White Paper:

Understand Choice in Banking: Use of Discrete Choice Conjoint Analysis

by TRC
 

Conjoint analysis provides incentive for survey respondents to determine which features must not be omitted in their final purchase. The method closely mirrors decision-making in the real world, and as shown by TRC in this white paper, is applicable to many situations including how customers choose their bank.

 

An important consideration for banks is how customers choose them for opening checking accounts. Given that checking accounts can often be the keystone of an entire relationship with a banking customer, the importance of this decision becomes even higher. How then do we understand choice in banking?

Traditionally the focus has been on directly asking customers what factors they consider when opening a new checking account at a bank. This can be done qualitatively or quantitatively, and often both are done sequentially. In quantitative questioning, respondents are usually provided a series of reasons (or features of the bank) and asked about the importance of each one using an importance scale. There are several drawbacks to using such a scale. The primary problem is that since no trade-off is involved, the respondent has no incentive to clearly discriminate between features. Hence, many features show up as being important without clear separation among them. A solution to this problem is provided by conjoint analysis.

Conjoint analysis uses a trade-off approach to get at respondent preferences. Instead of asking about features one at a time, respondents are shown entire products (described as bundles of features) and asked for their evaluation. In the particular form of conjoint analysis that we will be looking at (discrete choice), respondents are shown sets of product descriptions (bank checking accounts) and asked to choose the one they like the best in each set. This approach more closely mirrors what happens in the real world and hence provides better answers. As we shall see shortly, conjoint results are also provided in a form that is particularly useful.

To conduct a conjoint analysis one needs to pay careful attention to the features to be included in the study. In this case, specific attention needs to be paid to the features that consumers may consider when choosing a checking provider. Each feature needs to be defined with two or more levels, such that respondents can clearly see the difference between the levels.

 

An Example

In order to study checking provider choice, a conjoint study was run on a web panel. Eight features were chosen for the study with two to four levels per feature. Before looking at the results a few caveats are necessary. While the respondents are distributed nationally, the sample is not representative and hence the results should be seen as illustrative and not prescriptive. Further, no allowance has been made for the fact that all of these respondents have online access and hence may be especially predisposed to online banking. Finally, only type of bank was included and not brand names. The features chosen for this study and the results are shown in Table 1.

Conjoint results are typically displayed as utility scores and importance scores. The utility scores are attractiveness scores associated with each level of each feature. The higher the utility associated with a level, the more it is preferred compared with other levels of the same feature. A negative utility score does not mean that level is unattractive per se. It just means that level is less attractive when compared to the other levels in that feature. It is entirely possible that consumers found a level to be acceptable even if it has a negative utility score. Importance scores of a feature are calculated as a function of the range of the levels within that feature. Hence, features where the levels have a wider range will be more important.

Table 1 shows the utility score of each level and the importance score of each feature.

 

It is very important to remember that these are aggregated scores. That is, the utility scores were calculated for each respondent individually (using an advanced statistical method called Hierarchical Bayes estimation) and then averaged to produce the scores in the table. To calculate the importance scores, the individual utilities were used and not the aggregated utilities shown in the table. That is why Type of Bank has an importance score that is well above zero (11%). If calculated from the aggregated utility scores its importance would have fallen to near zero. This type of result indicates that there are clear differences between respondents in terms of how important the type of bank is and shows the usefulness of using individual level utility estimation.

 

Implications

As can be seen, overall, Balance/Fees and Online Banking/Billpay are the most important features to these respondents. The former is not surprising and the latter could be affected by the fact that this is an online sample. Separately estimating the utilities for those who currently use Online Banking or Billpay and those who don’t could produce different results for the two groups.

