{"id":37916,"date":"2026-01-19T12:59:31","date_gmt":"2026-01-19T11:59:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.hs-nordhausen.de\/?post_type=zusatzmaterial&p=37916"},"modified":"2026-01-19T12:59:31","modified_gmt":"2026-01-19T11:59:31","slug":"7-2-determining-the-optimal-electricity-tariff-using-choice-based-conjoint-analysis","status":"publish","type":"zusatzmaterial","link":"https:\/\/www.hs-nordhausen.de\/en\/zusatzmaterial\/7-2-ermittlung-des-optimalen-stromtarifs-mittels-choice-based-conjointanalyse\/","title":{"rendered":"7-2: Determining the optimal electricity tariff using choice-based conjoint analysis"},"content":{"rendered":"

Marketing textbook, Keywords<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Pricing policy \u2192 Starting points for determining the optimal offer price \u2192 Demand-oriented setting of the offer price \u2192 Price-sales function as an important basic model of classical price theory<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

<\/div>
<\/div>
<\/div>
<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n

In a study by Pabsch et al. (2000, p. 109 ff.), the significance of various price components for the choice of electricity tariff of a regional electricity supplier was empirically determined using a choice-based conjoint analysis (CBC) (see also Section 4.4.3.2). Figure 1 provides an overview of the characteristics and characteristic values considered in the study.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n
\"This
Figure 1: Features and characteristics of electricity tariffs<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
Image description<\/summary>\n

This table shows five different features of electricity tariffs, each with six different characteristics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The table is divided into columns for the different Features<\/strong> and lines for the Characteristics (1 to 6)<\/strong> subdivided:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  • Basic price per month:<\/strong> Increases in \u20ac2.50 increments from \u20ac2.50 (denomination 1) up to \u20ac15.00 (denomination 6).<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • Consumption price per kWh:<\/strong> Increases from \u20ac 0.09 (characteristic 1) via \u20ac 0.12, \u20ac 0.15, \u20ac 0.19, \u20ac 0.22 to \u20ac 0.25 (characteristic 6).<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • Price per kWh during off-peak hours (night tariff):<\/strong>\n
      \n
    • Characteristic 1: no ancillary tariff.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • Characterisation 2: \u20ac 0.04. Characterisation 3: \u20ac 0.07.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • The values 4 to 6 are not used in this column (dash).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • Contractual commitment:<\/strong>\n
        \n
      • Ranges from \u201enone\u201c (characteristic 1) to 3, 6, 9 and 12 months (characteristic 5).<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      • Characteristic 6 is not documented.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      • Additional service:<\/strong>\n
          \n
        • none<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        • Maintenance protection letter for the heating system<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        • Discounted rubbish bin cleaning<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        • Telephone voucher<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        • discounted window cleaning service<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        • discounted internet access<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/details>\n<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n

          In the survey situation, the characteristic values were systematically combined to form holistic product concepts, which were presented to the test subjects for assessment (see Figure 2). The respondents were confronted with several selection situations one after the other and were each asked to state their preferred electricity tariff. However, there was also the option of not choosing a tariff if both alternatives in a selection situation were categorised as unacceptable. This comparison helps users to understand the trade-offs between the tariffs (e.g. lower basic price for tariff 1 vs. lower energy price for tariff 2).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          \n
          \"This
          Example of a selection situation for the empirical study<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
          Image description<\/summary>\n

          This image represents a classic decision situation (choice set) as presented to test persons during a choice-based conjoint analysis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Illustration of a selection situation from a questionnaire with two different electricity tariffs and a non-choice option for direct comparison:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Structure and instructions:<\/strong> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The picture shows the question at the top: \u201eWhich electricity tariff would you choose? Please tick the appropriate box!\u201c. Below this is a table with three options.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The three selection options in detail:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

            \n
          • Tariff 1:<\/strong>\n
              \n
            • Basic price per month:<\/strong> 5,- \u20ac<\/li>\n\n\n\n
            • Consumption price:<\/strong> 0.15 \u20ac\/kWh<\/li>\n\n\n\n
            • Price for night tariff:<\/strong> 0,04 \u20ac<\/li>\n\n\n\n
            • Contractual commitment:<\/strong> 6 months<\/li>\n\n\n\n
            • Additional service:<\/strong> Telephone voucher<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n
            • Tariff 2:<\/strong>\n
                \n
              • Basic price per month:<\/strong> 10,- \u20ac<\/li>\n\n\n\n
              • Consumption price:<\/strong> 0.09 \u20ac\/kWh<\/li>\n\n\n\n
              • Price for night tariff:<\/strong> 0,07 \u20ac<\/li>\n\n\n\n
              • Contractual commitment:<\/strong> 3 months<\/li>\n\n\n\n
              • Additional service:<\/strong> none<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n
              • Non-choice option (non-option):<\/strong>\n
                  \n
                • A grey field with the text: \u201eI would not choose either of the two electricity tariffs.\u201c<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                  Interaction:<\/strong> Below each of the three columns there is a light yellow button to click on the preferred option.<\/p>\n<\/details>\n<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n

                  In order to carry out a market simulation, it was assumed that electricity customers can choose between three different electricity tariffs. The choice shares for these three tariffs were then calculated using conjoint analysis. Figure 3 illustrates the result of this market simulation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  \n
                  \"Comparison
                  Figure 3: Proportion of the various electricity tariffs chosen<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
                  Image description<\/summary>\n

