IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v57y2011i7p1288-1299.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When Acquisition Spoils Retention: Direct Selling vs. Delegation Under CRM

Author

Listed:
  • Yan Dong

    (Robert H. Smith School of Business, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20850)

  • Yuliang Yao

    (College of Business and Economics, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 18015)

  • Tony Haitao Cui

    (Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455)

Abstract

The widespread implementation of customer relationship management technologies in business has allowed companies to increasingly focus on both acquiring and retaining customers. The challenge of designing incentive mechanisms that simultaneously focus on customer acquisition and customer retention comes from the fact that customer acquisition and customer retention are usually separate but intertwined tasks that make providing proper incentives more difficult. The present study develops incentive mechanisms that simultaneously address acquisition and retention of customers with an emphasis on the interactions between them. The main focus of this study is to examine the impact of the negative effect of acquisition on retention, i.e., the spoiling effect, on firm performance under direct selling and delegation of customer acquisition. Our main finding is that the negative effect of acquisition on retention has a significant impact on acquisition and retention efforts and firm profit. In particular, when the customer acquisition and retention are independent, the firm's profit is higher under direct selling than under delegation; however, when acquisition spoils retention, interestingly, the firm's profit may be higher under delegation. Our analysis also finds that the spoiling effect not only reduces the optimal acquisition effort but may also reduce retention effort under both direct selling and delegation. Comparing the optimal efforts under direct selling and delegation, the acquisition effort is always lower under delegation regardless of the spoiling effect, but the retention effort may be higher under delegation with the spoiling effect. Furthermore, when the customer antagonism effect from price promotions is considered, our main results hold regarding the firm's preferences between direct selling and delegation, which demonstrates the robustness of our model. This paper was accepted by Pradeep Chintagunta, marketing.