The location of the nearest branch gets only a 7% importance score, which might seem low. To understand this, we have to look at the levels that describe the feature. All three of those levels are quite convenient for a customer. The only question is which is most convenient. At the aggregate level, there isn’t much difference, with a location close to home being somewhat more convenient. It is possible there are segments of respondents for whom the utility scores may vary. But it is also true that more variation among the levels would have made this feature more important. For example, if the levels had been defined as being within walking distance, a five-minute drive and a twenty-minute drive, the importance of this feature would likely be very different. For a smaller bank that is trying to understand the importance of location, this type of level specification may be more appropriate. For a larger bank that is trying to identify the ideal location (given that it is going to be convenient), the levels used in this study may be preferable.

In terms of convenience, there is a preference for banks that are open over the weekend and that have ATMs in many places. Regional and community banks seem to have a slight preference, at least in this sample. Excellent customer service is preferred, but merely good customer service seems acceptable. In terms of prior relationship, we did not specify that relationship as being positive and hence a recommendation seems more valuable. While all of these factors have importance, the overwhelming importance of the checking account features cannot be denied. Monthly fees are a definite no-no, while free checking is a big plus. Amongst competing banks that are offering free checking, many of these other factors may come into play, but if free checking is not offered the competition can quickly become lopsided.

 

What Else?

Conjoint analysis results can also be used to run simulations to understand how attractive different bank profiles would be to these customers. If we were to create, say, three competing bank profiles, it is quite straightforward to identify the proportion of respondents who would choose each bank. Of course, inclusion of brand names would make the exercise much more interesting.

Given that utilities are available at the individual level, it would be possible to conduct segmentation analysis on these results to identify preference based segments. These segments are likely to be more distinct than those based on traditional importance scales.

In conclusion, studying bank choice by using conjoint analysis can be very fruitful, as long as the conjoint is properly designed and analyzed to meet the objectives of the sponsoring bank.

 

This article was provided by TRC, a full-service market research provider located in Fort Washington, PA.

 

 

Other content shared by TRC



White Paper
Better Questions For Segmentation: Use of MAX-DIFF

by Rajan Sambandam, TRC

Better Questions For Segmentation: Use of MAX-DIFFUsing Maximum Difference Scaling as a method in designing surveys may ensure more useful results in your market research. It is a comparative method based on importance that sidesteps the problems associated with traditional importance scales. TRC explains the mechanics behind this method through a detailed example in this white paper. Read Article »

White Paper
Database Scoring with Object Based Segmentation

by Rajan Sambandam, TRC

Database Scoring with Object Based SegmentationSegmentation created from company databases are often lacking the rich segmentation schemes formed by attitudinal surveys. A new approach is Object based segmentation that uses database variables at the basis for forming attitudinal segments, leaving both markets classifiable with clear demographic segments. TRC compares traditional segmentation analysis with Object based. Read Article »

White Paper
Asymmetry in Product Features: Use of the Kano Method

by Rajan Sambandam, TRC

Asymmetry in Product Features: Use of the Kano MethodThe presence or absence of product features strongly affect consumer satisfaction with the design. Comparing these features using asymmetry analysis can help identify satisfiers and dissatisfiers from among the features of a product. The Kano method is similar but results in categorizing each respondent's answers. TRC presents this essential method of deciding new product features in detail. Read Article »

White Paper
Conjoint Analysis versus Self-Explicated Method: A Comparison

by Rajan Sambandam, TRC

Conjoint Analysis versus Self-Explicated Method: A ComparisonDetermining feature importance in a product can be divided into two techniques - top-down methods where a customer evaluates the whole product at once, and bottum-up methods where features are evaluated individually or in sets. The former method, Conjoint Analysis, is more common while the latter method, Self-Explicated Method, is not widely used but has practical advantages. TRC compares the two methods in this white paper. Read Article »

White Paper
Product Configurator

by Rajan Sambandam, TRC

Product ConfiguratorTo help customers purchase the right product, companies often use product configurators - tools that let customers design their purchase before ordering. This method is employed as a market research technique, similar to conjoint analysis but without some of the constrictions. This white paper from TRC explains an appropriate use of the product configurator method. Read Article »