                  Comparison of three electricity tariffs (A, B, C) with their choice shares as well as a line diagram of the partial preference values of the consumption price:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  Upper left half: Definition of tariffs<\/strong> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  Three tariff options are listed with their specific features:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    \n
                  • Tariff A:<\/strong> Basic price \u20ac10; consumption price \u20ac0.09\/kWh; night tariff \u20ac0.07; 3-month commitment; additional service: telephone voucher.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                  • Tariff B:<\/strong> Basic price \u20ac5; consumption price \u20ac0.15\/kWh; night tariff \u20ac0.04; 6-month commitment; additional service: none.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                  • Tariff C:<\/strong> Basic price \u20ac15; consumption price \u20ac0.12\/kWh; no night tariff; 12-month commitment; additional service: maintenance protection letter.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                    Upper right half: Pie chart (voting shares)<\/strong> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    The diagram shows the percentage distribution of the decisions:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      \n
                    • Tariff A:<\/strong> 51.3 % (majority of votes)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                    • Tariff B:<\/strong> 29,6 %<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                    • Tariff C:<\/strong> 19,1 %<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                      Lower half: Line diagram<\/strong> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      The diagram visualises how the probability of choosing tariff A decreases when the consumption price per kWh increases:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      0,25 \u20ac:<\/strong> 19,3 %<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      0,09 \u20ac:<\/strong> 51,3 %<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      0,12 \u20ac:<\/strong> 47,5 %<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      0,15 \u20ac:<\/strong> 43,1 %<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      0,19 \u20ac:<\/strong> 39,7 %<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      0,22 \u20ac:<\/strong> 22.5 % (sharp drop)<\/p>\n<\/details>\n<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n

                      The most favoured tariff A would be chosen by 51.3 per cent of respondents, while tariffs B (29.6 per cent) and C (19.1 per cent) fared significantly worse. Tariff A has the lowest consumption price at \u20ac 0.09 per kWh. It is also possible to calculate the extent to which this tariff loses voting shares if the consumption price is gradually increased. The result is illustrated in the graph at the bottom of Figure 3: If the consumption price for tariff A is increased from \u20ac0.09 to \u20ac0.12 (tariffs B and C remain unchanged), for example, the proportion of respondents who would choose this tariff falls by 3.8 per cent, from 51.3 to 47.5 per cent.<\/p>\n\n\n

                      <\/div>
                      <\/div>
                      <\/div>
                      <\/div><\/div>\n\n\n
                      \n\n\n\n

                      Sources:<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                        \n
                      • Pabsch, M.\/Scharf, A.\/Volkmer, P.: Entwicklung neuer Stromprodukte durch die swb Enordia GmbH mit Hilfe der Conjointanalyse; in: Scharf, A.\/Wolf, T. (eds.): Case studies from dynamic markets. Telekommunikation, Internetdienste, Energiewirtschaft, Wiesbaden 2000, pp. 109-144.<\/li>\n<\/ul>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"template":"","meta":{"_piecal_is_recurring":false,"_piecal_recurring_interval":1,"_piecal_recurring_frequency":"","_piecal_recurring_exact_position":false,"_piecal_recurring_end":"","_piecal_color":"","_piecal_text_color":"","_piecal_global_color_master":false,"_piecal_rsets":"[]","_piecal_is_event":false,"_piecal_start_date":"","_piecal_end_date":"","_piecal_is_allday":false,"greyd_block_editor_preview":[],"pgc_sgb_lightbox_settings":""},"zusatzmaterial_category":[3293,3255],"zusatzmaterial_tag":[3298],"zielgruppen":[],"kontakt-zuordnung":[3203],"projekt":[1422],"institut-oder-einric":[683],"stg-zuordnung":[696],"zusatzbereiche":[1602],"fachbereich":[804],"wf_zusatzmaterial_folders":[3274],"ppma_author":[1400],"class_list":["post-37916","zusatzmaterial","type-zusatzmaterial","status-publish","hentry","zusatzmaterial_category-kapitel-7","zusatzmaterial_category-marketing-lehrbuch","zusatzmaterial_tag-kapitel-7","kontakt-zuordnung-stglassl","projekt-n-a","institut-oder-einric-sensoriklabor","stg-zuordnung-n-a","zusatzbereiche-_n-a","fachbereich-n-a"],"publishpress_future_workflow_manual_trigger":{"enabledWorkflows":[]},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.hs-nordhausen.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/zusatzmaterial\/37916","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.hs-nordhausen.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/zusatzmaterial"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.hs-nordhausen.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/zusatzmaterial"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hs-nordhausen.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.hs-nordhausen.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=37916"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"zusatzmaterial_category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hs-nordhausen.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/zusatzmaterial_category?post=37916"},{"taxonomy":"zusatzmaterial_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hs-nordhausen.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/zusatzmaterial_tag?post=37916"},{"taxonomy":"zielgruppen","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hs-nordhausen.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/zielgruppen?post=37916"},{"taxonomy":"kontakt-zuordnung","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hs-nordhausen.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kontakt-zuordnung?post=37916"},{"taxonomy":"projekt","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hs-nordhausen.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/projekt?post=37916"},{"taxonomy":"institut-oder-einric","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hs-nordhausen.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/institut-oder-einric?post=37916"},{"taxonomy":"stg-zuordnung","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hs-nordhausen.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/stg-zuordnung?post=37916"},{"taxonomy":"zusatzbereiche","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hs-nordhausen.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/zusatzbereiche?post=37916"},{"taxonomy":"fachbereich","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hs-nordhausen.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/fachbereich?post=37916"},{"taxonomy":"wf_zusatzmaterial_folders","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hs-nordhausen.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/wf_zusatzmaterial_folders?post=37916"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hs-nordhausen.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/ppma_author?post=37916"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}