 | Barbara, "The Practical Statistician," enjoys applying practical statistics along with a wealth of knowledge about Polk data to design workable solutions. Polk is a great place for her since there’s always plenty of data for her to work with in her role as Analtyic Consultant. In addition to her love of data, she loves animals and has way too many cats, a huge golden retriever and a horse. When she's not riding her horse, she likes to make baby quilts. She's also known for making the best chocolate chip cookies in the world, or at least at Polk. If she weren’t dealing with data at Polk, she'd be running a free spay/neuter clinic for cats. |
Ditch the Steering Wheel!
Monday, August 2, 2010 by
Barbara Keys
Picture yourself driving a vehicle. The details of your vehicle will differ from person to person depending on the types of vehicles you own (or desire). But certain things are common. If you're driving in the U.S., you're sitting in the front left corner of the passenger cabin (aka, the driver's seat). You have one or both hands on a steering wheel. There is a gear shift, either on the steering wheel or the floor. The brake pedal is on the left and the accelerator is on the right.
Does it have to be that way? We're still using the same basic design for vehicles that Henry Ford used in his first cars more than a hundred years ago. It will be difficult to make quantum leaps in fuel efficiency, including hybrids and electric vehicles, without a fundamental change in our mental picture of a vehicle.
Consider the sub-compact segment, which includes cars like the Ford Fiesta, Toyota Yaris and Honda Fit. There's reasonable concern that these vehicles won't gain wide acceptance in the U.S. market, with comfort and safety being a major concern. Probably the most common use for these cars will be as a commuter car -- a car occupied only by a driver who uses it to commute to and from work with no passengers.
Why not design a minicar for this express purpose? Scrap the traditional car design and start over. Put a single seat in the middle of a small car, leaving open space around it for comfort and safety. Ditch the steering wheel – it takes up too much space and is a danger in crashes. Combine the functions of the steering wheel, gear shift and brake and accelerator pedals into a joystick instead. Borrow ideas from the space program to design a comfortable seat with the latest in safety restraints. Make it comfortable and safe, with really good fuel economy yet with sufficient power to drive on the freeway. And make it economical enough to justify buying and insuring a car strictly for commuting while leaving the SUV in the driveway for other uses. And fun to drive, of course - gotta love a joystick!
I'm no engineer, so I don’t even know if what I suggest is feasible. I describe it only as an example of what we might be able to come up with if we stop using the same basic design and completely reinvent the car.
Now picture yourself driving a vehicle. What does it look like?
Posted by Barbara Keys, Analytic Consultant, Polk (08.02.2010)
To Err is Human...
Tuesday, July 20, 2010 by
Barbara Keys
Anytime you do a direct marketing campaign, whether it's a mail or email campaign or some other kind of direct contact, quality of the targeting is a concern. This is especially true for automotive marketing campaigns that target people that own competitive vehicles – targeting Toyota owners for a Honda sales campaign for example. In this case you are likely relying on an external list provider instead of your own owner database. Inevitably you will find some people on your list who don't own a Toyota. That's bad. But there's another source of list error that might be just as bad.
In the example of targeting Toyota owners, there are two things that can go wrong:
List selection tends to "err" on the side of accuracy, counting it worse to contact someone that doesn't own than to miss someone that does. Where that can sometimes backfire is when someone connected with the campaign owns a Toyota and wants to know why they aren’t on the list.
One situation where it might be desirable to increase coverage at the expense of accuracy is when the marketing cost is small (a postcard mailing, for example).
To err is human, but it still has a cost. How do you balance these competing goals when developing a direct marketing campaign?
Posted by Barbara Keys, Analytic Consultant, Polk (07.20.2010)
In the example of targeting Toyota owners, there are two things that can go wrong:
- You can contact someone who doesn't own a Toyota (a waste of marketing resources)
- You can miss someone who does own a Toyota (a missed opportunity)
- Accuracy: If the greatest majority of people on the list really do own a Toyota, then the list is accurate.
- Coverage: If a high proportion of Toyota owners can be found on the list, then this list has high coverage.
List selection tends to "err" on the side of accuracy, counting it worse to contact someone that doesn't own than to miss someone that does. Where that can sometimes backfire is when someone connected with the campaign owns a Toyota and wants to know why they aren’t on the list.
One situation where it might be desirable to increase coverage at the expense of accuracy is when the marketing cost is small (a postcard mailing, for example).
To err is human, but it still has a cost. How do you balance these competing goals when developing a direct marketing campaign?
Posted by Barbara Keys, Analytic Consultant, Polk (07.20.2010)
Powered by Compendium Blogware