1. Technical Field
The present invention relates to a system and associated method for ordering marketing offers for offering to a candidate.
2. Related Art
Selling a plurality of services to a customer typically requires a complicated series of steps. Therefore there exists a need for a simple procedure to sell a plurality of services to a customer.
The present invention provides a database system, comprising:
a first database structure storing a first list of candidates;
a second database structure storing a second list identifying marketing offers;
a third database structure storing a third list identifying optimized marketing events for a first candidate from said first list; and
a database manager software application stored on a computer readable medium, wherein said database manager software application comprises a comparison tool and an optimization tool, wherein said comparison tool is for comparing each of said optimized marketing events from said third list to each of said marketing offers from said second list in response to an inbound communication from said first candidate, wherein said optimization tool is for extracting a first group of marketing offers from said second list, and wherein each marketing offer from said first group comprises a same classification as any of said optimized marketing events from said third list.
The present invention provides a selection method, comprising:
providing a database system comprising a database manager software application, a first database structure storing a first list of candidates, a second database structure storing a second list identifying marketing offers, and a third database structure storing a third list identifying optimized marketing events for a first candidate from said first list, wherein each marketing event from said first list comprises a marketing offer and an identified channel means for communicating said marketing offer, wherein said database manager software application is stored on a computer readable medium, and wherein said database manager software application comprises a comparison tool and an optimization tool;
comparing by said comparison tool, each of said optimized marketing events from said third list to each of said marketing offers from said second list in response to an inbound communication from said first candidate; and
extracting by said optimization tool, a first group of marketing offers from said second list, wherein each marketing offer from said first group comprises a same classification as any of said optimized marketing events from said third list.
The present invention provides a process for integrating computing infrastructure, comprising integrating computer-readable code into a computing system, wherein the code in combination with the computing system comprises a database system comprising a database manager software application, a first database structure storing a first list of candidates, a second database structure storing a second list identifying marketing offers, and a third database structure storing a third list identifying optimized marketing events for a first candidate from said first list, wherein each marketing event from said first list comprises a marketing offer and an identified channel means for communicating said marketing offer, wherein said database manager software application is stored on a computer readable medium, and wherein said database manager software application comprises a comparison tool and an optimization tool, and wherein the code in combination with the computing system is adapted to implement a method for performing the steps of:
comparing by said comparison tool, each of said optimized marketing events from said third list to each of said marketing offers from said second list in response to an inbound communication from said first candidate; and
extracting by said optimization tool, a first group of marketing offers from said second list, wherein each marketing offer from said first group comprises a same classification as any of said optimized marketing events from said third list.
The present invention provides A computer program product, comprising a computer usable medium having a computer readable program code embodied therein, said computer readable program code comprising an algorithm adapted to implement a selection method within a database system, said database system comprising a database manager software application, a first database structure storing a first list of candidates, a second database structure storing a second list identifying marketing offers, and a third database structure storing a third list identifying optimized marketing events for a first candidate from said first list, wherein each marketing event from said first list comprises a marketing offer and an identified channel means for communicating said marketing offer, wherein said database manager software application is stored on a computer readable medium, said method comprising the steps of:
comparing by said comparison tool, each of said optimized marketing events from said third list to each of said marketing offers from said second list in response to an inbound communication from said first candidate; and
extracting by said optimization tool, a first group of marketing offers from said second list, wherein each marketing offer from said first group comprises a same classification as any of said optimized marketing events from said third list.
The present invention advantageously provides a system and associated method to implement a simple procedure to sell a plurality of services to a customer.
Table 1 illustrates an example of sorted ranking scores with constraint data applied and subtracted from the budget.
The first row comprises the highest ranked marketing event ($50 rank). The total budget is $30 and the associated constraint data is $10. The constraint data ($10) is subtracted from the budget ($30) for the highest ranked marketing event leaving $20 in the budget for offering more marketing events to the candidate. The second row comprises the next ranked marketing event ($40 rank). The constraint data ($5) is subtracted from the budget ($20) for the next ranked marketing event ($40 rank) leaving $15 in the budget offering more marketing events to the candidate. The optimization tool goes through each ranked marketing event until there is no more money left in the budget (see row 5) thereby eliminating any more offerings for marketing events. The first four rows comprise the marketing events to be offered sequentially to the candidate. The fifth row comprises an eliminated marketing event due to an exhausted budget ($0).
