Hi! They work for both, but you'll get slightly different things out of them. The interview is ok to get a rough sense of the numbers, but is more about figuring out the value story. The advantage of an interview is that you can challenge people's answers, which helps understanding which messaging gets them to change their minds about the acceptability of different price thresholds, which you can then proactively use in your marketing. E.g., sometimes people want to change their answer to Q4 after answering Q5, if the suggested prices are higher than they initially expected, and they are forced to consider whether they'd buy at higher prices. Once they consider the higher prices and think "actually, that's fair", they go back to change what they initially thought was acceptable. This requires a good interviewer that can sell them on the offer, though. The interview is ok when the value proposition is figured out, and you want the numbers. The advantage of a survey, is that you can get more answers, as it's more hands off (a lot of people don't like to answer open question, though). You won't get as much interesting information, and the value of what you offer must be decently explained already in the survey, so that people understand what it does for them, and therefore, how much they'd pay. In an interview you get to explain it better if they don't get it, and refine your messaging as you go along. Also, if you have a 5 to 6-figure budget for a survey, there are better methods (would just keep Q4, and mostly for data quality control). But if you're doing it yourself or with a low budget, they can get you a decent job done. These questions aren't good for optimizing between close price points (e.g. $149 vs $159), but they're good to get a ballpark. Hope it answers your question! 😊
Hey! Would you say these questions are best answered in an interview setting or also work in a survey?
Hi! They work for both, but you'll get slightly different things out of them.
The interview is ok to get a rough sense of the numbers, but is more about figuring out the value story.
The advantage of an interview is that you can challenge people's answers, which helps understanding which messaging gets them to change their minds about the acceptability of different price thresholds, which you can then proactively use in your marketing.
E.g., sometimes people want to change their answer to Q4 after answering Q5, if the suggested prices are higher than they initially expected, and they are forced to consider whether they'd buy at higher prices. Once they consider the higher prices and think "actually, that's fair", they go back to change what they initially thought was acceptable. This requires a good interviewer that can sell them on the offer, though.
The interview is ok when the value proposition is figured out, and you want the numbers. The advantage of a survey, is that you can get more answers, as it's more hands off (a lot of people don't like to answer open question, though). You won't get as much interesting information, and the value of what you offer must be decently explained already in the survey, so that people understand what it does for them, and therefore, how much they'd pay. In an interview you get to explain it better if they don't get it, and refine your messaging as you go along.
Also, if you have a 5 to 6-figure budget for a survey, there are better methods (would just keep Q4, and mostly for data quality control). But if you're doing it yourself or with a low budget, they can get you a decent job done. These questions aren't good for optimizing between close price points (e.g. $149 vs $159), but they're good to get a ballpark.
Hope it answers your question! 😊