8/18/2019 Cases_(Chapter_13_pp.344-347)

1/4

  44

Part

Sample Design for

Data

CoUection

and

Sample Size

C A S E S

CASE

4  1

Riverside County Humane Society B)

Like a lot of nonprofits, Riverside County Humane So

ciety RC HS)

is

being expected to do more (services)

with less (funding and donations). In an effort to halt

further decline in the quality of its services and to pro

vide better care for the pets at the center, the Mem

bership Committee of the board of directors began

making plans for a member/contributor drive. The or

ganized drive was the first of its kind for the local

chapter and the committee members wanted it to be as

productive as possible.

As the plans began to

evolve,

the committee realized

that the organization had only scattered bits and pieces

of information about its current members. It did have a

list of members and contributors for the last five years

that had been compiled by the RCHS staff. In addition, it

had access to the results of a survey that had been done

by a staff member several years earlier that focused on

member usage of shelter facilities

and

their opinions of

shelter services and programs. However, the organiza

tion had only sparse knowledge

of

the profile

of

its

typical member

and

contributor, why they belonged or

contributed, how long they had been associated with the

humane society, how the services of the humane society

could

be

improved, and so

on.

The committee members

believed information on these issues was important to

the conduct of a successful membership drive, and thus

they commissioned research to secure t

Initial contacts with other humane society chapters

and interviews with some RCHS staff and board

members produced a number of hypotheses regarding

who is likely to become a member or contributor, why,

how much people are likely to give, and so

on.

The

researchers are interested

in

examining these hy

potheses through a mail survey sent to current mem

bers and contributors. (See Case 2.2, Riverside County

Humane Society (A) for details.)

Sampling P lan

For the last five years, the RCHS had maintained a

master list of members

and

contributors. Contributors

were those who had sent a donation to RCHS but had

not filled out an official form making them members,

which essentially entitled them to receive RCHS's

newsletter. The separate list of members contained all

those who had expressed interest in membership and

who were receiving the newsletter. Both lists were

alphabetical. The contributor list included the amount re

ceived from each person or business, but not the number

of times the person or business

had

given during the last

five years. The member list showed the number of years

each organization or person had belonged.

For purposes of the study, all names of businesses or

other organizations were deleted

and

a separate sample

was taken from each list Approximately 1,050 people

were on the member list and 300 on the contributor list

The researchers decided to take 120 names from the

member list

and

50 from the contributor list. They iden

tified those to be sent questionnaires by drawing two

random numbers-3 and

5 using

a random number

table. They then sent questionnaires to the 3 '

d

11th,

19th,

and so on, person on the member l s ~ and the 5th,

11th,

1

?1h

and so on, person on the contributor list

QU STIONS

1. What is the sampling frame and is it a good frame

for the target population?

2. What type of sample is being used?

3. Can you think of some ways in which the sample

could

be

improved?

CASE

2

Sampling Lead Use

rs

for New

Products

The new, hot thing

in

testing new product concepts

and

product specifications 1s to bring in samples of lead

users

.

the customers who are ··innovators ' in terms

of diffusion of innovation, or those who precede the

early adopters·'-they're the earliest of adopters. The

idea is that these customers are so highly involved in

this product category that they're likely to encounter

needs and desire benefits before the rest of the mar

ketplace might even recognize that there's an issue or

an unmet need. Their customer involvement is also so

high that they're very likely to agree to be involved in

beta testing products or giving their expert opinions

about product design and the like.

QU STIONS

1.

What kind of information can you obtain from a

··lead-user

.

sample?

This document is authorized for use by

Raymond a

, from 3/14/2016 to 4/20/2016, in the course:

MGMT 686.001: Marketing Research - Porter Spring 2016), Rice University.

Any unauthorized use or reproduction of this document is strictly prohibited.

8/18/2019 Cases_(Chapter_13_pp.344-347)

2/4

 2

. Is this a probability sample? A cluster sample? A

stratified sample? A convenience sample?

3. What limitations might there be to a lead-user

sample?

