eight praccal rules for building markeng mix modelsnymetro.chapter.informs.org/prac_cor_pubs/06-2014...
Post on 04-Jul-2020
1 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
EightPrac+calRulesforBuilding
Marke+ngMixModelsModelsthatwork
‐andyourclientscanbuyinto
mathematics applied to government, industry and commerce, llc
Rule1:Understandthebigpicture
• Whoaretheplayersinthecategory• Whataretheydoing
– Marke<ngexpenditures
– Productposi<oning– Marke<ngchannels– Productinnova<ons
• Whatobjec<veistheclienttryingtomeet
Rule2:Grapheverythinginsight
• OEoEcksteinrule:– Nevershowaclientamorethan2by2matrix
• Noclient–andveryfewanalysts–canmakesenseofacomplexsetofnumbers
• Don’tshowgraphsunlesstheytellastory– Somestoriestheyknow[toshowthatyouunderstandthebusiness]
– Andsometheydon’t[toshowyourvalue]
Illustra<on:Dish‐washingdetergent
• Clientwasdisturbedbyasharpdeclineinmarketshareinlong‐<mecategoryleader
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
MarketShare(byVolume)
BrandA BrandB BrandC AllOthers
Illustra<on
• Newentrywasgrowingrapidly• Butalsofundamentallyalteringthecategorybyintroducingconcentrates
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
MarketVolume(byForm)
Concentrate Powder
Illustra<on
• Asconcentratesweremuchmoreprofitable• Theclient–whohadbeenquicktorespond–wasnowmakingfarmoremoney– Attheexpenseofthesmallerbrands
$0$1,000$2,000$3,000$4,000$5,000$6,000$7,000$8,000$9,000$10,000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
ProjectedProfit
BrandA BrandB BrandC AllOthers
Realobjec<ve
• Theclient’sconcernwasmisplaced• Theobjec<veshouldn’thavebeentorestorelostmarketshare
– Buttobestrespondtocompe<<vepressureinordertomaximizeprofits
Rule3:Considereverything
• Marke<ng• Compe<<ve
• Environmental
• Justbecausethedatabaseis“big”doesn’tmeanincontainseverythingyouneed
• Ifyouleavesomethingout,themodelisopentocri<cism
Rule4:Lookat–andunderstand–outliers
• Outlierswreakhavoconmodels• Inalmostallcases,there’sanexplana<on
– Strikes– Productrecalls– Weatherevents– Geopoli<calevents– Etc.
Rule5:Graphallrela<onships
• Rela<onshipsareusuallymucheasiertoexplain–andgetclientbuy‐in–iftheycanbedemonstratedgraphically
Graphallrela<onships
• Some<mes,explana<oniseasy
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0.0
100.0
200.0
300.0
400.0
500.0
600.0
700.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536
Promo<on Sales
Graphallrela<onships
• Outliersusuallypopout
0
5
10
15
20
25
0.0
100.0
200.0
300.0
400.0
500.0
600.0
700.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536
Promo<on Outlier Sales
Don’tshowconfusinggraphs
• Ifsta<s<callysignificantrela<onshipsdon’tstandout
0
5
10
15
20
25
0.0
100.0
200.0
300.0
400.0
500.0
600.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536
Sales Adver<sing
Makerela<onshipsclear
• Dosomethingtomaketherela<onshipclear– Lag,smooth,transformoraggregatevariables
• Inthisexample,AdBankisasmoothedadver<singseries[equivalenttoAdStock]
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
18.0
20.0
0.0
100.0
200.0
300.0
400.0
500.0
600.0
700.0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35
Sales AdBank
Makerela<onshipsclear
• Plotagainstresidualsoraddaddi<onalinforma<on,asnecessary
0
5
10
15
20
25
0.0
100.0
200.0
300.0
400.0
500.0
600.0
700.0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35
Outlier Sales AdBank
Rule6:Neverpresentalinearmodel
• Althoughlinearandnon‐linearmodelsyieldsimilarresultsintherangeofactualdata– Theycanbequitedifferentwhenextrapolated
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2,000
$50 $150 $250 $350 $450
SalesVo
lume
Marke+ngExpenditures
LinearModel
Non‐LinearModel
Problemswithlinearmodels
• Theworldisnon‐linear– Alleconomictheoryisbasedonadecliningreturntoscale
• Linearmodelsleadtodangerousinterpreta<ons,suchas:– Whydon’twetripleadspending….– Ifpromo<onhasahigherresponsethanadver<sing,whynotputeverythingintopromo<on
Problemswithlinearmodels
• Inmyopinion,allregressionbasedmodelsshouldbelog‐log
Ln[Salest] = β0 + β1 Ln [Advt] + β2 Ln [Promot] + β3 Dummy + …..
Or
Salest = Exp[β0] x Exp[β3 x Dummy] x [Advt]β1 x [Promot]β2 x …
Rule7:Besurethemodelmakessense
• Toyouandtotheclient– Avoidnega<vemarke<ngelas<ci<es
• And[inmostcases]posi<vepriceelas<ci<es
– Beawareofthedifferencebetweenpriceandpromo<on
– Havestrongevidencebeforeyouchallengetheclient’sbasicassump<ons
• Testallresults
Rule8:Usethemodeltoguidedecision‐making
• UsethemodelresultstosimulateaP&L• Evaluatealterna<vescenarios• Considerpossiblecompe<<veac<ons
– Andreac<ons
Illustra<on:Laundrydetergent
• Ourclient’sbrandwasthecategoryleaderfacingchallengefromheavilysupportedmul<‐na<onalbrand
• Bothbrandswerespendingaboutthesameonbothadver<singandtradesupport
• However,thetwobrandsrespondedquitedifferentlytomarke<ngandfolloweddis<nctlydifferentmarke<ngstrategies
Modelingresults
• Bothbrandswereresponsivetoadver<sing– Client’sbrandwasmoreresponsive
• Bothbrandswerealsoinfluencedbytradepromo<on– Promo<onaleffectsweresimilarforbothbrands
– Butcompe<<vepromo<onshadasubstan<aleffectwhichcouldeffec<velyoffsettheimpactoftheirownpromo<ons
Impactofadver<singonleader
• Leaderwasinaposi<ontoincreaseshareatminimalcost
Advertising Market Share Profits
Current
Maximum
Impactofadver<singonchallenger
• Challengerwasinvestmentspendingtobuyshare
Advertising Market Share Profits
Current
Maximum
Impactofleader’stradespending
• Client’sbrandcouldmakeonlylimitedgainsbyincreasingtradesupport
Spending on Trade Support Category Leader Challenger
Current Maximum
Profi
ts
Impactofleader’stradespending• Butnotifcompe<tormatchesspendingincreases
Current Maximum
Spending on Trade Support Category Leader Challenger
Profi
ts
Outcome
• Categoryleaderincreasedadspending– Whilethechallengercon<nueditshighlevelofadsupport
• Bothbrandscarefullyavoidedatradewar• Asaresult,bothbrandsgrew
– Attheexpenseofthesmallerbrandsinthecategory
Inconclusion
• Ifyourclientsunderstandandbuyintoyourmodels– They’llusethem– Andprofitfromthem
• Iftheydon’t– ………
top related