IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormksc/v28y2009i3p424-441.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Heterogeneous Learning and the Targeting of Marketing Communication for New Products

Author

Listed:
  • Sridhar Narayanan

    (Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305)

  • Puneet Manchanda

    (Ross School of Business, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109)

Abstract

New product launches are often accompanied by extensive marketing communication campaigns. Firms' allocation decisions for these marketing communication expenditures have two dimensions—across consumers and over time. This allocation problem is different relative to the problem of allocation of resources for existing products. In the case of new products, consumers are uncertain about their quality and learn about the products through marketing communication. Furthermore, different consumers may have different rates of learning about product quality; i.e., there may be heterogeneous learning. Thus, consumer responsiveness to marketing communication could vary along two dimensions. For each consumer, this responsiveness would vary over time, as she learns about product quality. Across consumers, there would be differences in responsiveness in each time period. For optimal allocation of marketing communication across both consumers and time, firms would need estimates of how consumer responsiveness varies across consumers and over time. Past studies have typically focused on one of these two dimensions in which responsiveness varies. They have either looked at heterogeneity in responsiveness across agents or the variation in responsiveness over time. In the context of new products, past research has looked at how consumer learning about product quality causes responsiveness to vary over time. In this study, we build a model that allows for heterogeneous learning rates and obtain individual-level learning parameters for each consumer. We use a novel and rich panel data set that allows us to estimate these model parameters. To obtain individual-level estimates of learning, we add a hierarchical Bayesian structure to the Bayesian learning model. We exploit the natural hierarchy in the Bayesian learning process to incorporate it in the hierarchical Bayesian model. We use data augmentation, coupled with the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm, to make inferences about individual-level parameters of learning. We conduct this analysis on a unique panel data set of physicians where we observe prescription decisions and detailing (i.e., sales-force effort) at the individual physician level for a new prescription drug category. Our results show that there is significant heterogeneity across physicians in their rates of learning about the quality of new drugs. We also find that there are asymmetries in the temporal evolution of responsiveness of physicians to detailing—physicians who are more responsive to detailing in early periods are less responsive later on and vice versa. These findings have interesting implications for the targeting of detailing across physicians and over time. We find that firms could increase their revenue if they took these temporal and cross-sectional differences in responsiveness into account while deciding on allocations of detailing.

