Infinity G20 Positioning
Autor: panichhhh • May 30, 2017 • Case Study • 810 Words (4 Pages) • 1,547 Views
Infiniti G20 Data (Positioning)
QUESTION 1. Using the data in Exhibit 1 and the associated perceptual mapping software, describe the two (or, if applicable, three) dimensions underlying the perceptual maps that you generated. Based on these maps, how do people in this market perceive the Infiniti G20 compared with its competitors?
Answer: From the table below, we decide to go for the three dimensions because moving from 3 to 2 dimensions will lose 0.112 of variance. Variance Explained
Dimensions / Items | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
Total variance explained | 0.546 | 0.188 | 0.112 | 0.073 | 0.025 | 0.023 | 0.019 | 0.010 | 0.004 | 0.000 | |
Cumulative variance explained | 0.546 | 0.734 | 0.846 | 0.919 | 0.944 | 0.967 | 0.986 | 0.996 | 1.000 | 1.000 | |
Statistics | 3 dimensions | 2 dimensions | |||||||||
Attribute | Mean | Variance | Proportion Variance Explained | Proportion Variance Explained | |||||||
Attractive | 4.78 | 0.737 | 0.990 | 0.973 | |||||||
Quiet | 4.41 | 1.050 | 0.795 | 0.795 | |||||||
Unreliable | 3.42 | 0.755 | 0.897 | 0.760 | |||||||
Poorly Built | 3.09 | 1.056 | 0.950 | 0.882 | |||||||
Interesting | 4.02 | 0.666 | 0.926 | 0.591 | |||||||
Sporty | 4.83 | 0.725 | 0.858 | 0.838 | |||||||
Uncomfortable | 3.53 | 0.657 | 0.838 | 0.838 | |||||||
Roomy | 4.14 | 0.771 | 0.817 | 0.811 | |||||||
Easy Service | 4.47 | 0.478 | 0.696 | 0.694 | |||||||
Prestige | 4.72 | 1.235 | 0.962 | 0.828 | |||||||
Common | 3.45 | 0.707 | 0.559 | 0.548 | |||||||
Economical | 4.03 | 0.648 | 0.924 | 0.008 | |||||||
Successful | 4.88 | 0.732 | 0.902 | 0.845 | |||||||
AvantGarde | 4.17 | 0.441 | 0.414 | 0.376 | |||||||
Poor Value | 3.60 | 0.560 | 0.953 | 0.609 | |||||||
S1 | 4.82 | 2.401 | 0.949 | 0.948 | |||||||
S2 | 4.99 | 1.476 | 0.774 | 0.772 | |||||||
S3 | 6.07 | 2.305 | 0.878 | 0.852 | |||||||
Overall | 5.27 | 1.334 | 0.987 | 0.974 |
...