Dear conjoint experts,
in a recently fielded MBC study we surveyed a large number of current prescribers to a newspaper (next to other respondents with no product experience). In the choice tasks only ~40% of these prescribers actually chose the product that they are currently receiving at the current market price.
One could argue that the paper is just not that attractive (anymore) so that - given the choice - prescribers would opt out of their prescription. However, our goal is to simulate the effect of a change of the product portfolio relative to the current status quo. Hence, ideally all of the current prescribers should also be simulated to chose their current product.
How can I achieve that?
I can (brutally) adjust aggregate market shares of the status quo scenario but that would everything else but the observed and modelled choices from the actual data... Furthermore, the client would like split analyses of current prescribers and non-customers, so technically I would have to adjust individual choices (or segment shares) rather than aggregate market share.
Price sensitivity conveyed in the (unrealistic) choices and reflected in the choice models and simulation results is unreasonably high. The simulation suggests massive loss of customers in case of $1 price increases which is simply not valid in the light of historic data about past price increases. We have also surveyed price knowledge and perceived fairness, and the single linear price coefficient does not reflect this information of relative inelasticity.
While we want to recommend a price increase that (as we are certain) would not have a big negative impact on prescribers, the simulation undermines our better judgement.
Does anyone have suggestions how to approach this situation?
From my understanding I can either change/manipulate:
a) the actual choice data
b) the model specification
c) the estimation
(and in the simulator)
d) the estimation results (i.e. individual parameters)
e) the resulting shares (to affect either share of preference market shares or first choice individual predictions)
I am greatful for any advice, workaround or even story to justify this indigestable results to our client. Feel free to contact me via IM.
Thanks in advance,