Suggested Citation

  • Sridhar Narayanan & Puneet Manchanda, 2009. "Heterogeneous Learning and the Targeting of Marketing Communication for New Products," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 424-441, 05-06.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:28:y:2009:i:3:p:424-441
    DOI: 10.1287/mksc.1080.0410
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1080.0410
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mksc.1080.0410?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. Peter E. Rossi & Robert E. McCulloch & Greg M. Allenby, 1996. "The Value of Purchase History Data in Target Marketing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 321-340.
    2. Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 1996. "Decision-Making Under Uncertainty: Capturing Dynamic Brand Choice Processes in Turbulent Consumer Goods Markets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20.
    3. Gregory S. Crawford & Matthew Shum, 2005. "Uncertainty and Learning in Pharmaceutical Demand," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 73(4), pages 1137-1173, July.
    4. Hurwitz, Mark A & Caves, Richard E, 1988. "Persuasion or Information? Promotion and the Shares of Brand Name and Generic Pharmaceuticals," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(2), pages 299-320, October.
    5. Gary L. Lilien, 1974. "A Modified Linear Learning Model of Buyer Behavior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(7), pages 1027-1036, March.
    6. Greg Shaffer & Z. John Zhang, 1995. "Competitive Coupon Targeting," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(4), pages 395-416.
    7. Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 2000. "Customer Poaching and Brand Switching," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(4), pages 634-657, Winter.
    8. Dmitri Byzalov & Ron Shachar, 2004. "The Risk Reduction Role of Advertising," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 2(4), pages 283-320, December.
    9. Leffler, Keith B, 1981. "Persuasion or Information? The Economics of Prescription Drug Advertising," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(1), pages 45-74, April.
    10. Daniel A. Ackerberg, 2003. "Advertising, learning, and consumer choice in experience good markets: an empirical examination," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 44(3), pages 1007-1040, August.
    11. Puneet Manchanda & Pradeep K. Chintagunta, 2004. "Responsiveness of Physician Prescription Behavior to Salesforce Effort: An Individual Level Analysis," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 15(2_3), pages 129-145, July.
    12. Ganesh Iyer & David Soberman & J. Miguel Villas-Boas, 2005. "The Targeting of Advertising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 461-476, May.
    13. Stoneman, P, 1981. "Intra-Firm Diffusion, Bayesian Learning and Profitability," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 91(362), pages 375-388, June.
    14. Robert J. Meyer & Arvind Sathi, 1985. "A Multiattribute Model of Consumer Choice During Product Learning," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(1), pages 41-61.
    15. J. Miguel Villas-Boas, 1999. "Dynamic Competition with Customer Recognition," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 30(4), pages 604-631, Winter.
    16. John H. Roberts & Glen L. Urban, 1988. "Modeling Multiattribute Utility, Risk, and Belief Dynamics for New Consumer Durable Brand Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 167-185, February.
    17. Gary L. Lilien & Ambar G. Rao & Shlomo Kalish, 1981. "Bayesian Estimation and Control of Detailing Effort in a Repeat Purchase Diffusion Environment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(5), pages 493-506, May.
    18. Wagner A. Kamakura & Bruce S. Kossar & Michel Wedel, 2004. "Identifying Innovators for the Cross-Selling of New Products," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(8), pages 1120-1133, August.
    19. Coscelli, Andrea & Shum, Matthew, 2004. "An empirical model of learning and patient spillovers in new drug entry," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 122(2), pages 213-246, October.
    20. Puneet Manchanda & Ying Xie & Nara Youn, 2008. "The Role of Targeted Communication and Contagion in Product Adoption," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(6), pages 961-976, 11-12.
    21. Rizzo, John A, 1999. "Advertising and Competition in the Ethical Pharmaceutical Industry: The Case of Antihypertensive Drugs," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 42(1), pages 89-116, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Andrew T. Ching & Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 2013. "Invited Paper ---Learning Models: An Assessment of Progress, Challenges, and New Developments," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(6), pages 913-938, November.
    2. Andrew T. Ching & Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 2013. "Learning Models: An Assessment of Progress, Challenges and New Developments," Economics Papers 2013-W07, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    3. Kremer, Sara T.M. & Bijmolt, Tammo H.A. & Leeflang, Peter S.H. & Wieringa, Jaap E., 2008. "Generalizations on the effectiveness of pharmaceutical promotional expenditures," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 234-246.
    4. Jie Bai, 2016. "Melons as Lemons: Asymmetric Information, Consumer Learning and Seller Reputation," Natural Field Experiments 00540, The Field Experiments Website.
    5. Andrew T. Ching & Masakazu Ishihara, 2012. "Measuring the Informative and Persuasive Roles of Detailing on Prescribing Decisions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(7), pages 1374-1387, July.
    6. Tat Chan & Chakravarthi Narasimhan & Ying Xie, 2013. "Treatment Effectiveness and Side Effects: A Model of Physician Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(6), pages 1309-1325, June.
    7. Dhaval M. Dave, 2013. "Effects of Pharmaceutical Promotion: A Review and Assessment," NBER Working Papers 18830, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Stole, Lars A., 2007. "Price Discrimination and Competition," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: Mark Armstrong & Robert Porter (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 34, pages 2221-2299, Elsevier.
    9. Andrew Ching & Susumu Imai & Masakazu Ishihara & Neelam Jain, 2012. "A practitioner’s guide to Bayesian estimation of discrete choice dynamic programming models," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 151-196, June.
    10. Ching, Andrew T. & Erdem, Tülin & Keane, Michael P., 2014. "A simple method to estimate the roles of learning, inventories and category consideration in consumer choice," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 60-72.
    11. Chen, Yuxin & Zhang, Z. John, 2009. "Dynamic targeted pricing with strategic consumers," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 43-50, January.
    12. Ruiz-Conde, Enar & Wieringa, Jaap E. & Leeflang, Peter S.H., 2014. "Competitive diffusion of new prescription drugs: The role of pharmaceutical marketing investment," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 49-63.
    13. Guofang Huang & Matthew Shum & Wei Tan, 2019. "Is pharmaceutical detailing informative? Evidence from contraindicated drug prescriptions," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 135-160, June.
    14. Xu, Yan, 2017. "Essays on preference formation and home production," Other publications TiSEM b028fd7e-53ba-4ff6-97eb-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    15. Song Lin & Juanjuan Zhang & John R. Hauser, 2015. "Learning from Experience, Simply," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(1), pages 1-19, January.
    16. Pradeep Chintagunta & Renna Jiang & Ginger Jin, 2009. "Information, learning, and drug diffusion: The case of Cox-2 inhibitors," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 7(4), pages 399-443, December.
    17. Bronnenberg, Bart & Dube, Jean-Pierre, 2016. "The Formation of Consumer Brand Preferences," CEPR Discussion Papers 11648, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Jiwoong Shin & K. Sudhir, 2010. "A Customer Management Dilemma: When Is It Profitable to Reward One's Own Customers?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(4), pages 671-689, 07-08.
    19. Nuno Camacho & Bas Donkers & Stefan Stremersch, 2011. "Predictably Non-Bayesian: Quantifying Salience Effects in Physician Learning About Drug Quality," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 305-320, 03-04.
    20. Bruno Jullien & Markus Reisinger & Patrick Rey, 2023. "Personalized Pricing and Distribution Strategies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(3), pages 1687-1702, March.

    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:ormksc:v:28:y:2009:i:3:p:424-441. 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.