MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2278479652

To Grow Profitably, Manage Customer Value, Not Customer Relationships

2003· article· en· W2278479652 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
E. Armour, Lee Mergy

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe Journal of Bank Cost & Management Accounting · 2003
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBusiness, Management and Accounting
ThématiqueCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCustomer profitabilityBusinessCustomer retentionCustomer equityMarketingShareholder valueCustomer to customerCustomer lifetime valueCustomer delightCustomer advocacyProfitability indexFinanceFinancial institutionLiberian dollarReturn on investmentShareholderEconomicsCorporate governanceMicroeconomicsProfit (economics)Service (business)
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

It's a zero-sum game and the clock is ticking, but only a few players have the right 'play book.' Senior executives at virtually every major financial institution are frustrated. They have seen minimal return on huge investments in customer relationship management - well over $2 billion annually in the United States alone.1 Often the return on these investments hasn't covered their dollar cost or the opportunity cost of management time and energy, let alone provided an adequate return to shareholders. Yes, there have been a few success stories, but for the most part these investments have been disappointing. Consequently, in a period of slow economic growth and intense profitability pressures, many companies are facing a key strategic choice: whether to continue investing in CRM - and, if so, how? We believe that customer management initiatives have the potential to drive tremendous improvements in profitable growth and warrant continued investment by many large financial institutions. But most firms must take a dramatically different approach if they want to create true strategic advantages. Companies unwilling or unable to change their traditional approach are likely to lose (gradually at first and more rapidly in three to five years) their ability to retain their most profitable customers and generate reasonable shareholder returns. First and foremost, they must shift their frame of mind from managing customer relationships to managing customer value. Managing customer value is a two-way street: It entails managing both the value provided by the company to customers and the value of customers to the company. Decisions are based on a detailed understanding of the value that customers place on the benefits they receive and on the economics of delivering those benefits. In this article, we address four questions that executives should ask themselves when considering additional investment in customer management initiatives: 1. Can I deliver meaningful profitable growth through a more systematic management of my customer relationships? 2. What constraints are keeping me from translating this customer value into value for the company? 3. How should I best pursue future investments in managing customer value? 4. Are there natural next steps I can take today to advance my company's capabilities? Profitable Growth Potential The profitable growth potential (top-line and bottom-line) of improved customer management is particularly large in financial services. Analysis has shown time and again that the economic profits (net income less a charge for equity capital employed) of financial institutions are highly concentrated in the top two to three deciles of customers. In many businesses, the top decile alone accounts for more than 50% of total economic profits. Enriching the customer mix toward the more profitable deciles, reducing the numbers of unprofitable customers and capturing a greater share of total customer spending have all proven to be powerful ways of increasing long-term intrinsic value. Can these opportunities be more effectively pursued through a customer value approach? Several early leaders have reported major improvements in performance. Royal Bank of Canada is considered a pioneer in customer value management, and its returns to shareholders have substantially exceeded the S&P 500 Financial Index over the past five years, creating an additional $8.6 billion in shareholder wealth. Although the bank is fairly tightlipped about its success, it has cited an increase in its direct-marketing response rate to as much as 40%, compared to a 2-4% average across industries. The National Australia Bank has also demonstrated dramatic improvements in performance from its early initiatives, with customer penetration and share of wallet in the small business sector rising to market-leading levels of 31% and 77%, respectively. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,045
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,150

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,008
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,004
Communication savante0,0160,014
Science ouverte0,0010,005
Intégrité de la recherche0,0050,005
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0450,039

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,040
Tête enseignante GPT0,263
Écart entre enseignants0,224 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2003
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe Journal of Bank Cost & Management AccountingMême sujetCustomer Service Quality and LoyaltyTravaux en français237 207