CASE4 .3

Sampling

from

Your

Loyalty

Database

Cain is a holding company that publishes magazines. It

has a large subscription database, across all its maga

zines. It wants to use th is database to get feedback on

some ideas about a new magazine, a new loyalty pro

gram, and a new pricing policy as it makes its period

icals avai lab le online.

Here's what they're thinking

of

doing. They have the

entire database-that's their sampling frame. They're

going to split the customers into good ones (sub

scribe to

two

or more magazines), current customers'

(subscribe to one), and ·'lapsed customers·· those who

subscribed to one or more, more than six months ago

but did not keep up their subscription).

Then, the database is huge and they only want a

sample of 300 of each group good/ currenV lapsed

customers). So once the database is parsed into these

t

hr

ee groups, they're going to take every 50

1

h

customer

in the database until they have 300, then stop and go

onto the next group.

QU STIONS

1. What kind of sampling plan is this?

2. Evaluate the sampling plan.

Table

4 .4 . 1

The Estimates for

the

U.S. Samples

Cases

CASE4 .4

International Differences in

the

Cost

of

Data

345

A multinational bank, MNB, was interested in measur

ing customer satisfaction with its consumer banking

services and financial products. The managers at

MNB

Corporate differed in their opinions regarding

the

form

of the optimal customer satisfaction study: survey,

focus group, interview, and

so on.

So

as

a starting point,

MNB

commissioned bids from marketing research

firms

in

the United States to describe how they would

approach studying their

U.S.

banking customers. In

particular, they asked the bidding firms to

offer

cost

estimates, that

is,

how many customers could be sam

pled given the proposed budget

of 1

5,

000

for th is

re

search project using different techniques.

The bids covered a variety

of

research methods,

which differed in their costs.Th

ey

con

si

dered a personal

interview method in which the customer would be i

n-

tercepted in the bank

an

d asked several questions re

garding service and satisfaction. They compared that

method to the costs of sending out mail surveys to

current customers. Finally, they explored the efficiency

of

placing small, postcard-sized surveys at each teller

station that the

ba

n

ki

ng customer might pick up and

complete and return at their leisure.

MNB gathered the marketing research firms' propo

sals to begin to make a decision

of

how the bank should

approach its customers. In terms

of

outlay expenses,

more postcards could be printed less expensively than

surveys sent or interviewers staffing each of the local

ban

k branches. However, in terms of

re

sponse rates,

somewhat fewer people turned down the personal in

terview than who returned the mail survey or postcard

survey. Table 4.4.1 presents the comparative estimates

Interview

Mail

Survel:'.

Postcards

a.

Research bu dget

15,000

15 ,000 15,0

00

b. Cost per

co

n

tact

25

2

.50

S.25

c. Prospects reached•

2,400 6,000

60

,000

d . R

espo

nse rate

5% 3%

1.5%

e. Estimated net s

am

  e size (c x d ) 120 180

90

0

f. Effective cost per capita (a/ e) 1 25.00 83.33

16.6

7

·F

or

mail and postcard, c

=

alb; for interview

s,

cost

is 25

per hour, times a f

1ve·

hour day,

= 1

25

per d

ay,

for each

in

terviewer. Each of

12

1nterv1ewers (spread across the area local bank branches) wou ld spend

two

weeks ( 10 bank days) approaching and in terviewing customer

s.

Each interviewer on each day would target 20 bank customers, on average.

his document is authorized for use byRaymond a, from 3/14/2016 to 4/20/2016, in the course:

MGMT 686.001: Marketing Research - Porter Spring 2016), Rice University.

Any unauthorized use or reproduction of this document is strictly prohibited.

8/18/2019 Cases_(Chapter_13_pp.344-347)

3/4

346

Part4

Sample Design for Data Collection and Sample Size

J

- : . . ~ ~ ; : : ~ .

:.,

, • ;,_ • - •• , . . .. , • . . • : -

Tabl

e

4  4  2 The

Pr.ojections for Indonesia

Interview M  l Surv

er

P

os

tcards

a. Research budget 15 ,000 15 ,000 15 ,000

b. Cose per concact

12*

2.5 0 .25

c.

