An investigation of the relative efficacy of four alternative approaches to importance-performance analysis

Abstract

Importance-performance analysis is a tool which has been used in several contexts to transform research results into practical marketing actions. The technique compares product attributes on a two-dimensional grid which illustrates their relative strengths and weaknesses, and suggests actions that can be taken to improve the effectiveness of marketing efforts. Different plotting methods have been used to position product attributes on importance-performance grids. This study identified the nature and extent of differences in attribute location which emerged from using alternate graphing approaches. Few differences in attribute positioning were demonstrated between median and mean value methods of analysis. Differences were also minimal between two approaches which incorporated correlation analysis. More substantial differences were apparent between the descriptive methods and the correlation approaches. It is suggested that, whenever possible, one of the correlation approaches should be adopted when formulating importance-performance grids, for they are likely to yield more accurate results.