Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Models for the Financial-Performance Effects of Marketing

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbook of Marketing Decision Models

Part of the book series: International Series in Operations Research & Management Science ((ISOR,volume 254))

Abstract

We consider marketing-mix models that explicitly include financial performance criteria. These financial metrics are not only comparable across the marketing mix, they also relate well to investors’ evaluation of the firm. To that extent, we treat marketing as an investment in customer value creation and communication that ultimately leads to shareholder value.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 299.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 379.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 379.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Higher cash flows are, for example, obtained when marketing helps to acquire additional customers, or convinces consumer to spend more. However, the role of marketing could also be to prevent a decline in sales or cash flows through appropriate defensive actions (see, for example, Gatignon et al. 1997; Hauser and Shugan 1983; Roberts 2005 or Roberts et al. 2005 for discussions on defensive marketing strategies).

  2. 2.

    In later models, we will also allow for a direct impact of marketing support on financial metric (the “direct route” in the terminology of Joshi and Hanssens 2010).

  3. 3.

    By accounting definition, “free” or “net” cash flow is operating profit minus investment. Investment is the net change in the firm’s capital. However, “marketing induced capital” such as brand equity or customer equity is currently not recognized on the firm’s balance sheet. For example, a $20 million investment in a plant or equipment is recognized as an asset, whereas a $20 million advertising campaign for a brand is not.

  4. 4.

    An extensive literature exists whether it is reasonable to assume that the investor reaction mechanism is always accurate and complete (given that many of them are not marketing experts, or because investors may be influenced by persuasive, but potentially misleading, communications by company executives and/or other mediating factors). An in-depth coverage of this debate is beyond the scope of the current chapter. We refer to Srinivasan and Hanssens (2009) for a more extensive coverage.

  5. 5.

    This limited-volatility criterion has received less attention in the marketing literature. A notable exception is Fischer et al. (2016), who consider various drivers of (potentially sub-optimal) revenue and cash-flow volatility.

  6. 6.

    We opt for the multiplicative, rather than the linear, model as our base model as (i) it allows for diminishing returns to scale, (ii) offers direct elasticity estimates, and (iii) automatically allows for interaction effects.

  7. 7.

    See in this respect Hanssens (2015).

  8. 8.

    We refer to Hanssens et al. (2001) for a review of other functional specifications that have been regularly used in the literature (pp. 94–115), and for a more in-depth discussion on the use of the lag operator (p. 181).

  9. 9.

    Apart from brand and customer equity, one could also consider a third source of market-based assets: channel equity emerging from collaborative channel relationships (see, for example, Srivastava et al. 2006 for a discussion).

  10. 10.

    Cross-sectional comparisons of brand equity cannot monitor the formation of brand strength, only the equilibrium result of the branding process. By contrast, longitudinal data, possibly across several brands or markets, allow us to infer how marketing spending builds brands over time.

  11. 11.

    Dekimpe and Hanssens (1999) also discuss the case where temporary (rather than sustained) spending has persistent brand-building effects, a situation they call hysteresis. Hanssens et al. (2016), in turn, identify windows of opportunities for opportunistic “brand-building” expenditures.

  12. 12.

    An excellent review on the link between perceptual marketing metrics and financial performance is given in Gupta and Zeithaml (2006; see e.g. their Table 1).

  13. 13.

    Apart from stock returns, marketing flow and stock metrics have also been linked to two other components of shareholder value, systematic risk and idiosyncratic risk (see, among others, Tuli and Bharadwaj 2009 or Osinga et al. 2011).

  14. 14.

    As before, also non-linear specifications could be considered, which may be more appealing from a (subsequent) optimization point of view.

  15. 15.

    Other studies on the stock-market reaction to firms’ innovation activities include, among others, Sorescu et al. (2007) and Sorescu and Spanjol (2008).

  16. 16.

    Through the feedback loops, VAR models also capture the role that (past) stock-price variations play in managerial decision making. It would be useful to extend these models to also incorporate anticipated stock-price variations (foresight) into dynamic marketing models.

