Advertisement

A New Relative Importance Index of Evaluation for Conjoint Analysis: Some Findings for CRM Assistant

  • Paolo Mariani
  • Andrea Marletta
  • Mariangela Zenga
Article
  • 29 Downloads

Abstract

ELECTUS is an Italian multi-centre research project with the aim of reinforcing the relationship between the academic world and business. Through this project, it is possible to acquire information about entrepreneurs’ new graduate recruitment strategies. Using a CAWI survey, Lombardy companies with at least 15 employees were asked to indicate their preferences in choosing among hypothetical profiles of new graduates with different competencies. In this study, a conjoint analysis is performed to identify the features of a graduate’s profile that employers prefer for a potential candidate for the position of a customer relationship management assistant. From a methodological point of view, starting from the part-worth utilities of conjoint analysis, a new indicator of relative importance of attributes is introduced to measure the monetary value for the skills possessed by the candidates.

Keywords

Conjoint analysis Relative importance of attributes Economic valuation index Labour market ELECTUS 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Prof. Luigi Fabbris for involving us in the ELECTUS project and for helpful advices. The authors also thank the two anonymous referees for their valuable suggestions.

References

  1. Almalaurea, XXVII. (2016). Indagine sulla condizione occupazionale dei laureati, Rapporto.Google Scholar
  2. Bak, A., & Bartlomowicz, T. (2012). Conjoint analysis method and its implementation in conjoint R package. In Data analysis methods and its applications (pp. 239–248).Google Scholar
  3. Breidert, C., Hahsler, M., & Reutterer, T. (2006). A review of methods for measuring willingness-to-pay. Innovative Marketing, 2(4), 8–32.Google Scholar
  4. Carmone, F., Green, P. E., & Jain, A. K. (1978). Robustness of conjoint analysis: Some Monte Carlo results. Journal of Marketing Research, 15, 300–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. C-Direct Consulting. (2016). Il CRM in Italia: Diffusione, aree critiche e di miglioramento, opportunit e trend emersi a confronto con il 2015.Google Scholar
  6. Cattin, P., & Wittink, D. (1982). Commercial use of conjoint analysis: A survey. Journal of Marketing, 46, 44–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Danaher, P. J. (1997). Using conjoint analysis to determine the relative importance of service attributes measured in customer satisfaction surveys. Journal of Retailing, 73(2), 235–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. David, H. A., & Nagaraja, H. N. (1970). Order statistics. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  9. Fabbris, L., & Scioni, M. (2015). Dimensionality of scores obtained with a paired-comparison tournament system of questionnaire item. In A. Meerman, & T. Kliewe, (Eds.), Academic proceedings of the 2015 University–Industry interaction conference: challenges and solutions for fostering entrepreneurial universities and collaborative innovation.Google Scholar
  10. Garavaglia, C., & Mariani, P. (2017). How much do consumers value protected designation of origin certifications? Estimates of willingness to pay for PDO dry-cured ham in Italy. Agribusiness, 33(3), 403–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Green, P. E., & Helsen, K. (1989). Cross-validation assessment of alternatives to individual-level conjoint analysis: A case study. Journal of Marketing Research, 26(3), 346–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Green, P. E., & Krieger, A. M. (1991). Segmenting markets with conjoint analysis. Journal of Marketing, 55(4), 20–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Green, P. E., & Srinivasan, V. (1978). Conjoint analysis in consumer research: Issues and outlook. Journal of Consumer Research, 5(2), 103–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Isfol. (2017). Ministero del lavoro-classificatore delle professioni. http://fabbisogni.isfol.it. Accessed 3 Dec 2017.
  15. Istat. (2014). La situazione del paese.Google Scholar
  16. Lancaster, K. J. (1966). A new approach to consumer theory. Journal of Political Economy, 74(2), 132–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mariani, P., & Mussini, M. (2013). A new coefficient of economic valuation based on utility scores. Argumenta Oeconomica, 30(1), 33–46.Google Scholar
  18. Mezbahur, R., & Lorica, B. G. (1999). Attribute relative importance computation in conjoint analysis. Journal of Information and Optimization Sciences, 20(1), 113–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sawtooth, S. (2017). http://www.sawtoothsoftware.com. Accessed 3 Dec 2017.
  20. Unioncamere. (2017). Sistema informativo excelsior. In Progetto Excelsior. Sintesi dei principali risultati. http://excelsior.unioncamere.net. Accessed 3 Dec 2017.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Economics Management and StatisticsUniversity of Milano-BicoccaMilanItaly
  2. 2.Department of Statistics and Quantitative MethodsUniversity of Milano-BicoccaMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations