The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Individual Marketing with Imperfect Targetability
Abstract
Our research investigates the competitive ramifications of individual marketing and information management in today's information-intensive marketing environments. The specific managerial issues we address are as follows. First, what kinds of incentive environments do competing firms face when they can only target individual customers imperfectly? Second, does the improvement in an industry's targetability intensify price competition in the industry such that all competing firms become worse off? Third, should a firm share its customer knowledge so as to improve its rival's targetability? Fourth, how should an information vendor sell its information that can improve a firm's targetability? Finally, do competing firms have the same incentives to invest in their own targetability? To answer those questions, we develop a simple model à la Narasimhan (1988), in which each of the two competing firms have their own loyal customers and compete for common switchers. We assume that each firm can classify its own loyal customers and switchers correctly only with a less-than-perfect probability. This means that each firm's perceived customer segmentation differs from the actual customer segmentation. Based on their perceived reality, these two competing firms engage in price competition. As an extension, we also allow the competing firms to make their investment decisions to acquire targetability. We show that when individual marketing is feasible, but imperfect, improvements in targetability by either or both competing firms can lead to win-win competition for both even if both players behave noncooperatively and the market does not expand. Win-win competition results from the fact that as a firm becomes better at distinguishing its price-insensitive loyal customers from the switchers, it is motivated to charge a higher price to the former. However, due to imperfect targetability, each firm mistakenly perceives some price-sensitive switchers as price-insensitive loyal customers and charges them all a higher price. These misperceptions thus allow its competitors to acquire those mistargeted customers without lowering their prices and, hence, reduce the rival firm's incentive to cut prices. This effect softens price competition in the market and qualitatively changes the incentive environment for competing firms engaged in individual marketing. A “prisoner's dilemma” occurs only when targetability in a market reaches a sufficiently high level. This win-win perspective on individual marketing has many managerial implications. First, we show that superior knowledge of individual customers can be a competitive advantage. However, this does not mean that a firm should always protect its customer information from its competitors. To the contrary, we find that competing firms can all benefit from exchanging individual customer information with each other at the nascent stage of individual marketing, when firms' targetability is low. Indeed, under certain circumstances, a firm may even find it profitable to give away this information unilaterally. However, as individual marketing matures (as firms' targetability becomes sufficiently high), further improvements in targetability will intensify price competition and lead to prisoner's dilemma. Therefore, it is not only prudent politics but also a business imperative for an industry to seize the initiative on the issue of protecting customer privacy so as to ensure win-win competition in the industry. Second, we show that the firm with a larger number of loyal customers tends to invest more in targetability when the cost of acquiring targetability is high. However, the firm with a smaller loyal base can, through information investment, acquire a higher level of targetability than the firm with a larger loyal base as long as the cost of acquiring targetability is not too high. As the cost further decreases, competing firms will all have more incentives to increase their investments in targetability until they achieve the highest feasible level. Third, an information vendor should make its information available nonexclusively (exclusively) when its information is associated with a low (high) level of targetability. When the vendor does sell its information exclusively, it should target a firm with a small loyal following if it can impart a high level of targetability to that firm. Finally, our analysis shows that an information-intensive environment does not doom small firms. In fact, individual marketing may provide a good opportunity for a small firm to leapfrog a large firm. The key to leapfrogging is a high level of targetability or customer knowledge.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Value of Purchase History Data in Target Marketing
Rossi, P. E., McCulloch, R. E., & Allenby, G. M. (1996) · Marketing Science · doi:10.1287/mksc.15.4.321 · Cited by 754
Cited by
Acquisti, A., Taylor, C., & Wagman, L. (2016) · Journal of Economic Literature · doi:10.1257/jel.54.2.442 · Cited by 1,283
Conditioning prices on purchase history
Acquisti, A., & Varian, H. R. (2005) · Marketing Science · doi:10.1287/mksc.1040.0103 · Cited by 689
Personalization in personalized marketing: Trends and ways forward
Chandra, S., Verma, S., Lim, W. M., Kumar, S., & Donthu, N. (2022) · Psychology & Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.21670 · Cited by 595
The Value of Personal Information in Online Markets with Endogenous Privacy
Montes, R., Sand-Zantman, W., & Valletti, T. (2019) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2017.2989 · Cited by 280
CRM in Data-Rich Multichannel Retailing Environments: A Review and Future Research Directions
Verhoef, P. C., Venkatesan, R., McAlister, L., Malthouse, E. C., Krafft, M., & Ganesan, S. (2010) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2010.02.009 · Cited by 160
Effects of price framing on consumers’ perceptions of online dynamic pricing practices
Weisstein, F. L., Monroe, K. B., & Kukar-Kinney, M. (2013) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-013-0330-0 · Cited by 146
Dynamic targeted pricing with strategic consumers
Chen, Y., & Zhang, Z. J. (2009) · International Journal of Industrial Organization · doi:10.1016/j.ijindorg.2008.03.002 · Cited by 144
Self-citationZhang, K., & Katona, Z. (2012) · Marketing Science · doi:10.1287/mksc.1120.0740 · Cited by 111
Behavior-based price discrimination and customer information sharing
De Nijs, R. (2017) · International Journal of Industrial Organization · doi:10.1016/j.ijindorg.2016.12.003 · Cited by 34
Behavior-based pricing under imperfectly informed consumers
Esteves, R.-B., & Cerqueira, S. (2017) · Information Economics and Policy · doi:10.1016/j.infoecopol.2017.06.007 · Cited by 34
Personalized pricing versus history-based pricing: implications for privacy policy
Miettinen, T., & Stenbacka, R. (2015) · Information Economics and Policy · doi:10.1016/j.infoecopol.2015.10.003 · Cited by 15
The Past, Present, and Future of Customer Knowledge Management: A Review and Research Agenda
Ourzik, V. Y. (2026) · Knowledge and Process Management · doi:10.1002/kpm.70076 · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Chen, Y., Narasimhan, C., & Zhang, Z. J.
- Venue
- Marketing Science
- Published
- 2001-02
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 23-41
- ISSN
- 0732-2399 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-548X
- OpenAlex
- W2106108342
- Cited by
- 341
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 18.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.