Some difficulties in predicting new product trial using concept test scores Available to Purchase

At an early stage in the new product development process, marketers often evaluate several concept statements in terms of customer preferences to choose the best concept for further development. Purchase intention scale is often used to measure consumer preferences at this stage when the product is still a concept statement or a mathematical position on a perceptual map. This paper discusses the limitations of two methods of aggregating individual preferences, namely plurality (first‐choice) and the Condorcet (pair‐wise majority) methods. The plurality method is subject to the top‐box paradox while the Condorcet method suffers from the paradox of voting. The Copeland method is presented as an alternative to the Condorcet method when the latter fails to identify the majority’s choice. Some limitations of predicting product trial are also presented.