The Virtual Customer

Communication and information technologies are adding new capabilities for rapid and inexpensive customer input to all stages of the product development (PD) process. In this article we review six web-based methods of customer input as examples of the improved Internet capabilities of communication, conceptualization, and computation. For each method we give examples of user-interfaces, initial applications, and validity tests. We critique the applicability of the methods for use in the various stages of PD and discuss how they complement existing methods. For example, during the fuzzy front end of PD the information pump enables customers to interact with each other in a web-based game that provides incentives for truth-telling and thinking hard, thus providing new ways for customers to verbalize the product features that are important to them. Fast polyhedral adaptive conjoint estimation enables PD teams to screen larger numbers of product features inexpensively to identify and measure the importance of the most promising features for further development. Meanwhile, interactive web-based conjoint analysis interfaces are moving this proven set of methods to the web while exploiting new capabilities to present products, features, product use, and marketing elements in streaming multimedia representations. User design exploits the interactivity of the web to enable users to design their own virtual products thus enabling the PD team to understand complex feature interactions and enabling customers to learn their own preferences for new products. These methods can be valuable for identifying opportunities, improving the design and engineering of products, and testing ideas and concepts much earlier in the process when less time and money is at risk. As products move toward pretesting and testing, virtual concept testing on the web enables PD teams to test concepts without actually building the product. Further, by combining virtual concepts and the ability of customers to interact with one another in a stock-market-like game, securities trading of concepts provides a novel way to identify winning concepts. Prototypes of all six methods are available and have been tested with real products and real customers. These tests demonstrate reliability for web-based conjoint analysis, polyhedral methods, virtual concept testing, and stock-market-like trading; external validity for web-based conjoint analysis and polyhedral methods; and consistency for web-based conjoint analysis vs. user design. We report on these tests, commercial applications, and other evaluations.Center for Innovation in Product Development and the MIT Center for eBusines

Preference Markets in New Product Development

Abstract Preference markets address the need for scalable, fast and engaging market research in new product development. The Web 2.0 paradigm, in which users contribute numerous ideas that may lead to new products, requires new methods of screening those ideas for their marketability and preference markets offer just such a mechanism. For faster new product development decisions, a flexible prioritization methodology for product features and concepts is tested. It scales up in the number of testable alternatives, limited only by the number of participants. New product preferences for concepts, attributes and attribute levels are measured by trading stocks whose prices are based upon share of choice of new products and features. Benefits of preference markets include speed, scalability, flexibility, and respondent enthusiasm for the method.</jats:p

Application and Test of Web-based Adaptive Polyhedral Conjoint Analysis

In response to the need for more rapid and iterative feedback on customer preferences, researchers are developing new web-based conjoint analysis methods that adapt the design of conjoint questions based on a respondent’s answers to previous questions. Adapting within a respondent is a difficult dy-namic optimization problem and until recently adaptive conjoint analysis (ACA) was the dominant method available for addressing this adaptation. In this paper we apply and test a new polyhedral method that uses “interior-point” math programming techniques. This method is benchmarked against both ACA and an efficient non-adaptive design (Fixed). Over 300 respondents were randomly assigned to different experimental conditions and were asked to complete a web-based conjoint exercise. The conditions varied based on the design of the con-joint exercise. Respondents in one group completed a conjoint exercise designed using the ACA method, respondents in another group completed an exercise designed using the Fixed method, and the remaining respondents completed an exercise designed using the polyhedral method. Following the conjoint exer-cise respondents were given $100 and allowed to make a purchase from a Pareto choice set of five new-to-the-market laptop computer bags. The respondents received their chosen bag together with the differ-ence in cash between the price of their chosen bag and the$100. We compare the methods on both internal and external validity. Internal validity is evaluated by comparing how well the different conjoint methods predict several holdout conjoint questions. External validity is evaluated by comparing how well the conjoint methods predict the respondents’ selections from the choice sets of five bags. The results reveal a remarkable level of consistency across the two validation tasks. The polyhe-dral method was consistently more accurate than both the ACA and Fixed methods. However, even better performance was achieved by combining (post hoc) different components of each method to create a range of hybrid methods. Additional analyses evaluate the robustness of the predictions and explore al-ternative estimation methods such as Hierarchical Bayes. At the time of the test, the bags were proto-types. Based, in part, on the results of this study these bags are now commercially available.The Sloan School of Management, the Center for Innovation in Product Development at MIT and the EBusiness Center at MI

