green,et al.  A General Approach to Product Design Optimization via Conjoint Analysis , 1981 .

[23]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Siting energy facilities , 1980 .

[24]  Gary L. Lilien,et al.  Market planning for new industrial products , 1980 .

[25]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Measurement Scales for Quantifying Attributes , 1981 .

[26]  C. Crawford Marketing Research and the New Product Failure Rate , 1977 .

[27]  Robert G. Cooper,et al.  Why new industrial products fail , 1975 .