2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.intmar.2013.04.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Donor Segmentation: When Summary Statistics Don't Tell the Whole Story

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The donors' behavior could be described based on the RFM model. The RFM value is a preferred method of segmentation [35], and considered as an easy and effective technique for defining customer segmentation [36]. The RFM analysis proposed by Hughes [37] is a method that differentiates important customers from transaction data according to three attributes.…”
Section: B Rfmmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The donors' behavior could be described based on the RFM model. The RFM value is a preferred method of segmentation [35], and considered as an easy and effective technique for defining customer segmentation [36]. The RFM analysis proposed by Hughes [37] is a method that differentiates important customers from transaction data according to three attributes.…”
Section: B Rfmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Rupp et al [6] showed that charitable donors have been segmented by a range of demographic, psychographic and behavioral factors, as suggested by several studies related to customer segmentation [7,8]. In terms of behavior, RFM (Recency, Frequency, Monetary) is a powerful and well-known analytical method for segmentation due to its reflection of customer behavior (Durango-Cohen et al, 2013). Previous studies used customer transaction data to extract RFM and segment them for most marketing goals.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Potential segmentation criteria range from extrinsic demographic measures through to intrinsic psychographic characteristics (Lee and Chang 2007). Between these extremes are a wide range of behavioral and value-based criteria, which include donation patterns, preferred methods of giving and levels of charitable interest that can be used to inform life time value (LTV) or recency, frequency, monetary value (RFM) analysis (Bennett 2006;Durango-Cohen et al 2013). Little wonder then that non-profit managers struggle to select the most appropriate segmentation criteria (Boenigk and Leipnitz 2016).…”
Section: Donor Segmentationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Unlike the more prevalent a priori segmentation method (where the number and types of segments are determined in advance by the fundraiser) a post-hoc segmentation model could be utilized where the number of segments and segment characteristics is inferred from data collected via questions and feedback from existing donors of Christian faith-related INGOs. Such inferences are drawn from statistical techniques (like K-means clustering) and is deployed in the works of Wedel and Kamakura [81], and Durango-Cohen, Torres, and Durango-Cohen [82]. Such post-hoc segmentation could be useful because the traits of donors of Christian faith-related INGOs are not known.…”
Section: Proposition Development: Christian Faith-related Ingos and Imentioning
confidence: 99%