Die Portfoliomatrix für Kundenallokation

Jede Zeile nennt eine Aussage zu dieser Abbildung, ihre Quelle und die Art ihrer Prüfung.

• A BMB08-C1 The article treats customer selection and prioritization as a resource-allocation problem aimed at maximizing customer value.Bhatnagar, Maryott & Bejou. (2008)
• A BMB08-C2 Customer acquisition, retention, relationship development, and customer lifetime value are presented as connected inputs to allocation decisions.Bhatnagar, Maryott & Bejou. (2008)
• A BMB08-C3 The framework implies that firms should differentiate customers and investment levels rather than apply uniform relationship-marketing spending across the customer base.Bhatnagar, Maryott & Bejou. (2008)
• A MB05-C1 The question is feasibility, not desirability: relationship-marketing strategies "presume that a firm can accurately predict the future profitability of customers", and the paper is "a detailed empirical evaluation of how accurately the future profitability of customers" can be predicted across four industry data setsMalthouse & Blattberg. (2005)
• A MB05-C2 The 20-55 rule, as posited: of the actual best customers, "approximately 55% will be misclassified and not receive special treatment". The authors call these "two new empirical rules of thumb based on these results", so they are rules of thumb from four data sets, not constants. About 15% of the future bottom 80% may be misclassified and receive special treatment.Malthouse & Blattberg. (2005)
• A MB05-C3 "the feasibility of such strategies depends on the probabilities and costs of misclassifying customers", so it turns on prediction accuracy, forecast horizon, and the costs of misclassification.Malthouse & Blattberg. (2005)
• A GLS04-C2 The sensitivity is theirs and it is asymmetric: "a 1% improvement in retention, margin, or acqui"sition cost "improves firm value by 5%, 1%, and .1%, respectively"Gupta, Lehmann & Stuart. (2004)
• A GLS04-C3 Five firms, public data: the method is demonstrated "by using publicly available data for five firms", and retention outweighs the discount rate, since "a 1% improvement in retention has almost five times greater impact on firm value than a 1% change in discount rate or cost of capital"Gupta, Lehmann & Stuart. (2004)

Prüfgrade: A, gegen die gedruckte Seite der Primärquelle geprüft · B, Primärquelle, nur Textebene · C, belastbare Sekundärquelle · D, berichtet.

Diese Abbildung gehört zu einem Essay: Die Zahlen stehen hier, das Argument dort.