IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v70y2024i6p3841-3855.html

Targeting for Long-Term Outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Jeremy Yang

    (Harvard Business School, Boston, Massachusetts 02163)

  • Dean Eckles

    (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142)

  • Paramveer Dhillon

    (University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109)

  • Sinan Aral

    (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142)

Abstract

Decision makers often want to target interventions so as to maximize an outcome that is observed only in the long term. This typically requires delaying decisions until the outcome is observed or relying on simple short-term proxies for the long-term outcome. Here, we build on the statistical surrogacy and policy learning literatures to impute the missing long-term outcomes and then approximate the optimal targeting policy on the imputed outcomes via a doubly robust approach. We first show that conditions for the validity of average treatment effect estimation with imputed outcomes are also sufficient for valid policy evaluation and optimization; furthermore, these conditions can be somewhat relaxed for policy optimization. We apply our approach in two large-scale proactive churn management experiments at The Boston Globe by targeting optimal discounts to its digital subscribers with the aim of maximizing long-term revenue. Using the first experiment, we evaluate this approach empirically by comparing the policy learned using imputed outcomes with a policy learned on the ground-truth, long-term outcomes. The performance of these two policies is statistically indistinguishable, and we rule out large losses from relying on surrogates. Our approach also outperforms a policy learned on short-term proxies for the long-term outcome. In a second field experiment, we implement the optimal targeting policy with additional randomized exploration, which allows us to update the optimal policy for future subscribers. Over three years, our approach had a net-positive revenue impact in the range of $4–$5 million compared with the status quo.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeremy Yang & Dean Eckles & Paramveer Dhillon & Sinan Aral, 2024. "Targeting for Long-Term Outcomes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 70(6), pages 3841-3855, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:70:y:2024:i:6:p:3841-3855
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2023.4881
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2023.4881
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.2023.4881?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. Duncan Simester & Artem Timoshenko & Spyros I. Zoumpoulis, 2020. "Efficiently Evaluating Targeting Policies: Improving on Champion vs. Challenger Experiments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(8), pages 3412-3424, August.
    2. Zhichao Jiang & Peng Ding & Zhi Geng, 2016. "Principal causal effect identification and surrogate end point evaluation by multiple trials," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 78(4), pages 829-848, September.
    3. Stefan Wager & Susan Athey, 2018. "Estimation and Inference of Heterogeneous Treatment Effects using Random Forests," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 113(523), pages 1228-1242, July.
    4. Susan Athey & Raj Chetty & Guido W. Imbens & Hyunseung Kang, 2019. "The Surrogate Index: Combining Short-Term Proxies to Estimate Long-Term Treatment Effects More Rapidly and Precisely," NBER Working Papers 26463, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Brett R. Gordon & Florian Zettelmeyer & Neha Bhargava & Dan Chapsky, 2019. "A Comparison of Approaches to Advertising Measurement: Evidence from Big Field Experiments at Facebook," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(2), pages 193-225, March.
    6. Victor Chernozhukov & Juan Carlos Escanciano & Hidehiko Ichimura & Whitney K. Newey & James M. Robins, 2022. "Locally Robust Semiparametric Estimation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(4), pages 1501-1535, July.
    7. Marshall M. Joffe & Tom Greene, 2009. "Related Causal Frameworks for Surrogate Outcomes," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 65(2), pages 530-538, June.
    8. Zhengyuan Zhou & Susan Athey & Stefan Wager, 2023. "Offline Multi-Action Policy Learning: Generalization and Optimization," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 71(1), pages 148-183, January.
    9. Farrell, Max H., 2015. "Robust inference on average treatment effects with possibly more covariates than observations," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 189(1), pages 1-23.
    10. Hua Chen & Zhi Geng & Jinzhu Jia, 2007. "Criteria for surrogate end points," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 69(5), pages 919-932, November.
    11. Aurélie Lemmens & Sunil Gupta, 2020. "Managing Churn to Maximize Profits," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(5), pages 956-973, September.
    12. Rajeev H. Dehejia & Sadek Wahba, 2002. "Propensity Score-Matching Methods For Nonexperimental Causal Studies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(1), pages 151-161, February.
    13. Dean Eckles & Maurits Kaptein, 2019. "Bootstrap Thompson Sampling and Sequential Decision Problems in the Behavioral Sciences," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(2), pages 21582440198, June.
    14. Tyler J. VanderWeele, 2013. "Surrogate Measures and Consistent Surrogates," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 69(3), pages 561-565, September.
    15. Steffen L. Lauritzen, 2004. "Discussion on Causality," Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, Danish Society for Theoretical Statistics;Finnish Statistical Society;Norwegian Statistical Association;Swedish Statistical Association, vol. 31(2), pages 189-193, June.
    16. Jinyong Hahn, 1998. "On the Role of the Propensity Score in Efficient Semiparametric Estimation of Average Treatment Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(2), pages 315-332, March.
    17. Miguel Godinho de Matos & Pedro Ferreira & Rodrigo Belo, 2018. "Target the Ego or Target the Group: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment in Proactive Churn Management," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(5), pages 793-811, September.
    18. Susan Athey & Stefan Wager, 2021. "Policy Learning With Observational Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(1), pages 133-161, January.
    19. Jane Xu & Scott L. Zeger, 2001. "The Evaluation of Multiple Surrogate Endpoints," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 57(1), pages 81-87, March.
    20. Dean Eckles & Eytan Bakshy, 2021. "Bias and High-Dimensional Adjustment in Observational Studies of Peer Effects," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 116(534), pages 507-517, April.
    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. Athey, Susan & Keleher, Niall & Spiess, Jann, 2025. "Machine learning who to nudge: Causal vs predictive targeting in a field experiment on student financial aid renewal," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 249(PC).
    2. Yuyan Wang & Long Tao & Xian Xing Zhang, 2025. "Recommending for a Multi-Sided Marketplace: A Multi-Objective Hierarchical Approach," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(1), pages 1-29, January.

