Bike helmet case study banner
MaxDiffPro — Measuring the perceived value of your innovations

MaxDiff Case Study: Prioritizing Bike Helmet Innovations

How to identify the advertising claims that reveal the technologies to develop first.

MaxDiff Case Study: Prioritizing Bike Helmet Innovations

A bike helmet brand had many innovation ideas. But not all of them are equally valuable to consumers. Here's how MaxDiff analysis turned development ideas into clear priorities.

Introduction

A bike helmet brand had several innovation tracks: anti-rotation protection, integrated LED, advanced ventilation, recycled materials, magnetic closure, lighter construction, and more.

But not all these innovations are equally valuable in consumers' eyes. Before investing in product development, the brand wanted to know which promises were truly the most compelling.

The MaxDiff study allowed each innovation to be turned into an advertising claim, then measured which ones triggered the strongest preference level, across two very different cyclist profiles.

The challenge

The brand had many development ideas, but no clear way to know which to prioritize.

The risk was developing features that seemed attractive internally but made little difference at the moment of purchase.

Why a simple survey can mislead you

In a standard survey, almost all innovations can seem important. Consumers easily give high ratings to safety, comfort, visibility, durability, or design.

But these ratings don't tell you which innovations truly matter most when consumers have to make a choice.

MaxDiff forces respondents to trade off. In each scenario, they choose the most and least compelling claim from several options. This produces a much more discriminating ranking of real priorities.

The solution

Each development idea was turned into a clear advertising claim. Respondents then compared these claims in a series of MaxDiff scenarios.

This approach allows two questions to be answered simultaneously:

  1. Which advertising messages are most compelling?
  2. Which product innovations deserve to be developed first?
Key principle: Each tested claim corresponded to a product development option. Testing the claims means testing the perceived value of each innovation.

Tested Claims

14 advertising claims, each associated with a technology or product development decision.

Advertising Claim Tested in MaxDiff Technology / Development Behind It
Anti-rotation protection to better protect your head in case of a fall.Anti-rotation system
A multi-impact shell designed to better absorb violent impacts.Reinforced shell / multi-density foam
Safety tested beyond minimum standards.Advanced safety testing
An integrated rear LED to stay visible as light fades.Rechargeable LED
360° visibility thanks to reflective elements all around the helmet.Peripheral reflectors
Precise adjustment in seconds.Micro-adjustable dial
Lasting comfort thanks to memory foam.Premium foams
Internal air channels to keep your head cool.Optimized internal ventilation
A lightweight structure for more comfort without compromising safety.Lightweight construction
In-mold construction for more solidity and less weight.In-mold technology
Easy magnetic closure, even with gloves.Magnetic buckle
Antibacterial interior for a fresher helmet every day.Antibacterial textile
Recycled materials for a more responsible helmet.Shell / recycled components
Replaceable parts to extend the life of your helmet.Modular components

Research Results

MaxDiff preference score: (Best - Worst) / Exposures × 100. A positive score indicates the claim is more often chosen as the most compelling. A negative score indicates it is more often eliminated. Bars are normalized to 0–100%; the center (50%) corresponds to a score of 0 (neutral).
ⓘ Reading this chart Bars show the MaxDiff score of each claim for both segments. The center of the bar corresponds to a score of 0 (neutral). Gold / Silver / Bronze = top 3 in each segment. Displayed values are actual scores in %.

Claim Positioning by Segment

ⓘ Understanding this chart This chart positions each claim according to its score in both segments. Horizontal: urban cyclist score (right = more compelling). Vertical: sports cyclist score (top = more compelling). Bubble size: overall preference intensity. Hover over a bubble to see the full claim.
← Low (urban) High (urban) → High (sports) Low (sports)
Bubbles at the top right indicate claims compelling for both segments. Bottom right: mainly appreciated by urban cyclists. Top left: mainly appreciated by sports cyclists. Bottom left: low priority in both profiles. Hover over a bubble to see the full claim.

Product Mix Report – Recommended Claim Portfolio

ⓘ How to read this chart This chart identifies the optimal combination of claims. The first claim is the one that, alone, generates the most preference. Each subsequent claim is selected because it adds the greatest incremental preference combined with the previous ones. Bars show the incremental contribution of each claim; the line represents the cumulative preference generated by the portfolio.
Recommended portfolio: Anti-rotation protection + Rear LED + Air channels + Lightweight structure cover most of the expectations of both segments and form the basis of a differentiated range.

Interpreting the Results

Results show that priorities vary strongly by cyclist type.

Among urban and commuter cyclists, the most powerful claims are linked to visible safety: anti-rotation protection, integrated LED, and 360° visibility. For this segment, the helmet must reassure in daily traffic, especially when light fades or traffic becomes dense.

Among sports cyclists, priorities are different. Ventilation, lightness, anti-rotation protection, and in-mold construction become much more important. This segment looks for a high-performance helmet, comfortable over time and adapted to effort.

This result shows that the brand should not communicate a single message to all cyclists. The innovations to develop and the arguments to highlight must vary according to the target segment.

What We Learned

Urban cyclists primarily want to be better protected and more visible. Sports cyclists primarily want to stay cool, ride light, and maintain high protection.

Urban / commuter cyclists — Top priorities
  • Anti-rotation protection
  • Integrated rear LED
  • 360° visibility
Sports / performance cyclists — Top priorities
  • Optimized internal ventilation (air channels)
  • Anti-rotation protection
  • Lightweight structure
  • In-mold construction

The Impact

The study enabled consumer preferences to be turned into concrete development priorities.

For an urban range, the brand should prioritize:

For a sports range, it should prioritize:

The brand can thus avoid prioritizing less differentiating features, such as recycled materials or replaceable parts, which score low in both segments.

Prioritize your innovations with MaxDiff

What's next? Testing the best product-price combination with DCM

MaxDiff identifies the innovations with the most perceived value. But once these priorities are known, another question arises: what combination of features and prices actually maximizes choice?

That's where Discrete Choice Modeling comes in.

A second DCM phase could test several complete helmet configurations, for example:

MaxDiff reveals which innovations deserve attention. DCM reveals which product-price offer consumers would actually choose.

MaxDiff for Testing Marketing Claims and Prioritizing Innovation

MaxDiff doesn't just rank advertising messages. When a claim corresponds to a specific feature or technology, the resulting ranking also becomes a product decision-making tool.

It identifies the innovations with the greatest commercial potential, those that deserve to be developed first, and those that can be deferred or reserved for a specific segment.

ℹ️ About the bicycle study

Study characteristics:

📋
Claims tested
14
🚴
Segments
98 urban + 101 sports
🇨🇭
Market
French-speaking Switzerland
⏱️
Field duration
5–7 days
💰
Price
From CHF 1'990
for 100 respondents

This study is an illustrative example based on a simulated MaxDiff design. It shows how the method can be used to prioritize messages and product innovations.

Want to identify the innovations that truly matter to your customers?

We can help you measure the perceived value of your messages, features and product concepts.

Typical study: 15–25 items tested · 150–300 respondents · Results in 3–5 days

Book a 20-min call