Case Study
Market Segmentation: One Method, Four Examples

by Rajan Sambandam, TRC

Market Segmentation: One Method, Four ExamplesEffective market segmentation requires an understanding of the market and the skilled art of finding the appropriate segments. TRC gives four examples of this method's application with results. Read Article »

White Paper
How to Measure the Value of a Brand

by Rajan Sambandam, TRC

How to Measure the Value of a BrandBrand name evokes an inherent value; finding a way to reliably measure that value is crucial in determining product development. A technique called discrete choice conjoint analysis is described in this paper by TRC. Read Article »

White Paper
Deriving Value from Research: the Use of Conjoint Analysis for Product Development

by Rajan Sambandam, TRC

Marketing research has been used by firms over the last several decades to provide information for decision making. Over time, increasingly sophisticated statistical methods have been developed and deployed in the service of this goal. This article focuses on one such method - conjoint analysis - and its application to product development. Read Article »

White Paper
Cluster Analysis Gets Complicated

by Rajan Sambandam, TRC

Cluster Analysis Gets ComplicatedSegmentation studies using cluster analysis have become commonplace. However, the data may be affected by collinearity, which can have a strong impact and affect the results of the analysis unless addressed. This article investigates what level presents a problem, why it's a problem, and how to get around it. Simulated data allows a clear demonstration of the issue without clouding it with extraneous factors. Read Article »

White Paper
Identifying Feature Importance: A Comparison of Methods

by TRC

Identifying Feature Importance: A Comparison of MethodsUnderstanding what customers want is fundamental to the new product development process as well as to the process of keeping existing products fresh and relevant. To be successful in this area we need to be able to correctly identify what features are important to consumers. Feature importance can be measured using a variety of methods of differing effectiveness. In this paper we will deal with the following methods: Importance Scales, Pick data, Pairwise Comparisons, and Max-Diff. Read Article »

White Paper
Monadic Price Testing vs. Price Laddering

by TRC

Compares two popular pricing methods to understand the difference in take rate information. Read Article »

White Paper
New Product Development: Stages and Methods

by Rajan Sambandam, TRC

New Product Development: Stages and MethodsTRC identifies the best methods for each stage of the product development process, from Idea Generation through Feature Development, Product Development and Product Testing. Read Article »

White Paper
Want better product ideas? Try smart incentives

by Rajan Samandam, TRC

Want better product ideas? Try smart incentivesIdea generation from survey respondents is strongly dependent on incentive. Introducing competition strengthens the quantity and quality of creative responses. TRC provides examples of smart incentives in this white paper. Read Article »

White Paper
An alternative method of reporting customer satisfaction scores

by Rajan Sambandam and George Hausser of TRC

An alternative method of reporting customer satisfaction scores Though customer satisfaction evaluations are widely used, reporting of these scores has varied from one study to another. This is likely the result of each method’s advantages and disadvantages, as well as the personal preferences and habits of the researcher. In this article we review various reporting methods and outline our method with an example. Read Article »

Service
Identifying the Key Drivers of Brand Image

by TRC

Measuring brand image requires looking at direct effects as well as indirect effects of a company's performance. TRC compares traditional multiple regression with SatiscanTM, a method that can review all possible path models. Read Article »

Case Study
Improving Call Satisfaction: A Case Study

by TRC

Improving Call Satisfaction: A Case StudyTRC presents a case study of analyzing and improving a call center as an on-going data collection process. Read Article »

Case Study
Improving Claim Satisfaction: A Case Study

by TRC

A case study on applying full-service market research to help an insurance company improve their client satisfaction with claim handling. Read Article »

White Paper
Non-Response Bias In Survey Sampling

by TRC

Non-Response Bias In Survey SamplingMarket research accounts for many scenarios to ensure high quality of data. One of the most overlooked problems is non-response bias. TRC describes ways to reduce its effects through survey design and data adjustment in this white paper. Read Article »