    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. Carlos Fernández-Loría & Foster Provost, 2022. "Causal Decision Making and Causal Effect Estimation Are Not the Same…and Why It Matters," INFORMS Joural on Data Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(1), pages 4-16, April.
    2. Ganesh Karapakula, 2023. "Stable Probability Weighting: Large-Sample and Finite-Sample Estimation and Inference Methods for Heterogeneous Causal Effects of Multivalued Treatments Under Limited Overlap," Papers 2301.05703, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2023.
    3. Kyle Colangelo & Ying-Ying Lee, 2019. "Double debiased machine learning nonparametric inference with continuous treatments," CeMMAP working papers CWP72/19, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    4. Kyle Colangelo & Ying-Ying Lee, 2019. "Double debiased machine learning nonparametric inference with continuous treatments," CeMMAP working papers CWP54/19, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    5. Kyle Colangelo & Ying-Ying Lee, 2020. "Double Debiased Machine Learning Nonparametric Inference with Continuous Treatments," Papers 2004.03036, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2023.
    6. Artem Timoshenko & Caio Waisman, 2025. "Profit-Aligned CATE Estimation: Reconciling Policy Learning and Inference," Papers 2512.13400, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2026.
    7. Huber, Martin, 2019. "An introduction to flexible methods for policy evaluation," FSES Working Papers 504, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Freiburg/Fribourg Switzerland.
    8. Sasaki, Yuya & Ura, Takuya, 2023. "Estimation and inference for policy relevant treatment effects," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 234(2), pages 394-450.
    9. Fatema Shafie Khorassani & Jeremy M. G. Taylor & Niko Kaciroti & Michael R. Elliott, 2023. "Incorporating Covariates into Measures of Surrogate Paradox Risk," Stats, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-23, February.
    10. Carlos Fernández-Loría & Foster Provost, 2025. "Observational vs. Experimental Data When Making Automated Decisions Using Machine Learning," INFORMS Joural on Data Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(3), pages 197-229, July.
    11. Ron Berman & Elea McDonnell Feit, 2024. "Latent Stratification for Incrementality Experiments," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(4), pages 903-917, July.
    12. Ting-Chih Hung & Yu-Chang Chen, 2026. "The Proximal Surrogate Index: Long-Term Treatment Effects under Unobserved Confounding," Papers 2601.17712, arXiv.org.
    13. Fayssal Ayad, 2026. "Lessons of the Vergangenheit: optimal policy learning of innovation subsidies," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 70(4), pages 1-37, April.
    14. Guido Imbens & Nathan Kallus & Xiaojie Mao & Yuhao Wang, 2022. "Long-term Causal Inference Under Persistent Confounding via Data Combination," Papers 2202.07234, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2024.
    15. Max H. Farrell & Tengyuan Liang & Sanjog Misra, 2021. "Deep Neural Networks for Estimation and Inference," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(1), pages 181-213, January.
    16. Zhichao Jiang & Peng Ding & Zhi Geng, 2016. "Principal causal effect identification and surrogate end point evaluation by multiple trials," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 78(4), pages 829-848, September.
    17. Xuan Wang & Layla Parast & Larry Han & Lu Tian & Tianxi Cai, 2023. "Robust approach to combining multiple markers to improve surrogacy," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(2), pages 788-798, June.
    18. Athey, Susan & Imbens, Guido W. & Metzger, Jonas & Munro, Evan, 2024. "Using Wasserstein Generative Adversarial Networks for the design of Monte Carlo simulations," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 240(2).
    19. Michael C. Knaus, 2021. "A double machine learning approach to estimate the effects of musical practice on student’s skills," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 184(1), pages 282-300, January.
    20. Bokelmann, Björn & Lessmann, Stefan, 2024. "Improving uplift model evaluation on randomized controlled trial data," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 313(2), pages 691-707.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:70:y:2024:i:6:p:3841-3855. 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.