고객가치 평가모형에 관한 연구: 고객유지율과 Take-Off시점의 영향을 중심으로 (The Effect of Retention Rate and Timing of Take-Off on Valuing Customers)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국소비자학회
· 수록지 정보 : 소비자학연구 / 20권 / 4호 / 287 ~ 304페이지
· 저자명 : 이석규, 정용재, 차태훈

초록

본 연구는 최근의 기업 마케팅전략 목표와 각종 마케팅활동 성과평가에 관련하여, 기업의 고객관리활동을 중심으로 고객가치를 평가하고 이를 토대로 기업가치를 지속적으로 관리 하고자 하는 데 필요한 평가모형을 제시하는데 목적이 있다.
본 연구에서는 한정된 자원을 가지고 있는 기업의 현실적 제약을 고려할 때, 어떠한 형태의 고객수에 바탕을 둔 예측모형을 활용할 수 있는지를 살펴 보았고, 해당 기업에 적합한 활동 별 자원배분 의사결정에 도움이 되는 기본 개념을 제시하였다. 또한 본 연구는 기본 고객가치평가모형에 비하여 다음과 같은 차이점을 보인다. 첫째, Gupta, Lahmann, and Stuart(2004)(이하 GLS)의 고객가치평가모형은 항상 t=0시점에서 기업가치를 평가하였는데, 본 연구에서 제시하는 수정된 고객가치평가모형은 평가시점에서의 고객가치 및 기업가치를 산정함으로써 산출된 기업가치의 시장가치와의 비교 가능성을 제고시켰다. 둘째, Kim, Mahajan, and Srivastava(1995)는 이동통신서비스산업을 대상으로 하였고, GLS(2004)는 성장속도가 빠르면서도 영업손실을 보이고 있는 인터넷기반 기업(닷컴 기업)만을 대상으로 실증분석 하였다. 반면에 본 연구에서는 분석대상기업을 일반기업과 인터넷기업 모두에 확대하여 고객가치평가모형의 적용가능성을 일반화시켰다. 셋째, GLS(2004)의 연구는 한 기업 내에서 각 고객가치구성요소가 가지는 중요성을 상호 비교하였다. 반면, 본 연구에서는 서로 다른 서비스수요특성(고객유지율 및 Take-off시점)을 가지는 기업 간에 고객가치구성요소의 상대적 중요도가 달라질 수 있음을 실증적으로 보여주었다.
본 연구의 결과는 기업 혹은 산업 특성에 맞는 효율적 자원배분이라는 기업의 마케팅목표를 효과적으로 수행하는데 고객가치의 관점에서 고객유지율과 Take-off 시점이 어떤 역할을 하는지에 대한 시사점을 제공하고 있다.

영어초록

The recent movement to improve the marketing productivity has focused on CRM and its measurement. Particularly, as the competition is getting fierce in the market, companies are required to allocate its resources on more productive activities. According to the Customer Equity Model, companies would like to acquire customers, retain them and provide products or render services in a more profitable and efficient way. To meet those goals, companies need to understand the key marketing activities, which will eventually enhance the firm value along with customer values. Studies on assessing the customer lifetime value have been conducted by several researchers. Kim, Mahajan and Srivastava (1995) tested the model for customer lifetime value with actual data at the industry level. They developed a customer lifetime valuing model based on the study of Rappaport (1986), where the value is explained by the variables such as the number of subscribers, margin, investment per a new subscriber, cost of capital, tax rate and growth period. By testing the model with several scenarios on cost of capital and growth period, they found that their model fits well with lower cost of capital in the later stage of lifecycle and with shorter growth period in the early stage of lifecycle. Gupta, Lehmann and Stuart (2004) developed the customer valuing model, which can be applied to the individual company level with public data. Their valuing model includes four key independent variables of customer retention rate, margin, acquisition cost and discount rate. In estimating the number of customers, they basically used the Technical Substitution Model, which was also used in Kim, Mahajan and Srivastava (1995)’s model but they recognized customer cohorts by each time period, which defects by (1-retention rate) every quarter. They selected four companies in their high growth stage to show how their model can explain the firm values of the high growth companies, which the traditional financial valuing models can’t. They also test their model against one established company to show that their approach is capable of providing good estimates of firm value, similar to standard financial models. The result was that their model explained the firm values of three out of five. They also identified that out of the three main CRM activities, acquisition, retention and margin (up-selling), retention is the most crucial factor in determining the firm value. The importance of 1% improvement of retention rate in valuing customers is almost five times greater than a 1% change of discount rate or cost of capital. The study of Gupta, Lehmann and Stuart (2004) is very helpful to the management who want to know how the resources should be allocated among various marketing/ finance activities. The result of their study, however, requires further study in several points. First, they mainly used the data of high growth company in assessing their model’s fit, not considering other types of companies, which might bring some other conclusion. Second, their model estimated the firm value at t=0 regardless of the firm’s current position in its lifecycle. Lastly, they assumed that the retention rate is important in valuing customer compared to acquisition cost, margin and discount rate, which might different from company to company, depending on the company’s situation.
This study recognized the above issues in the previous study. First, Gupta, Lehmann and Stuart (2004)’s customer-valuing model is modified in such a way that it reflects the customer value at the time of valuation. Only the cash flow on and after the time of valuation was considered in the valuation. Secondly, companies in more various industries are selected to confirm the fit of the model in all companies and industries. The selected companies are from Education industry (Mega-Study, YBM, Sisa dot_com, Dae-Kyo), Game & Internet industry (Webzen, NC Soft, NHN, Daum), Telecommunication service industry(SK Telecom, LG Telecom, KTF, Hanaro Telecom) and Security industry(S1). Finally, retention rate and take-off timing were considered in assessing the relative importance of retention rate on customer value against the impact of other valuing factors on the customer value. The modified Gupta, Lehmann and Stuart (2004)’s model was run on the twelve companies from four industries, producing the customer value of each company as of the end of 2004, which was in turn compared with the actual market value of each of the companies at the time of valuation. The result of this study shows that the customer-valuing model explains the value of the selected companies quite well except for the values of game and Internet companies, which have short-term cash generation cycle and low level of customer retention rate. The relative elasticity of each valuing factor on the customer value was assessed by the customer retention rate and timing of take-off. The test result showed that, as in the study of Gupta, Lehmann and Stuart (2004), the 1% improvement in the retention rate has the greatest impact on the firm value among CRM activities. However, the relative importance of retention rate against the discount rate was different, depending on the timing of take-off. That is, the shorter the timing of take-off is the greater the relative importance of retention rate on customer value against that of discount rate. Even though Gupta, Lehmann and Stuart (2004) didn’t say explicitly about the timing impact of take-off on the valuing customers, this result is quite in line with the study of Gupta and his colleagues based on the analysis of the five companies.
This study made several contributions to the customer-valuing models. First, this study considered the valuation timing in estimating the cash flow, which enables the customer- valuing model to be used as practical valuation model. Second, by testing the model’s fit using diversified sample companies, this study enhanced the applicability of the model. Lastly, retention rate and timing of take-off were considered in assessing the relative importance of business activities including acquisition, retention, up-selling and financing or discount rate.

참고자료

· 없음