An example of an implementation for dynamically ordering marketing events for a candidate using the database system 2 of
Marketing Offers
The 6 marketing offers are multiplied by the 4 channels to produce 24 marketing events. Each marketing event comprises a drop date and therefore a calendar of events. A first candidate is scored for each of the 24 marketing events with propensity to respond (i.e., a response probability score) to each of the marketing events. All 24 response probability scores are calculated in parallel and each score comprises a range between 0 and 1 with 1 comprising the highest propensity to respond to a marketing event and 0 comprising the lowest propensity to respond to a marketing event. Each of the marketing events comprises an expected profit gain (i.e., value score). For example, if the marketing offer is a mortgage offer, the expected profit margin (i.e., value score) may be calculated based on an annual return of repayments vs. infrastructure costs balanced against the risk of the candidate defaulting on the mortgage vs. prepayment of mortgage before the term is up (although the mortgage may be loaded with a prepayment penalty clause to protect a revenue stream). A ranking score for each of the 24 marketing events is calculated as a function of a value score for each marketing event with respect to a response probability score for the associated marketing event with respect to the first candidate. The aforementioned process is performed by a computing tool (e.g., computing tool 6 in
The database structure 15 comprises final ranking lists of optimized and sorted marketing events for offering to candidates to from database 10. Each ranking list is associated with a specific candidate from the database structure 10. Offering a candidate (i.e., candidate from database structure 10) marketing events is more costly to the entity offering the marketing events than offering marketing offers to the candidate in response to an inbound communication 24 from the candidate because marketing events comprise associated costs (e.g., advertising costs, costs associated with channels, etc.) and the marketing offers may be offered to the candidate during the inbound communication initiated by the candidate thereby eliminating some of the associated costs related to the marketing events. In the event that a candidate (i.e., candidate from database structure 10) initiates an inbound communication 24 (i.e., to the entity offering the marketing events), the comparison tool 7 in the database system 2 will compare a final ranking list comprising the optimized and sorted marketing events for the candidate to marketing offers from database structure 12 in response to the inbound communication 24 from the candidate. The comparison tool 7 will compare the final ranking list of the optimized and sorted marketing events for the candidate to marketing offers from the database structure 12 to locate any similarities (i.e., similar classifications) between marketing offers within the optimized and sorted marketing events from final ranking list and the marketing offers from the database structure 12. Similarities (i.e., similar classifications) may comprise, inter alia, a same marketing offer, marketing offers within a same category (e.g., a marketing offer from the optimized and sorted marketing events comprises an offer for a home equity loan and a marketing offer from the database structure 12 comprises a home equity line of credit), marketing offer product type (e.g., a marketing offer from the optimized and sorted marketing events comprises camping equipment and a marketing offer from the database structure 12 comprises camping equipment), promotional incentives, timing, etc. The comparison tool 7 may use the assigned classifications associated with the marketing events and the assigned classifications associated the marketing offers to compare each marketing offer to each marketing event. Upon finding any similarities (e.g., similar offers) between the marketing offers within the optimized and sorted marketing events from final ranking list and the marketing offers from the database structure 12, the comparison tool 7 extracts the similar marketing offers from the database structure 12. The optimization tool 8B, optimizes and sorts the similar marketing offers for the candidate and creates a ranking list of marketing offers for offering to the candidate in response to the inbound communication 24. Optimizing and sorting the similar marketing offers for the candidate may use the same method as described supra for optimizing and sorting the marketing events in database 15. Alternatively, the optimization tool 8B may optimize and sort the similar marketing offers using any method. The ranking list comprising the optimized and sorted similar marketing offers is stored in the database structure 17. The optimized and sorted similar marketing offers from the ranking list may be offered to the candidate using a same communication means as used by the candidate to execute the inbound communication 24. For example, if a candidate calls (i.e., using a telephone) the entity then the marketing offers from the final ranking list may be offered to the candidate using the telephone during the aforementioned call. Alternatively, the optimized and sorted similar marketing offers from the ranking list may be offered to the candidate using a different communication means at a different time. Any communication means may be used to offer the optimized and sorted similar marketing offers from the ranking list to the candidate including, inter alia, e-mail, direct mail, text message, telephone, etc. Additionally, the optimization tool 8B may remove any of the optimized and sorted marketing events comprising any of the similar offers to the marketing offers so that the candidate does not receive duplicate offers. Additionally, any finds which would have been used for the removed marketing events may be re-allocated to another marketing event for the same candidate.
