Skip to main content

Price Vs Quality


We all have probably seen on the Web pictures which may look like the following:


It implies that if someone quotes to a customer low (or lower than average, I presume) price for the services or products it necessary means low/lower quality of the services or products provided.

This is very interesting assumption and I had a short conversation a while ago on Twitter with another SharePoint specialist about it:


Original Bjørn's article should be here http://t.co/36brwYq4Kf

A study in Journal of Consumer Research http://www.jstor.org/userimages/ContentEditor/1351717003127/DevalRelease.pdf in regards to the subject clearly shows:

'"Consumers rarely have complete information and use various strategies to fill the gaps in their knowledge as they consider and choose products. One of these strategies involves using naive theories: informal, common sense, explanations that consumers use to make sense of their environment. For example, consumers may believe that popular products are high in quality while also believing that scarce products are high in quality," write authors Hélène Deval (Dalhousie University), Susan P. Mantel (Ball State University), Frank R. Kardes (University of Cincinnati), and Steven S. Posavac (Vanderbilt University).'

If we use popular market theory logic we may say that 'popular products' and 'scarce products' from the passage above should be of higher price.

I have been in the industry of selling and delivering IT services of various kinds to companies and government organisations since 2000. I have been on the other side of the fence as well representing customers. Also as we all are I am a customer of various products and services that doesn't include IT. That allows me to have an informed opinion on the subject.

There is no guarantee that price reflects quality of the product/service. Especially in situations when services/products are supplied to organisations or by organisations and not individuals.
When we deal with individuals it should have been simpler, however as one of my indirect mentors said: "we won’t pay you for your past performance". This is true and unfortunately only spoken out by not many people. Therefore how come reflection of the past expectations (price) should reflect the existing quality of the product/service? But many of us do think about and take to account past performance of people, products and services of others (see 'using naive theories' above).

For example, my business provides highest quality services to customers, but it doesn't mean our prices are highest in the industry at the same time. On the other hand I bet majority of us were in situations when some company may charge top price for not-so-top quality service.

Adam Smith in his well-known book "The Wealth of Nations" provided the following example: 'Grain, the food of the common people, is dearer in Scotland than in England... The quality of grain depends chiefly upon the quantity of flour or meal which it yields at the mill; and, in this respect, English grain is so much superior to the Scotch, that though often dearer in appearance, or in proportion to the measure of its bulk, it is generally cheaper in reality, or in proportion to its quality, or even to the measure of its weight.' – this is to the point of 'someone who says they can do cheaper.

However later in the book he provides another interesting thought: 'Quality, however, is so very disputable a matter, that I look upon all information of this kind as somewhat uncertain.'

So even from 17th century (though I'd say much earlier) people have had the knowledge that price doesn't necessarily correlate with quality.

In addition to that if in general the focus is on quantity more than quality – why bother about it? Also, how do we measure quality?

It would be interesting to research.

Read other posts I published on the subject:

Soaring childcare prices in Australia

Supply and Demand Pricing Rules for Property Market

Economic Lessons - Consumer Influence on Price

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Scrum - Team Culture and Wall Manifesto

In the Scrum framework one of the key components is the wall and daily stand-up. In some organisations I worked with the whole concept of the wall is not accepted by many developers, because of the stand-up necessity and "time waste". Very often all that methodology is used for the sake of methodology and not to achieve what we actually do - adding or creating value to our customer (usually called "The Business"). I can understand frustration that is caused by the wall and stand-up process. From the software developer perspective it is really a waste of time for the following reasons: 1. In 95% of cases developers are head down working like hell delivering valuable outcomes that they are accountable for. Extra effort to go to the wall, staying there for 15-30 minutes and listening or not listening to what others were doing yesterday and will be doing tomorrow is annoying for them; 2. The mere fact of having to do something mandatory to do that looks like

Construction issues resolution in Sydney - part 17

It's been a while since  the last post In January 2016 the owner lodged an application to NCAT against owners corporation to fix three major defects: - waterproofing of large windows in the living room and bedroom which led to windows full replacement - bathroom drain fix - planterbox fix The owners corporation didn't come to mediation and tribunal ordered to fix all defects within 2 months (the deadline was 8th July 2016). The owners corporation as usual didn't rush to comply with the order regarding two items: bathroom and planterbox. The windows works started end of April 2016. At the same time owners corporation decided to check whether it's a warranty and original builder should fix the issues. That was also related to the fact that the variation was submitted by the current contractor who started fixing the defect. So the owners corporation stopped all works in the middle and went off for a month to "make decision". The decision was mad

How strata owners corporation "solves" problems or Construction issues resolution in Sydney - Part 16

Almost 8 months passed from the time of previous post and here's how the owners corporations activities looked like to "resolve" the defects/problems: 1. Independent inspection report was ordered and completed 1st June 2015. The report confirmed the defects that were known to owners corporation already. It should be noted that in the period between December 2014 and June 2015 the only attempts by owners corporation to resolve the issues were to convince the lot owner that it's the owner's personal responsibility. Therefore half a year gone with a couple of meetings only, because people were "on holidays", "busy" etc. 2. Between 3rd July 2015 and end of July 2015 the strata manager spent "contacting the builders for quotes". Until owner called the strata manager nothing have happend. 3. By the end of August 2015 all quotes were in place. The meeting of all owners was set up for the 7th October! Because as usual "holid