IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijbisy/v14y2013i2p182-201.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Direct mailing decisions based on the worst and best practice cross-efficiency evaluations

Author

Listed:
  • Mahdi Mahdiloo
  • Abdollah Noorizadeh
  • Reza Farzipoor Saen

Abstract

The problem argued in the literature of direct mailing decisions generally contains three parts: 1) forecasting customers' future purchase/non-purchase responses; 2) evaluating the effectiveness of various strategies for increasing customers purchase responses; 3) prioritising the customers in terms of their values. A significant body of the literature has been dedicated to the first two components, and in particular, to purchase/non-purchase prediction modelling. However, in the current paper, we do not address these two components, but rather we focus on the third component. To this end, data envelopment analysis (DEA) technique and particularly cross-efficiency formulation of the best practice frontier Charnes, Cooper and Rhodes (CCR) (Charnes et al., 1978) (BPF-CCR) is used to determine those customers who should be put on the first priorities of marketing mailing list. In addition, the cross-efficiency formulation of worst practice frontier CCR (WPF-CCR) is developed to exclude the worst customers from mailing list and save the mailing expenses for the best practice ones. Using a numerical example, the application of the proposed model is demonstrated.

Suggested Citation

  • Mahdi Mahdiloo & Abdollah Noorizadeh & Reza Farzipoor Saen, 2013. "Direct mailing decisions based on the worst and best practice cross-efficiency evaluations," International Journal of Business Information Systems, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 14(2), pages 182-201.
  • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijbisy:v:14:y:2013:i:2:p:182-201
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=56138
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:ids:ijbisy:v:14:y:2013:i:2:p:182-201. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=172 .

    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.