References

  • Ailawadi, Kusum L., Donald R. Lehmann, and Scott A. Neslin. 2003. Revenue premium as an outcome measure of brand equity. Journal of Marketing 67 (October): 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambler, Tim. 2003. Marketing and the bottom line, 2nd ed. London, U.K.: FT Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambler, Tim, and John H. Roberts. 2008. Assessing marketing performance: Don’t settle for a silver metric. Journal of Marketing Management 24 (7–8): 733–750.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ataman, Berk, Carl F. Mela, and Harald J. van Heerde. 2008. Building brands. Marketing Science 26 (November–December), 1036–1054.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barwise, Patrick, and John U. Farley. 2003. Which marketing metrics are used and where. Marketing Reports 2: 105–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bass, Frank M. 1969. A new product growth model for consumer durables. Management Science 15 (January): 215–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bass, Frank M., Trichy V. Krishnan, and Dipak C. Jain. 1994. Why the Bass model fits without decision variables. Marketing Science 13 (3): 204–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bharadwaj, Sundar G., Kapil R. Tuli, and Andre Bonfrer. 2011. The impact of brand quality on shareholder wealth. Journal of Marketing 75 (September): 88–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaney, Paul K., Timothy M. Devinney, and Russell S. Winer. 1991. The impact of new product introductions on the market value of firms. Journal of Business 64 (4): 573–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dekimpe, Marnik G., and Dominique M. Hanssens. 1999. Sustained spending and persistent response: A new look at long-term marketing profitability. Journal of Marketing Research 36 (November): 1–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dekimpe, Marnik G., and Dominique M. Hanssens. 2011. The hidden powers of advertising investments. In Liber Amicorum in honor of Peter S.H. Leeflang, ed. Jaap E. Wierenga, Peter C. Verhoef, and Janny C. Hoekstra. Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dekimpe, Marnik G., and Dominique M. Hanssens. 2017. Time-series models in marketing: Insights from persistence modeling. In Handbook of marketing analytics: Methods and applications in marketing, public policy, and litigation support, ed. Natalie Mizik and Dominique M. Hanssens. Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd. (in print).