Experimental Markets for Product Concepts

Market prices are well known to efficiently collect and aggregate diverse information regarding the value of commodities and assets. The role of markets has been particularly suitable to pricing financial securities. This article provides an alternative application of the pricing mechanism to marketing research - using pseudo-securities markets to measure preferences over new product concepts. Surveys, focus groups, concept tests and conjoint studies are methods traditionally used to measure individual and aggregate preferences. Unfortunately, these methods can be biased, costly and time-consuming to conduct. The present research is motivated by the desire to efficiently measure preferences and more accurately predict new product success, based on the efficiency and incentive-compatibility of security trading markets. The article describes a novel market research method, pro-vides insight into why the method should work, and compares the results of several trading experiments against other methodologies such as concept testing and conjoint analysis

Fast Polyhedral Adaptive Conjoint Estimation

We propose and test new "polyhedral" question design and estimation methods that use recent developments in mathematical programming. The methods are designed to offer accurate estimates after relatively few questions in problems involving many parameters. With polyhedral question design, each respondent's questions are adapted based upon prior answers by that respondent to reduce a feasible set of parameters as rapidly as possible. Polyhedral estimation provides estimates based on a centrality criterion (the "analytic center" of the feasible parameter set). The methods require computer support but can operate in both Internet and other computer-aided environments with no noticeable delay between questions. We evaluate the proposed methods using two approaches. First, we use Monte Carlo simulations to compare the methods against established benchmarks in a variety of domains. In the simulations we compare polyhedral question design to three benchmarks: random selection, efficient Fixed designs, and Adaptive Conjoint Analysis (ACA). We compare polyhedral estimation to Hierarchical Bayes estimation for each question design method. The simulations evaluate the methods across different levels of respondent heterogeneity, response accuracy, and numbers of questions. For low numbers of questions, polyhedral question design does best (or is tied for best) for all domains. For high numbers of questions, efficient Fixed designs do better in some domains. The best estimation method depends on respondent heterogeneity and response accuracy. Polyhedral (analytic center) estimation shows particular promise for high heterogeneity and/or for low response errors. The second evaluation employs a large-scale field test. The field test involved 330 respondents, who were randomly assigned to a question-design method and asked to complete a web-based conjoint exercise. Following the conjoint exercise, respondents were given $100 and allowed to make a purchase from a Pareto choice set of five new-to-the-market laptop computer bags. The respondents received their chosen bag together with the difference in cash between the price of their chosen bag and the$100. We compare the question-design and estimation methods on both internal validity (holdout tasks) and external validity (actual choice of a laptop bag). The field test findings are consistent with the simulation results and offer strong support for the polyhedral question design method. The preferred estimation method varied based on the question design method, although Hierarchical Bayes estimation consistently per-formed well in this domain. The findings reveal a remarkable level of consistency across the validation tasks. They suggest that the proposed methods are sufficiently promising to justify further development. At the time of the test, the bags were prototypes. Based, in part, on the results of this study the bags were launched successfully and are now commercially available. Sales of the features of the laptop bags were consistent with conjoint-analysis predictions

Securities trading of concepts (STOC)

Identifying winning new product concepts can be a challenging process that requires insight into private consumer preferences. To measure consumer preferences for new product concepts, the authors apply a “securities trading of concepts,” or STOC, approach, in which new product concepts are traded as financial securities. The authors apply this method because market prices are known to efficiently collect and aggregate private information regarding the economic value of goods, services, and firms, particularly when trading financial securities. This research compares the STOC approach against stated-choice, conjoint, constant-sum, and longitudinal revealed-preference data. The authors also place STOC in the context of previous research on prediction markets and experimental economics. Across multiple product categories, the authors test whether STOC (1) is more cost efficient than other methods, (2) passes validity tests, (3) measures expectations of others, and (4) reveals individual preferences, not just those of the crowd. The results show that traders exhibit a self-preference bias when trading. Ultimately, STOC offers two key advantages over traditional market research methods: cost efficiency and scalability. For new product development teams deciding how to invest resources, this scalability may be especially important in the Web 2.0 world.United States. Office of Naval Research (Contract Number N00014-93-1-3085)National Science Foundation (U.S.). Information Technology Research (Contract Number IIS-0085836)National Science Foundation (U.S.). Knowledge and Distributed Intelligence Initiative (Contract Number DMS-9872936)National Science Foundation (U.S.) (Contract Number IIS-9800032)United States. Office of Naval Research (United States. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) (Contract Number N00014-00-1-0907

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008

SCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

The United States COVID-19 Forecast Hub dataset

Academic researchers, government agencies, industry groups, and individuals have produced forecasts at an unprecedented scale during the COVID-19 pandemic. To leverage these forecasts, the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) partnered with an academic research lab at the University of Massachusetts Amherst to create the US COVID-19 Forecast Hub. Launched in April 2020, the Forecast Hub is a dataset with point and probabilistic forecasts of incident cases, incident hospitalizations, incident deaths, and cumulative deaths due to COVID-19 at county, state, and national, levels in the United States. Included forecasts represent a variety of modeling approaches, data sources, and assumptions regarding the spread of COVID-19. The goal of this dataset is to establish a standardized and comparable set of short-term forecasts from modeling teams. These data can be used to develop ensemble models, communicate forecasts to the public, create visualizations, compare models, and inform policies regarding COVID-19 mitigation. These open-source data are available via download from GitHub, through an online API, and through R packages

