A DIALOGUE ON INDIVIDUALISED MARKETING: ADDRESSING MISPERCEPTIONS

Abstract

This paper provides a summary of published results to date from implementation of Individualised Marketing (IndiMark(r)) interventions around the world. A discussion is provided to explain the methodology and the evaluation process. This paper then presents evidence and logic that refutes allegations raised by Professor Peter Stopher of the University of Sydney at a public forum in England in June 2003 and repeated in his ATRF 2003 paper. Similar responses were previously provided to Stopher after the June 2003 Forum, but the arguments presented in his ATRF paper are essentially unchanged. The paper concludes that the reduction in car as driver trips for all IndiMark(r) programs is within a range of 6 percent to 14 percent across target populations (broadly 5.5-13 percent allowing for non-contactable and non-responding households), demonstrating that IndiMark(r) is robust and broadly applicable for urban areas. (a) For the covering entry of this conference, please see ITRD abstract no. E210413.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 8 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.