IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v69y2023i6p3220-3240.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Design and Evaluation of Optimal Free Trials

Author

Listed:
  • Hema Yoganarasimhan

    (Foster School of Business, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195)

  • Ebrahim Barzegary

    (Foster School of Business, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195)

  • Abhishek Pani

    (Bright Machines, San Francisco, California 94107)

Abstract

Free trial promotions are a commonly used customer acquisition strategy in the Software as a Service industry. We use data from a large-scale field experiment to study the effect of trial length on customer-level outcomes. We find that, on average, shorter trial lengths (surprisingly) maximize customer acquisition, retention, and profitability. Next, we examine the mechanism through which trial length affects conversions and rule out the demand cannibalization theory, find support for the consumer learning hypothesis, and show that long stretches of inactivity at the end of the trial are associated with lower conversions. We then develop a personalized targeting policy that allocates the optimal treatment to each user based on individual-level predictions of the outcome of interest (e.g., subscriptions) using a lasso model. We evaluate this policy using the inverse propensity score reward estimator and show that it leads to 6.8% improvement in subscription compared with a uniform 30-days for-all policy. It also performs well on long-term customer retention and revenues in our setting. Further analysis of this policy suggests that skilled and experienced users are more likely to benefit from longer trials, whereas beginners are more responsive to shorter trials. Finally, we show that personalized policies do not always outperform uniform policies, and we should be careful when designing and evaluating personalized policies. In our setting, personalized policies based on other methods (e.g., causal forests, random forests) perform worse than a simple uniform policy that assigns a short trial length to all users.

Suggested Citation

  • Hema Yoganarasimhan & Ebrahim Barzegary & Abhishek Pani, 2023. "Design and Evaluation of Optimal Free Trials," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(6), pages 3220-3240, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:69:y:2023:i:6:p:3220-3240
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2022.4507
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4507
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4507?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eric M. Schwartz & Eric T. Bradlow & Peter S. Fader, 2017. "Customer Acquisition via Display Advertising Using Multi-Armed Bandit Experiments," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(4), pages 500-522, July.
    2. Omid Rafieian & Hema Yoganarasimhan, 2021. "Targeting and Privacy in Mobile Advertising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(2), pages 193-218, March.
    3. Hsing Kenneth Cheng & Yipeng Liu, 2012. "Optimal Software Free Trial Strategy: The Impact of Network Externalities and Consumer Uncertainty," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(2), pages 488-504, June.
    4. Miriam Bruhn & David McKenzie, 2009. "In Pursuit of Balance: Randomization in Practice in Development Field Experiments," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(4), pages 200-232, October.
    5. Hema Yoganarasimhan, 2020. "Search Personalization Using Machine Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(3), pages 1045-1070, March.
    6. Friedman, Jerome H. & Hastie, Trevor & Tibshirani, Rob, 2010. "Regularization Paths for Generalized Linear Models via Coordinate Descent," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 33(i01).
    7. Charles F. Manski, 2004. "Statistical Treatment Rules for Heterogeneous Populations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(4), pages 1221-1246, July.
    8. Bram Foubert & Els Gijsbrechts, 2016. "Try It, You’ll Like It—Or Will You? The Perils of Early Free-Trial Promotions for High-Tech Service Adoption," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(5), pages 810-826, September.
    9. Diana C. Mutz & Robin Pemantle & Philip Pham, 2019. "The Perils of Balance Testing in Experimental Design: Messy Analyses of Clean Data," The American Statistician, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 73(1), pages 32-42, January.
    10. Tyler J. VanderWeele, 2013. "Surrogate Measures and Consistent Surrogates," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 69(3), pages 561-565, September.
    11. Fader, Peter S. & Hardie, Bruce G.S., 2009. "Probability Models for Customer-Base Analysis," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 61-69.
    12. Imbens,Guido W. & Rubin,Donald B., 2015. "Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521885881, October.
    13. Randall A. Lewis & Justin M. Rao, 2015. "The Unfavorable Economics of Measuring the Returns to Advertising," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 130(4), pages 1941-1973.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Günter J. Hitsch & Sanjog Misra & Walter W. Zhang, 2024. "Heterogeneous treatment effects and optimal targeting policy evaluation," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 115-168, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hema Yoganarasimhan & Ebrahim Barzegary & Abhishek Pani, 2020. "Design and Evaluation of Personalized Free Trials," Papers 2006.13420, arXiv.org.
    2. Garrett Johnson & Julian Runge & Eric Seufert, 2022. "Privacy-Centric Digital Advertising: Implications for Research," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 9(1), pages 49-54, June.
    3. Ali Goli & Anja Lambrecht & Hema Yoganarasimhan, 2024. "A Bias Correction Approach for Interference in Ranking Experiments," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(3), pages 590-614, May.
    4. Susan Athey & Guido Imbens, 2016. "The Econometrics of Randomized Experiments," Papers 1607.00698, arXiv.org.
    5. Yuehao Bai & Azeem M. Shaikh & Max Tabord-Meehan, 2024. "A Primer on the Analysis of Randomized Experiments and a Survey of some Recent Advances," Papers 2405.03910, arXiv.org.
    6. Clément de Chaisemartin & Jaime Ramirez-Cuellar, 2024. "At What Level Should One Cluster Standard Errors in Paired and Small-Strata Experiments?," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 193-212, January.
    7. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens & Stefan Wager, 2018. "Approximate residual balancing: debiased inference of average treatment effects in high dimensions," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 80(4), pages 597-623, September.
    8. Suresh de Mel & David McKenzie & Christopher Woodruff, 2019. "Labor Drops: Experimental Evidence on the Return to Additional Labor in Microenterprises," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 11(1), pages 202-235, January.
    9. Pedro Carneiro & Sokbae Lee & Daniel Wilhelm, 2020. "Optimal data collection for randomized control trials," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 23(1), pages 1-31.
    10. Sung Jae Jun & Sokbae Lee, 2024. "Causal Inference Under Outcome-Based Sampling with Monotonicity Assumptions," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(3), pages 998-1009, July.
    11. Rina Friedberg & Julie Tibshirani & Susan Athey & Stefan Wager, 2018. "Local Linear Forests," Papers 1807.11408, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2020.
    12. Aufenanger, Tobias, 2017. "Machine learning to improve experimental design," FAU Discussion Papers in Economics 16/2017, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Institute for Economics, revised 2017.
    13. Brian Quistorff & Gentry Johnson, 2020. "Machine Learning for Experimental Design: Methods for Improved Blocking," Papers 2010.15966, arXiv.org.
    14. Patrizia Lattarulo & Marco Mariani & Laura Razzolini, 2017. "Nudging museums attendance: a field experiment with high school teens," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 41(3), pages 259-277, August.
    15. Omid Rafieian & Hema Yoganarasimhan, 2021. "Targeting and Privacy in Mobile Advertising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(2), pages 193-218, March.
    16. Zhengyuan Zhou & Susan Athey & Stefan Wager, 2023. "Offline Multi-Action Policy Learning: Generalization and Optimization," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 71(1), pages 148-183, January.
    17. Susan Athey & Raj Chetty & Guido Imbens, 2020. "Combining Experimental and Observational Data to Estimate Treatment Effects on Long Term Outcomes," Papers 2006.09676, arXiv.org.
    18. Michael Lechner, 2023. "Causal Machine Learning and its use for public policy," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics, Springer;Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics, vol. 159(1), pages 1-15, December.
    19. Angela Aerry Choi & Daegon Cho & Dobin Yim & Jae Yun Moon & Wonseok Oh, 2019. "When Seeing Helps Believing: The Interactive Effects of Previews and Reviews on E-Book Purchases," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 1164-1183, December.
    20. Jinglong Zhao, 2024. "Experimental Design For Causal Inference Through An Optimization Lens," Papers 2408.09607, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2024.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:69:y:2023:i:6:p:3220-3240. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.