Suggested Citation

  • Yan Dong & Yuliang Yao & Tony Haitao Cui, 2011. "When Acquisition Spoils Retention: Direct Selling vs. Delegation Under CRM," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(7), pages 1288-1299, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:57:y:2011:i:7:p:1288-1299
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1110.1344
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1110.1344
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.1110.1344?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David A. Schweidel & Peter S. Fader & Eric T. Bradlow, 2008. "A Bivariate Timing Model of Customer Acquisition and Retention," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(5), pages 829-843, 09-10.
    2. Fangruo Chen, 2005. "Salesforce Incentives, Market Information, and Production/Inventory Planning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(1), pages 60-75, January.
    3. Young-Hoon Park & Peter S. Fader, 2004. "Modeling Browsing Behavior at Multiple Websites," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 280-303, May.
    4. Birendra K. Mishra & Ashutosh Prasad, 2004. "Centralized Pricing Versus Delegating Pricing to the Salesforce Under Information Asymmetry," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 21-27, January.
    5. Gounaris, Spiros P., 2005. "Trust and commitment influences on customer retention: insights from business-to-business services," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 126-140, February.
    6. Julian Villanueva & Pradeep Bhardwaj & Sridhar Balasubramanian & Yuxin Chen, 2007. "Customer relationship management in competitive environments: The positive implications of a short-term focus," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 99-129, June.
    7. Pradeep Bhardwaj, 2001. "Delegating Pricing Decisions," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 143-169, September.
    8. Rajiv Lal, 1986. "Technical Note—Delegating Pricing Responsibility to the Salesforce," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 159-168.
    9. Gregory R. Heim & Kingshuk K. Sinha, 2001. "Operational Drivers of Customer Loyalty in Electronic Retailing: An Empirical Analysis of Electronic Food Retailers," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 264-271, July.
    10. Holmstrom, Bengt & Milgrom, Paul, 1991. "Multitask Principal-Agent Analyses: Incentive Contracts, Asset Ownership, and Job Design," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(0), pages 24-52, Special I.
    11. Ram C. Rao, 1990. "Compensating Heterogeneous Salesforces: Some Explicit Solutions," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(4), pages 319-341.
    12. Kissan Joseph & Alex Thevaranjan, 1998. "Monitoring and Incentives in Sales Organizations: An Agency-Theoretic Perspective," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(2), pages 107-123.
    13. Slade, Margaret E, 1996. "Multitask Agency and Contract Choice: An Empirical Exploration," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 37(2), pages 465-486, May.
    14. Eric T. Anderson & Duncan I. Simester, 2010. "Price Stickiness and Customer Antagonism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 125(2), pages 729-765.
    15. Jagmohan S. Raju & V. Srinivasan & Rajiv Lal, 1990. "The Effects of Brand Loyalty on Competitive Price Promotional Strategies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(3), pages 276-304, March.
    16. John R. Hauser & Duncan I. Simester & Birger Wernerfelt, 1994. "Customer Satisfaction Incentives," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 327-350.
    17. Narasimhan, Chakravarthi, 1988. "Competitive Promotional Strategies," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 61(4), pages 427-449, October.
    18. Ajay Kalra & Mengze Shi & Kannan Srinivasan, 2003. "Salesforce Compensation Scheme and Consumer Inferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(5), pages 655-672, May.
    19. Andrés Musalem & Yogesh V. Joshi, 2009. "—How Much Should You Invest in Each Customer Relationship? A Competitive Strategic Approach," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 555-565, 05-06.
    20. Wujin Chu & Preyas S. Desai, 1995. "Channel Coordination Mechanisms for Customer Satisfaction," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(4), pages 343-359.
    21. Farquhar, Jillian Dawes & Panther, Tracy, 2008. "Acquiring and retaining customers in UK banks: An exploratory study," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 9-21.
    22. Eric T. Anderson & Duncan I. Simester, 2004. "Long-Run Effects of Promotion Depth on New Versus Established Customers: Three Field Studies," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 4-20, February.
    23. Jillian Dawes Farquhar, 2005. "Retaining customers in UK financial services: The retailers' tale," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(8), pages 1029-1044, December.
    24. Duncan Simester & Juanjuan Zhang, 2010. "Why Are Bad Products So Hard to Kill?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(7), pages 1161-1179, July.
    25. Dennis Campbell & Frances Frei, 2010. "Cost Structure, Customer Profitability, and Retention Implications of Self-Service Distribution Channels: Evidence from Customer Behavior in an Online Banking Channel," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(1), pages 4-24, January.
    26. Birendra K. Mishra & Ashutosh Prasad, 2005. "Delegating Pricing Decisions in Competitive Markets with Symmetric and Asymmetric Information," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 490-497, March.
    27. Ajay Kalra & Mengze Shi, 2001. "Designing Optimal Sales Contests: A Theoretical Perspective," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 170-193, December.
    28. Joel S. Demski & David E.M. Sappington, 1991. "Resolving Double Moral Hazard Problems with Buyout Agreements," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 22(2), pages 232-240, Summer.
    29. A. M. McGahan & Pankaj Ghemawat, 1994. "Competition to Retain Customers," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 165-176.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yan Dong & Kefeng Xu & Tony Haitao Cui & Yuliang Yao, 2015. "Service Failure Recovery and Prevention: Managing Stockouts in Distribution Channels," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(5), pages 689-701, September.
    2. Eugene Furman & Adam Diamant & Murat Kristal, 2021. "Customer Acquisition and Retention: A Fluid Approach for Staffing," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(11), pages 4236-4257, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Duncan Simester & Juanjuan Zhang, 2014. "Why Do Salespeople Spend So Much Time Lobbying for Low Prices?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(6), pages 796-808, November.
    2. Jian Chen & He Huang & Liming Liu & Hongyan Xu, 2021. "Price Delegation or Not? The Effect of Heterogeneous Sales Agents," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(5), pages 1350-1364, May.
    3. Frenzen, Heiko & Hansen, Ann-Kristin & Krafft, Manfred & Mantrala, Murali K. & Schmidt, Simone, 2010. "Delegation of pricing authority to the sales force: An agency-theoretic perspective of its determinants and impact on performance," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 58-68.
    4. Dai, Yue & Chao, Xiuli, 2016. "Price delegation and salesforce contract design with asymmetric risk aversion coefficient of sales agents," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 31-42.
    5. Sumitro Banerjee & Alex P. Thevaranjan, 2019. "Targeting and salesforce compensation: When sales spill over to unprofitable customers," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 81-104, March.
    6. Tat Y. Chan & Jia Li & Lamar Pierce, 2014. "Compensation and Peer Effects in Competing Sales Teams," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(8), pages 1965-1984, August.
    7. Matthias Kräkel & Anja Schöttner, 2020. "Delegating Pricing Authority to Sales Agents: The Impact of Kickbacks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(6), pages 2686-2705, June.
    8. Noah Lim & Sung H. Ham, 2014. "Relationship Organization and Price Delegation: An Experimental Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(3), pages 586-605, March.
    9. Sumitro Banerjee & Alex P. Thevaranjan, 2013. "How to deal with unprofitable customers? A salesforce compensation perspective," ESMT Research Working Papers ESMT-13-05, ESMT European School of Management and Technology.
    10. Ajay Kalra & Mengze Shi & Kannan Srinivasan, 2003. "Salesforce Compensation Scheme and Consumer Inferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(5), pages 655-672, May.
    11. Soroush Saghafian & Xiuli Chao, 2014. "The impact of operational decisions on the design of salesforce incentives," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(4), pages 320-340, June.
    12. Sandro Shelegia & Joshua Sherman, 2022. "Bargaining at Retail Stores: Evidence from Vienna," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(1), pages 27-36, January.
    13. Robert Phillips & A. Serdar Şimşek & Garrett van Ryzin, 2015. "The Effectiveness of Field Price Discretion: Empirical Evidence from Auto Lending," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(8), pages 1741-1759, August.
    14. Birendra K. Mishra & Ashutosh Prasad, 2005. "Delegating Pricing Decisions in Competitive Markets with Symmetric and Asymmetric Information," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 490-497, March.
    15. Tinglong Dai & Kinshuk Jerath, 2013. "Salesforce Compensation with Inventory Considerations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(11), pages 2490-2501, November.
    16. Birendra K. Mishra & Ashutosh Prasad, 2004. "Centralized Pricing Versus Delegating Pricing to the Salesforce Under Information Asymmetry," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 21-27, January.
    17. Long Gao, 2023. "Optimal Incentives for Salespeople with Learning Potential," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(6), pages 3285-3296, June.
    18. Ling‐Chieh Kung & Ying‐Ju Chen, 2011. "Monitoring the market or the salesperson? The value of information in a multilayer supply chain," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 58(8), pages 743-762, December.
    19. Dmitri Kuksov & J. Miguel Villas-Boas, 2019. "The Performance Measurement Trap," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(1), pages 68-87, January.
    20. Sanjog Misra & Anne Coughlan & Chakravarthi Narasimhan, 2005. "Salesforce Compensation: An Analytical and Empirical Examination of the Agency Theoretic Approach," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 5-39, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:57:y:2011:i:7:p:1288-1299. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.