White Paper
Segmentation Success

by Michael Sosnowski, TRC

Segmentation SuccessThis paper explains the basic building blocks of the segmentation process and its implementation. Read Article »

White Paper
Survey of Analysis Methods Part I

by Rajan Sambandam, TRC

Survey of Analysis Methods Part IPractical marketing research deals with two major problems: identifying key drivers and developing segments. In this two-part series TRC looks at key driver analysis and segmentation. Read Article »

White Paper
Survey of Analysis Methods Part II

by Rajan Sambandam, TRC

Survey of Analysis Methods Part IIThis is Part II of a series looking at aspects of practical marketing research: identifying key drivers and developing segments. This content describes specific segmentation methods: cluster analysis, neural networks, self-organizing map (SOM), and mixture models. Included is a discussion on ideas for developing good segments. Read Article »

Service
Validating Satiscan Using A Split Sample Approach

by TRC

TRC's SatiscanTM model is tested for validity using call center data and a split sample approach. This shows that SatiscanTM produces similar models when run on random halves of an energy industry dataset. Read Article »

Service
Satiscan and Regression Analysis: A Comparison

by TRC

The comparison shows the advantages of SatiscanTM, an analytical method from TRC, over regression in identifying the correct and cost efficient action steps. Read Article »

White Paper
TURF: New Methods for Implementation

by Westley Ritz, TRC

TURF: New Methods for ImplementationTURF is a long-established and quite useful marketing research tool, but not everyone is familiar with how it works, or with the latest developments that can make TURF even more effective. The purposes of this paper are twofold: (1) to explain the technique and (2) to describe the latest methods for implementation. Read Article »

White Paper
Product Configuration: A Research Approach for the Times

by Rajan Sambandam & Pankaj Kumar, TRC

The marketplace has shifted in the last decade with the ability of consumers to configure the product they want. This white paper explains the basics of configuration, an approach that mimics the real world of customer driven product design to obtain insight into consumer decision-making. Read Article »

White Paper
Product Configuration: Evidence for Effectiveness

by Rajan Sambandam & Pankaj Kumar, TRC

Product Configuration: Evidence for EffectivenessThis white paper looks at the examples from one product configuration study, the kinds of information that can be derived and the possibilities provided by statistical analysis. Read Article »

Article
New Product Research: A Dynamic Approach to Feature Prioritization

by Pankaj Kumar, Westley Ritz and Rajan Sambandam of TRC

New Product Research: A Dynamic Approach to Feature PrioritizationFeature prioritization is a very common new product research problem. Over the last few years, the most popular technique has been Max-Diff. However, as the number of features increases it becomes difficult to use. Bracket is a tournament-based approach that produces Max-Diff like results and can easily prioritize fifty or more features. Read Article »

Media
Doing More with Less: Getting Greater Value from Mobile Quant

by TRC

Doing More with Less: Getting Greater Value from Mobile QuantWhat “more with less” means with respect to mobile MR, and examples from traditional online studies to challenge existing assumptions about what will and will not work on a mobile device. Read Article »

Media
How to measure the value of a brand?

by TRC

How to measure the value of a brand?Knowing how to price your product that you can optimize your ROI is key. This video explains various ways to measure the value of a brand and talks about a discrete choice conjoint technique as a perfect approach to measuring the value of a brand. Read Article »

Media
Product Configuration with Michael Sosnowski

by TRC

Product Configuration with Michael SosnowskiConsider a person who wants to buy a personal computer. The customer can select exactly the combination desired, subject to a price constraint. Would it be possible to use such a process for research? Read Article »

Media
How to Improve Your Market Segmentation

by TRC

How to Improve Your Market SegmentationBob Hull from TRC talks about a market research technique for market segmentation and ways of improving them. Read Article »

Media
Rich Raquet Market Research Consulting

by TRC

Rich Raquet Market Research ConsultingRich Raquet is introducing TRC, a research & analytics firm, specializing in new product research, conjoint, segmentation, brand equity, sat & loyalty. Read Article »