An attractive quantitative example is unusable until its totals, denominators and response task agree.
Observed source problem
Buyer Personas (2024), Figure9.3, PDF sheet157, describes percentages ranked first or second across eleven criteria but displays values summing to617%. Under the stated common-sample ranking design, the sum would be200%.
Figure9.4 on sheet158 labels average chips and totals608, although sheet155 specifies allocating100 chips across the eleven criteria. Figure9.5 on162 repeats the scale problem. These are book illustrations, not Academy data.
Implication
Retain the useful distinction between ranking, rating, allocation and choice, while rejecting the example numbers as unexplained under the stated design. Before using a survey, specify who answered, the denominator, permitted choices, missing-response handling and expected totals.
Academy application
Add simple reconciliation checks to any future survey report. Label simulated data as simulated and make it mathematically consistent. A preference score remains a task-specific response; it does not establish demand, willingness to pay or a causal sales effect.
Confidence
The arithmetic and figure labels were checked directly in the supplied PDF. No claim is made about other editions or a publisher correction.
Buyer Personas — Buying Decisions, Evidence and Academy Messaging