Measuring Consumers' Willingness to Pay. Which Method fits best?

Gauging the maximum willingness to pay (WTP) of a product accurately is a critical success factor that determines not only market performance but also financial results. A number of approaches have therefore been developed to accurately estimate consumers’ willingness to pay. Here, four commonly used measurement approaches are compared using real purchase data as a benchmark. The relative strengths of each method are analyzed on the basis of statistical criteria and, more importantly, on their potential to predict managerially relevant criteria such as optimal price, quantity and profit. The results show a slight advantage of incentive-aligned approaches though the market settings need to be considered to choose the best-fitting procedure.

How Should Consumers’ Willingness to Pay Be Measured? An Empirical Comparison of State-of-the-Art Approaches

This study compares the performance of four commonly used approaches to measure consumers’ willingness to pay with real purchase data (REAL): the open-ended (OE) question format; choicebased conjoint (CBC) analysis; Becker, DeGroot, and Marschak’s (BDM) incentive-compatible mechanism; and incentive-aligned choice-based conjoint (ICBC) analysis. With this five-in-one approach, the authors test the relative strengths of the four measurement methods, using REAL as the benchmark, on the basis of statistical criteria and decision-relevant metrics. The results indicate that the BDM and ICBC approaches can pass statistical and decision-oriented tests. The authors find that respondents are more price sensitive in incentive-aligned settings than in non-incentive-aligned settings and the REAL setting. Furthermore, they find a large number of “none” choices under ICBC than under hypothetical conjoint analysis. This study uncovers an intriguing possibility: Even when the OE format and CBC analysis generate hypothetical bias, they may still lead to the right demand curves and right pricing decisions.