    Google Scholar 

  • Edeling, Alexander, and Marc Fischer. 2014. Marketing’s impact on firm value: Generalizations from a meta-analysis, Report No. 14-107. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elberse, Anita, and Jehoshua Eliashberg. 2003. Demand and supply dynamics for sequentially released products in international markets: The case of motion pictures. Marketing Science 22 (3): 329–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fama, Eugene, and Kenneth French. 1992. The cross-section of expected stock returns. Journal of Finance 47 (2): 427–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fama, Eugene, and Kenneth French. 1993. Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds. Journal of Financial Economics 33 (1): 3–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farris, Paul W., Neil T. Bendle, Phillip E. Pfeifer, and David J. Reibstein. 2010. Marketing metrics, the definitive guide to measuring marketing performance, 2nd ed. Wharton School Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farris, Paul W., Dominique M. Hanssens, James D. Lenskold, and David J. Reibstein. 2015. Marketing return on investment: Seeking clarity for concept and measurement. Applied Marketing Analytics 1 (3): 267–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, Marc, Hyun S. Shin, and Dominique M. Hanssens. 2016. Brand performance volatility from marketing spending. Management Science 62 (1): 197–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, Claes, Sunil Mithas, Forrest Morgeson, and M.S. Krishnan. 2006. Customer satisfaction and stock prices: High returns, low risk. Journal of Marketing 70 (January): 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forrester, Jay W. 1961. Industrial dynamics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ganesan, Shankar (ed.). 2012. Handbook of marketing and finance. Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gatignon, Hubert, Thomas S. Robertson, and Adam J. Fein. 1997. Incumbent defense strategies against new product entry. International Journal of Research in Marketing 14 (May): 163–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geyskens, Inge, Katrijn Gielens, and Marnik G. Dekimpe. 2002. The market valuation of internet channel additions. Journal of Marketing 66 (April): 102–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gielens, Katrijn, Linda M. Van de Gucht, Jan-Benedict E.M. Steenkamp, and Marnik G. Dekimpe. 2008. Dancing with a giant: The effect of Wal-Mart’s entry into the United Kingdom on the stock prices of European retailers. Journal of Marketing Research 45 (October): 519–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Givon, Moshe, and Dan Horsky. 1990. Untangling the effects of purchase reinforcement and advertising carryover. Marketing Science 9 (2): 171–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, Sunil, and Donald R. Lehmann. 2005. Managing customers as investments. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Wharton School Publishing/Pearson-Financial Times.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, Sunil, and Valarie Zeithaml. 2006. Customer metrics and their impact on financial performance. Marketing Science 25 (6): 718–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, Sunil, Donald R. Lehmann, and Jennifer Ames Stuart. 2004. Valuing customers. Journal of Marketing Research 41 (February): 7–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanssens, Dominique M. (ed.). 2015. Empirical generalizations about marketing impact, 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanssens, Dominique M., Leonard J. Parsons, and Randall L. Schultz. 2001. Market response models, 2nd ed. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanssens, Dominique M., Daniel Thorpe, and Carl Finkbeiner. 2008. Marketing when customer equity matters. Harvard Business Review May, 117–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanssens, Dominique M., Koen H. Pauwels, Shuba Srinivasan, Marc Vanhuele, and Gokhan Yildirim. 2014. Consumer attitude metrics for guiding marketing mix decisions. Marketing Science 33 (July–August), 534–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanssens, Dominique M., Fang Wang, and Xiao-Ping Zhang. 2016. Performance growth and opportunistic marketing spending. International Journal of Research in Marketing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardie, Bruce, Pete Fader, and Eva Ascarza. 2016. Customer base analysis, customer analytics, customer relationship. In Handbook of marketing decision models, ed. Berend Wierenga and Ralf van der Lans (New edition in print).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauser, John R., and Steven M. Shugan. 1983. Defensive marketing strategies. Marketing Science 2 (Autumn): 319–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinz, Oliver, Bernd Skiera, Christian Barrot, and Jan Becker. 2011. An empirical comparison of seeding strategies for viral marketing. Journal of Marketing 75 (November): 55–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horsky, Dan, and Leonard S. Simon. 1983. Advertising and the diffusion of new products. Marketing Science 2 (Winter): 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horsky, Dan, and Patrick Swyngedouw. 1987. Does it pay to change your company’s name? A stock market perspective. Marketing Science 6 (November): 320–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson, Johny K. 1979. Advertising and the S-curve: A new approach. Journal of Marketing Research 16 (August): 346–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joshi, Amit M., and Dominique M. Hanssens. 2009. Movie advertising and the stock market valuation of studios: A case of great expectations? Marketing Science 28 (March-April), 239–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joshi, Amit M., and Dominique M. Hanssens. 2010. The direct and indirect effects of advertising spending on firm value. Journal of Marketing 74 (January): 20–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamakura, Wagner A., and Gary J. Russell. 1993. Measuring brand value with scanner data. International Journal of Research in Marketing 10 (March): 9–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, Kevin L., and Donald R. Lehmann. 2001. The brand value chain: Linking strategic and financial performance. Working paper, Tuck School of Business, Dartmouth College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, V., and Denish Shah (eds). 2015. Handbook of research on customer equity in marketing. Edward-Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leeflang, Peter S.H., Tammo H.A. Bijmolt, Jenny van Doorn, Dominique M. Hanssens, Harald J. van Heerde, Peter C. Verhoef, and Jaap E. Wieringa. 2009. Creating lift versus building the base: Current trends in marketing dynamics. International Journal of Research in Marketing 26 (March): 13–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann, Donald R., and David J. Reibstein. 2006. Marketing metrics and financial performance. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute, Relevant Knowledge Series.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luo, Xueming, Koen H. Pauwels, and Dominique Hanssens. 2012. Time-series models of pricing the impact of marketing on firm value. In Handbook of marketing and finance, ed. Shankar Ganesan, 43–65. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madden, T.J., Frank Fehle, and Susan Fournier. 2006. Brands matter: An empirical demonstration of the creation of shareholder value through branding. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 34 (2): 224–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahajan, Vijay, Eitan Muller, and Subhash Sharma. 1984. An empirical comparison of awareness forecasting models of new product introduction. Marketing Science 3 (Summer): 179–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mela, Carl F., Sunil Gupta, and Donald R. Lehmann. 