An example of the comparison function performed by the comparison tool 7, is described with reference to table 2 (i.e., similarity of event/offer matrix) as follows:
Table 2 comprises marketing events from database structure 15 verses marketing offers from the database structure 12. The comparison function is performed by the comparison tool 7 using similarity scores derived from the assigned classifications associated with the marketing events and the marketing offers. The similarity scores in table 2 are in a range 0 to 1 where 1 comprises most similar and 0 comprises no similarities. Table 2 is used to select, optimize, and sort marketing offers for the candidate in response to the inbound communication 24. The candidate has been scheduled to receive marketing events 1, 3, 5, and 7 (i.e., final ranking list comprising the optimized and sorted marketing events stored in the database structure 15 comprises marketing events 1, 3, 5, and 7 in that order). The comparison tool 7 uses table 2 to look at event 1 and select the inbound offer from database structure 12 with a highest similarity score. Offer 6 with respect to event 1 comprises the highest similarity score (i.e., 0.4) so offer 6 is placed in the database structure 17 for offering to the candidate first. Next the comparison tool 7 uses table 2 to look at event 3 (i.e., next optimized event) to select the inbound offer from database structure 12 with a highest similarity score. Offer 3 with respect to event 3 comprises the highest similarity score (i.e., 0.5) so offer 3 is placed in the database structure 17 for offering to the candidate next. Next the comparison tool 7 uses table 2 to look at event 5 to select the inbound offer from database structure 12 with a highest similarity score. Offer 2 and offer 5 both comprise a same similarity score (i.e., 0.4). The comparison tool may select either offer 2 or offer 5 to place in the database structure 17 for offering to the candidate next. Next the comparison tool 7 uses table 2 to look at event 7 (i.e., next optimized event) to select the inbound offer from database structure 12 with a highest similarity score. Offer 1 with respect to event 7 comprises the highest similarity score (i.e., 0.5) so offer 1 is placed in the database structure 17 for offering to the candidate next. This process maintains a presentation order of the optimized and sorted marketing events as this is in a time based priority order.
Thus the present invention discloses a process for deploying or integrating computing infrastructure, comprising integrating computer-readable code into the computer system 90, wherein the code in combination with the computer system 90 is capable of performing a method used for dynamically ordering a plurality of marketing events and comparing the marketing events to marketing offers for offering to a candidate in response to an inbound communication from the candidate.
While
While embodiments of the present invention have been described herein for purposes of illustration, many modifications and changes will become apparent to those skilled in the art. Accordingly, the appended claims are intended to encompass all such modifications and changes as fall within the true spirit and scope of this invention.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5930764 | Melchione et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5966695 | Melchione et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
6236977 | Verba et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6484163 | Lawrence et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6567786 | Bibelnieks et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6847934 | Lin et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6882985 | Kay et al. | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6925441 | Jones et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
7007088 | Najmi | Feb 2006 | B1 |
7133834 | Abelow | Nov 2006 | B1 |
7194448 | Luth et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7216109 | Donner | May 2007 | B1 |
7222078 | Abelow | May 2007 | B2 |
7280975 | Donner | Oct 2007 | B1 |
7364068 | Strubbe et al. | Apr 2008 | B1 |
7386517 | Donner | Jun 2008 | B1 |
7392222 | Hamilton et al. | Jun 2008 | B1 |
20010037212 | Motosuna et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020007313 | Mai et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020026356 | Bergh et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020040352 | McCormick | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020165771 | Walker et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030046222 | Bard et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030083936 | Mueller et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030084053 | Govrin et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030120584 | Zarefoss et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030140282 | Kaler | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030208402 | Bibelnieks et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030229536 | House et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040073496 | Cohen | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040078273 | Loeb et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040093296 | Phelan et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040103017 | Reed et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040103051 | Reed et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20050038893 | Graham | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050043993 | Stollman et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050055275 | Newman et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050071223 | Jain et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050096950 | Caplan et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050137939 | Calabria et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050144065 | Calabria et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050153317 | DeNise et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050154630 | Lin et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050222906 | Chen | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20060047563 | Wardell | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060161474 | Diamond et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060247973 | Mueller et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
WO 9922328 | Jun 1999 | WO |
WO 03093930 | Nov 2003 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20060253468 A1 | Nov 2006 | US |