Integrating methods for the prioritization of innovations and improvements in services

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to present a methodology for the prioritization of innovations and improvements in services and products that integrates penalty–reward contrast analysis (PRCA) and improvement gap analysis (IGA). Design/methodology/approach The presented method is theoretically developed and simulated. It uses a case study with 290 clients of supermarkets, evaluating 16 attributes of this service, to demonstrate the advantages of integrating PRCA and IGA. Findings The integration of PRCA and IGA provides benefits that outweigh the use of each method individually. The joint use of these methods allows the identification of possible nonlinear impact of attributes on customers’ overall satisfaction, allowing managerial recommendations to be made with greater discriminatory power, in addition to qualifying the identification of innovative attributes. Originality/value Managers must be aware of the effect of the interaction of innovative attributes with attributes already used by the company. At the same time, it is appropriate to verify whether there is potential to improve the existing attributes. The literature shows that PRCA identifies the nonlinear influence of customers’ satisfaction with individual attributes on overall satisfaction, but it fails to identify the possible impact of innovative attributes. In turn, IGA identifies innovative attributes but does not identify how the attributes influence overall satisfaction. Thus, the benefits of integrating PRCA and IGA outweigh the individual limitations of each method, thereby increasing the quality of managerial recommendations. Moreover, a limitation of PRCA makes this method useful for identifying innovative attributes in relation to attractive attributes identified by the IGA method.