Prospects reached

5,000

6,000 60 ,000

d. Response rate

20%* 1.5%* .5%

e.

Estimated

nee

sample size (c x d)

1,000 90 300

f. Effective cost per capita (a/e)

15 .

00

166.67

50.00

'These estimates differ from those for conducting the research n the U.S . labor costs for mterv1

ew1ng

are much less, propens  t

1es

for customers to acquiesce and be interviewed are much greater mail surveys are somewhat less efficient because CD-ROM databases on

addresses are less accurate and postcards are an unfam1l1ar format and are therefore rarely filled out. Given the changes n the interviewing

parameters, If the project duration

is

still two weeks, 25 1nterv1ewers can be deployed, so

5 000

customers would

be

approached.

for the three different techniques. The table shows

cl

early that

in

the

U.S.

, the postcard technique appears

to be the most cos t effect

ive.

Thus the bank managers

are considering implemen ting this research tool.

MNB's second conce

rn is

with a few of its satellite

locations-in particular, the news from abroad

is

that

the Indonesian banking customers are not happy-and

MNB w

an

ts to underst

an

d what is going

on.

Its first

assumpt

io

n w

as

that the bank should proceed with the

pos t

ca

rd me thodology to be able to compare the re

sults in Indonesia to those from the States. However,

they conducted

som

e preliminary investigations

and

found the costs of the methods to

be

quite different.

Th

e bank plans to proceed with personal

in

terviews

in

Indonesia. Co nsider Tables

4.4.1 and

4

.4.2

and answer

the questions that foll

ow.

QU STIONS

1. Under what co

nd

itions might it matter that one

method is used in one country and another method

is used in

an

other?

2. What is the target population under investigation

both in the U.S. and in Indonesia? What are the

dif ferences between the sampling frames of each

of

the three techniques? What customers will each

techniqu

e miss?

3. What other issues must the bank managers con

sider in addition to the cost efficiencies of the three

methods?

C S

 

.5

nline Sampl

es

You're working for a lar

ge

pharmaceutical company on

a brand management team,

and

your team

is

responsible for building two initiatives. Fi rst you'

re

creating a Web site for social support-blogging

by

users and carriers to talk about their drug experiences

but also how their disease impacts their lives, how they

cope, things they've learned, just general, "we'

re

here

for you'· kind of suppor

t.

T

he

second initiative is based

on several pharma-firms' recent successes with flavors

for children's medici

nes. You

r drugs are for adults but

you

figur

e

if it works for kids, why not for adu l

ts

too,

so

you're exploring the possible desire for several flavors

(cherry, strawberry, pina colada, etc.).

Your team would like to get some good consumer

data before proceeding, because each initiative would

eventually require a good level

of

financial backing.

You've got a beta version of the Web site developed,

you're ready for potential-user feedback,

and

your

chemists have created several flavors that are

palatable, which your t

eam

is ready to test.

Your team meets with your boss and his boss. Your

team has proposed a combination of marketing re

search

me

thods including a few focus groups, some

on line surveys,

and

some mall-intercepted interviews.

Your boss is supportive, as you all knew he would be

from previous meetings, but he's keeping quiet be

cause this meeting

is

the first during which the ideas

are being presented to the big boss.

The big boss likes the focus group idea, doesn't

really like the mall-intercept idea but mostly wants re

sults quickly ("yesterday " ) and cheaply (ideally

free-

no line

on

the marketi

ng

budget). You all know he's

exaggerating, b

ut

he's like that, and you know he's not

exaggerating by much. So , he's pushing doing the

testing of the Web site and the flavors via your on line

panel of past customers who have redeemed pre

scriptions for your drugs.

This document is authorized for use byRaymond a, from 3/14/2016 to 4/20/2016, in the course:

MGMT 686.001: Marketing Research - Porter Spring 2016), Rice University.