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock, 2012

OBJECTIVE: To provide an update to the "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock," last published in 2008. DESIGN: A consensus committee of 68 international experts representing 30 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict of interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guidelines process was conducted independent of any industry funding. A stand-alone meeting was held for all subgroup heads, co- and vice-chairs, and selected individuals. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development. METHODS: The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations as strong (1) or weak (2). The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence were emphasized. Recommendations were classified into three groups: (1) those directly targeting severe sepsis; (2) those targeting general care of the critically ill patient and considered high priority in severe sepsis; and (3) pediatric considerations. RESULTS: Key recommendations and suggestions, listed by category, include: early quantitative resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 h after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm a potential source of infection (UG); administration of broad-spectrum antimicrobials therapy within 1 h of the recognition of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1C) as the goal of therapy; reassessment of antimicrobial therapy daily for de-escalation, when appropriate (1B); infection source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method within 12 h of diagnosis (1C); initial fluid resuscitation with crystalloid (1B) and consideration of the addition of albumin in patients who continue to require substantial amounts of crystalloid to maintain adequate mean arterial pressure (2C) and the avoidance of hetastarch formulations (1B); initial fluid challenge in patients with sepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusion and suspicion of hypovolemia to achieve a minimum of 30 mL/kg of crystalloids (more rapid administration and greater amounts of fluid may be needed in some patients (1C); fluid challenge technique continued as long as hemodynamic improvement is based on either dynamic or static variables (UG); norepinephrine as the first-choice vasopressor to maintain mean arterial pressure ≥65 mmHg (1B); epinephrine when an additional agent is needed to maintain adequate blood pressure (2B); vasopressin (0.03 U/min) can be added to norepinephrine to either raise mean arterial pressure to target or to decrease norepinephrine dose but should not be used as the initial vasopressor (UG); dopamine is not recommended except in highly selected circumstances (2C); dobutamine infusion administered or added to vasopressor in the presence of (a) myocardial dysfunction as suggested by elevated cardiac filling pressures and low cardiac output, or (b) ongoing signs of hypoperfusion despite achieving adequate intravascular volume and adequate mean arterial pressure (1C); avoiding use of intravenous hydrocortisone in adult septic shock patients if adequate fluid resuscitation and vasopressor therapy are able to restore hemodynamic stability (2C); hemoglobin target of 7-9 g/dL in the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, ischemic coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage (1B); low tidal volume (1A) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure (1B) for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in ARDS (1B); higher rather than lower level of PEEP for patients with sepsis-induced moderate or severe ARDS (2C); recruitment maneuvers in sepsis patients with severe refractory hypoxemia due to ARDS (2C); prone positioning in sepsis-induced ARDS patients with a PaO (2)/FiO (2) ratio of ≤100 mm Hg in facilities that have experience with such practices (2C); head-of-bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ARDS who do not have evidence of tissue hypoperfusion (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation (1A); minimizing use of either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation targeting specific titration endpoints (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers if possible in the septic patient without ARDS (1C); a short course of neuromuscular blocker (no longer than 48 h) for patients with early ARDS and a PaO (2)/FI O (2) 180 mg/dL, targeting an upper blood glucose ≤180 mg/dL (1A); equivalency of continuous veno-venous hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1B); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with bleeding risk factors (1B); oral or enteral (if necessary) feedings, as tolerated, rather than either complete fasting or provision of only intravenous glucose within the first 48 h after a diagnosis of severe sepsis/septic shock (2C); and addressing goals of care, including treatment plans and end-of-life planning (as appropriate) (1B), as early as feasible, but within 72 h of intensive care unit admission (2C). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include: therapy with face mask oxygen, high flow nasal cannula oxygen, or nasopharyngeal continuous PEEP in the presence of respiratory distress and hypoxemia (2C), use of physical examination therapeutic endpoints such as capillary refill (2C); for septic shock associated with hypovolemia, the use of crystalloids or albumin to deliver a bolus of 20 mL/kg of crystalloids (or albumin equivalent) over 5-10 min (2C); more common use of inotropes and vasodilators for low cardiac output septic shock associated with elevated systemic vascular resistance (2C); and use of hydrocortisone only in children with suspected or proven "absolute"' adrenal insufficiency (2C). CONCLUSIONS: Strong agreement existed among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best care of patients with severe sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients