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, July.
    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.
    2. Anya Shchetkina & Ron Berman, 2024. "When Is Heterogeneity Actionable for Personalization?," Papers 2411.16552, arXiv.org.
    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.

    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. Lalit Jain & Zhaoqi Li & Erfan Loghmani & Blake Mason & Hema Yoganarasimhan, 2024. "Effective Adaptive Exploration of Prices and Promotions in Choice-Based Demand Models," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(5), pages 1002-1030, September.
    3. Susan Athey & Guido Imbens, 2016. "The Econometrics of Randomized Experiments," Papers 1607.00698, arXiv.org.
    4. 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, revised Apr 2025.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Ta-Wei Huang & Eva Ascarza, 2024. "Doing More with Less: Overcoming Ineffective Long-Term Targeting Using Short-Term Signals," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(4), pages 863-884, July.
    10. 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.
    11. Sven Resnjanskij & Jens Ruhose & Simon Wiederhold & Ludger Woessmann & Katharina Wedel, 2024. "Can Mentoring Alleviate Family Disadvantage in Adolescence? A Field Experiment to Improve Labor Market Prospects," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 132(3), pages 1013-1062.
    12. Michael C Knaus, 2022. "Double machine learning-based programme evaluation under unconfoundedness [Econometric methods for program evaluation]," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 25(3), pages 602-627.
    13. Jeffrey Smith & Arthur Sweetman, 2016. "Viewpoint: Estimating the causal effects of policies and programs," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 49(3), pages 871-905, August.
    14. Weibin Mo & Yufeng Liu, 2022. "Efficient learning of optimal individualized treatment rules for heteroscedastic or misspecified treatment‐free effect models," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 84(2), pages 440-472, April.
    15. Guido W. Imbens & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2009. "Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(1), pages 5-86, March.
    16. Shaheer, Noman & Chen, Liang & Yi, Jingtao & Li, Sali & Su, Huiwen, 2024. "Network effects, word of mouth, and entry performance: A study of digital freemium products," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 59(6).
    17. Federico A. Bugni & Ivan A. Canay & Azeem M. Shaikh, 2018. "Inference Under Covariate-Adaptive Randomization," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 113(524), pages 1784-1796, October.
    18. Federico A. Bugni & Ivan A. Canay & Azeem M. Shaikh, 2019. "Inference under covariate‐adaptive randomization with multiple treatments," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 10(4), pages 1747-1785, November.
    19. Zhao, Anqi & Ding, Peng, 2024. "No star is good news: A unified look at rerandomization based on p-values from covariate balance tests," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 241(1).
    20. Susan Athey & Kristen Grabarz & Michael Luca & Nils Wernerfelt, 2023. "Digital public health interventions at scale: The impact of social media advertising on beliefs and outcomes related to COVID vaccines," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 120(5), pages 2208110120-, January.

    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.