Any unauthorized use or reproduction of this document is strictly prohibited.

8/18/2019 Cases_(Chapter_13_pp.344-347)

4/4

  E

STIONS

1. The

onl in

e panel was, of course, part of your pro

posal. Shall you just back down  and do what the

big boss wants?

2. What are the characteristics of the e-panel likely to

be?

3.

What kind of information can you obtain from the

online survey?

4.

Will

yo

u

be

ready to launch both initiatives after

conducting solely the online survey?

SE

4  6

Sampling

ambl

 

ng

Americans spend nearly 50 billion annually on gam

bling. That expenditure is more than three times t

he

amount spent on going to the movies and theme parks,

as

alternative means

of

entertainment. State-run lot

teries

and

casino games are the most popular legal

games of chance.

Ga

mbling traditionally held negative connotations,

being associated with immoral or even criminal behavior.

Cri t ics worry that legalized gambling can encourage

compul

sive

gambl

ers,

that it may encourage people to

gamble who can least afford to do

so,

and that casinos

bring an undesirable element to the surrounding

neighbor

hood.

Legalized gambling, however, especially in the form

of state lotteries,

has

largely sanitized the image of

gaming

be

h

av

i

or.

Among people who abstain from

gamblin

g,

fewer peo

pl

e cite moral or relig ious objec

tions, instead offering practical reasons: e.g. they don't

want to spend the money, or they don't have the money

to spend. Proponents claim casinos create jobs and

provide revenue for education that would otherwise be

raised

by

tax hikes.

Secondary data suggest that there

is no

particular

demographic profile of a gambler-people of all walks

of life e.g. age and income) enjoy casinos and lotteries.

Beyond demographics, the commonly held motivations

appear to be a desire to win a large amount of money,

and

a quick and relatively inexpen

sive

form

of

entertainment.

The heterogeneity of the demographics of gamblers

and the homogeneity of their motives have left some

casino managers perplexed

as

to how t

he

consumer

Ca

ses 47

market might be segmented. One hypothesis, based on

collective wisdom,

is

that novice gamblers tend to pre

fer slot machines because they are simple, whereas

more experienced gamblers prefer games like black

jack, baccarat, and craps because they are more stra

tegic in nature. Another frequent assumption is that

people who buy lottery tickets are different from people

who go to casinos,

and

that the two types of games

satisfy different needs.

The Internet introduces yet another medium in

which a consumer might gamble. Although the number

of gamblers online are far fewer than those who

frequent casinos or lotteries, and online gambling rev

enues are far less than nonelectronic games (approxi

mately only

2

billion), the online gambling industry is

expected to enjoy rap id growth.

If a gaming industry representati

ve

were to come to

you and say , I'd like to do some interviews. I want to

know more about what kinds of games my casino vi

si

tors want me to provide. I want to know how much floor

space to allot

to

slots versus blackjack tables. I want to

know why they come to any casino, or my casino, rather

than to the movies or something. Maybe I should just

sell lottery t ickets. How wo

ul

d you address the fol

lowing issues?

QU STIONS

1. What is the relevant population?

2. What would you

re

commend in terms of a sampling

plan- would

you intercept people in (or entering or

exi ting) casinos? Would you talk

to

peo

pl

e buying

lottery tickets at convenience stores? Would you

interview people stroll i

ng

along

in

a shopping mall?

What sampli

ng

frame does each of these locations

presume?

3.

If you wanted to verify the aforementioned as

sumptions (for example, that demographics do not

matter, or that novice versus experienced gamblers

have different game preferences), how would you

modify your sampling plan?

4. How would you try to assess objectivel y whether

there are moral or

re

ligious concerns against gam

bl

ing? What kinds of sampling plans would you

need to avoid, given the likel ihood that they would

shape your conclusions pro or con?

This document is authorized for use by Raymond a, from 3/14/2016 to 4/20/2016, in the course:

MGMT 686.001: Marketing Research - Porter Spring 2016), Rice University.

Any unauthorized use or reproduction of this document is strictly prohibited.