1997. The long-term impact of promotion and advertising on consumer brand choice. Journal of Marketing Research 34 (2): 248–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitra, Debanjan, and Peter N. Golder. 2006. How does objective quality affect perceived quality: Short-term effects, long-term effects, and asymmetries. Marketing Science 25 (May), 230–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mizik, Natalie, and Robert Jacobson. 2004. Stock return response modeling. In Assessing marketing strategy performance, ed. Christine Moorman, and Donald R. Lehmann. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naik, Prasad. 2015. Marketing dynamics: A primer on estimation and control. Foundations and Trends in Marketing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton, John A., and Frank M. Bass. 1987. A diffusion theory model of adoption and substitution for successive generations of high-technology products. Management Science 33 (September): 1069–1086.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Onishi, Hiroshi, and Puneet Manchanda. 2012. Marketing activity, blogging and sales. International Journal of Research in Marketing 29 (3): 221–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osinga, Ernst C., Peter S.H. Leeflang, Shuba Srinivasan, and Jaap E. Wieringa. 2011. Why do firms invest in consumer advertising with limited sales response? A shareholder perspective. Journal of Marketing 75 (January): 109–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pauwels, Koen, and Dominique M. Hanssens. 2007. Performance regimes and marketing policy shifts. Marketing Science 26 (3): 293–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pauwels, Koen, Jorge Silva-Risso, Shuba Srinivasan, and Dominique M. Hanssens. 2004. New products, sales promotions and firm value, with application to the automobile industry. Journal of Marketing 68 (October): 142–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quelch, John, and Gail J. McGovern. 2006. Boards must measure marketing effectiveness. Directors & Boards, 53–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raassens, Neomie, Stefan H.K. Wuyts, and Inge Geyskens. 2012. The market valuation of outsourcing new product development. Journal of Marketing Research 49 (5), 682–695.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rand, William M., and Roland T. Rust. 2011. Agent- based modeling in marketing: Guidelines for Rigor. International Journal of Research in Marketing 28 (June): 181–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, John H. 2005. Defensive marketing: How a strong incumbent can protect its position. Harvard Business Review 83 (November), 150–157, 168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, John H., Charles J. Nelson, and Pamela D. Morrison. 2005. A prelaunch diffusion model for evaluating market defense strategies. Marketing Science 24 (Winter): 150–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rust, Roland T., Tim Ambler, Gregory S. Carpenter, V. Kumar, and Rajendra K. Srivastava. 2004a. Measuring marketing productivity: Current knowledge and future directions. Journal of Marketing 68 (October): 76–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rust, Roland T., Katherine N. Lemon, and Valarie A. Zeithaml. 2004b. Return on marketing: Using customer equity to focus marketing strategy. Journal of Marketing 68 (January): 109–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sood, Ashish, and Gerard J. Tellis. 2009. Do innovations really payoff? Total stock market returns to innovation. Marketing Science 28 (3): 442–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorescu, Alina, Venkatesh Shankar, and Tarun Kushwaha. 2007. New product preannouncements and shareholder value: Don’t make promises you can’t keep. Journal of Marketing Research 44 (3): 468–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorescu, Alina, and Jelena Spanjol. 2008. Innovation’s effect on firm value and risk: Insights from consumer packaged goods. Journal of Marketing 72 (2): 114–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Srinivasan, Raji, and Sundat Bharadwaj. 2004. Event studies in marketing strategy research. In Assessing marketing strategy performance, ed. Christine Moorman, and Donald R. Lehmann. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Srinivasan, Raji, Gary L. Lilien, and Arvind Rangaswamy. 2004. First in, first out? The effects of network externalities on pioneer survival. Journal of Marketing 68 (January): 41–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Srinivasan, Shuba, and Dominique M. Hanssens. 2009. Marketing and firm value: Metrics, methods, findings and future directions. Journal of Marketing Research 46 (June): 293–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Srinivasan, Shuba, Koen Pauwels, Jorge Silva-Risso, and Dominique M. Hanssens. 2009. Product innovations, advertising, and stock returns. Journal of Marketing 73 (January): 24–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Srinivasan, Shuba, Marc Vanhuele, and Koen H. Pauwels. 2010. Mindset metrics in market response models: An integrative approach. Journal of Marketing Research (4), 672–684.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sriram, S., and Manohar U. Kalwani. 2007. Optimal advertising and promotion budgets in dynamic markets with brand equity as a mediating variable. Management Science 53 (January): 46–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Srivastava, Rajendra, David J. Reibstein, and William S. Woodside. 2005. Metrics for linking marketing to financial performance. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Srivastava, Rajendra, David J. Reibstein, and Yogesh V. Joshi. 2006. Link marketing metrics to financial performance. Technical report, Zyman Institute of Brand Science, Emory University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Srivastava, Rajendra, Tasadduq A. Shervani, and Liam Fahey. 1998. Market-based assets and shareholder value: A framework for analysis. Journal of Marketing 62 (January): 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, Florian, Mark Heitmann, Donald R. Lehmann, and Scott A. Neslin. 2012. The impact of brand equity on customer acquisition, retention, and profit margin. Journal of Marketing 76 (July): 44–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trusov, Michael, Ralf van der Lans, and Xi Chen. 2016. Social networks. In Handbook of marketing decision models, ed. Berend Wierenga and Ralf van der Lans (New edition in print).

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuli, Kapil R., and Sundar G. Bharadwaj. 2009. Customer satisfaction and stock returns risk. Journal of Marketing 73 (November): 184–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuli, Kapil, Anirban Mukherjee, and Marnik G. Dekimpe. 2012. On the value relevance of retailer advertising spending and same-store sales growth. Journal of Retailing 88 (4): 447–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, USA

    Dominique M. Hanssens

  2. Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands

    Marnik G. Dekimpe

  3. KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Marnik G. Dekimpe

Authors
  1. Dominique M. Hanssens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marnik G. Dekimpe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dominique M. Hanssens .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, South Holland, The Netherlands

    Berend Wierenga

  2. Department of Marketing, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Kowloon, Hong Kong

    Ralf van der Lans

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hanssens, D.M., Dekimpe, M.G. (2017). Models for the Financial-Performance Effects of Marketing. In: Wierenga, B., van der Lans, R. (eds) Handbook of Marketing Decision Models. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol 254. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56941-3_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation