ALR Bundles
None present in the data.
GRP 3-4
- Looks like PAE renews very well when the partner is of the 3-4 type, although most of these are Opt Outs.
Renewal Ratio by Navigate Bundling
|
GRP3-4
|
DecisionType
|
N
|
ATL
|
Dropped
|
Ratio
|
Perc_Renewed
|
|
0
|
Need New LOA
|
68
|
36
|
32
|
1.1
|
52.9%
|
|
0
|
Opt Out
|
21
|
19
|
2
|
9.5
|
90.5%
|
|
1
|
Need New LOA
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
1
|
Opt Out
|
8
|
8
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
Impact Interaction Volume Histogram
- Central Tendency is moving much closer to 4!
- Few partnerships in the 0-1 category!
- Another peak at 7 interactions!
##### Impact Interaction Volume Histogram Split by Decision
- Opt Outs bunched in 3-7 range.
- NNLOAs occupy more of the 7+ range.

Renewal by Interaction Volume and Decision Type, Unbinned
- NNLOA performance climbs at 9+, a very high interaction number.
- Opt Out performance is high no matter what, so engagement might not be an issue.
Renewal Ratio by Impact Interaction Volume
|
DecisionType
|
II_Credited_Volume
|
N
|
ATL
|
Dropped
|
Ratio
|
Perc_Renewed
|
|
Need New LOA
|
2
|
5
|
4
|
1
|
4.0
|
80.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
3
|
6
|
2
|
4
|
0.5
|
33.3%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
4
|
10
|
6
|
4
|
1.5
|
60.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
5
|
6
|
2
|
4
|
0.5
|
33.3%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
6
|
6
|
3
|
3
|
1.0
|
50.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
7
|
9
|
3
|
6
|
0.5
|
33.3%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
8
|
8
|
3
|
5
|
0.6
|
37.5%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
9
|
4
|
3
|
1
|
3.0
|
75.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
10
|
6
|
5
|
1
|
5.0
|
83.3%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
11
|
3
|
2
|
1
|
2.0
|
66.7%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
12
|
3
|
2
|
1
|
2.0
|
66.7%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
18
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
21
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
24
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
0.0
|
0.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
0
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
3
|
4
|
4
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
4
|
4
|
2
|
2
|
1.0
|
50.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
5
|
3
|
3
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
6
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
7
|
4
|
4
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
8
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
9
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
10
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
11
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
12
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
13
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
15
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
16
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
Renewal by Impact Interaction Volume, (Binned)
- [NNLOA] With these bins, there doesn’t seem to be much benefit from increased utilization.
Renewal Ratio by Impact Interaction Volume (Binned)
|
DecisionType
|
II_Volume_Bins
|
N
|
ATL
|
Dropped
|
Ratio
|
Perc_Renewed
|
|
Need New LOA
|
2-3
|
11
|
6
|
5
|
1.2
|
54.5%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
4-6
|
22
|
11
|
11
|
1.0
|
50.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
7+
|
36
|
20
|
16
|
1.2
|
55.6%
|
|
Opt Out
|
0
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
2-3
|
5
|
5
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
4-6
|
9
|
7
|
2
|
3.5
|
77.8%
|
|
Opt Out
|
7+
|
13
|
13
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
Renewal by Previous Yr Impact Interaction Volume & Decision
- No distinct pattern across previous year impact interactions.
- It is concerning to see the 0% renewed towards the high end of interactions in the previous year.
Renewal Ratio by Previous Year Impact Interaction
|
DecisionType
|
PreviousYr_II_Volume
|
N
|
ATL
|
Dropped
|
Ratio
|
Perc_Renewed
|
|
Need New LOA
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
0.0
|
0.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
0.0
|
0.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
2
|
4
|
3
|
1
|
3.0
|
75.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
3
|
8
|
4
|
4
|
1.0
|
50.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
4
|
4
|
2
|
2
|
1.0
|
50.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
5
|
9
|
5
|
4
|
1.2
|
55.6%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
6
|
7
|
3
|
4
|
0.8
|
42.9%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
7
|
5
|
3
|
2
|
1.5
|
60.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
8
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
1.0
|
50.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
9
|
4
|
4
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
10
|
3
|
2
|
1
|
2.0
|
66.7%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
11
|
3
|
0
|
3
|
0.0
|
0.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
13
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
0.0
|
0.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
14
|
3
|
3
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
15
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
0.0
|
0.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
17
|
3
|
2
|
1
|
2.0
|
66.7%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
20
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
23
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
0.0
|
0.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
24
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
0.0
|
0.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
32
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
NA
|
6
|
3
|
3
|
1.0
|
50.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
3
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
4
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
5
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
6
|
3
|
3
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
7
|
3
|
2
|
1
|
2.0
|
66.7%
|
|
Opt Out
|
8
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
16
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
18
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
0.0
|
0.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
NA
|
17
|
17
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
Renewal by Previous Yr Impact Interaction Volume Binned & Decision
Note: If II_PrevYr_Volume_Bins = NA, then there was not an active contract in the previous year.
- Agrees with the above, no patterns between previous year impact interactions and renewal rates.
Renewal Ratio by Previous Year Impact Interaction
|
DecisionType
|
II_PrevYr_Volume_Bins
|
N
|
ATL
|
Dropped
|
Ratio
|
Perc_Renewed
|
|
Need New LOA
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
0.0
|
0.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
0.0
|
0.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
2-3
|
12
|
7
|
5
|
1.4
|
58.3%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
4-6
|
20
|
10
|
10
|
1.0
|
50.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
7+
|
29
|
17
|
12
|
1.4
|
58.6%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
NA
|
6
|
3
|
3
|
1.0
|
50.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
2-3
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
4-6
|
5
|
5
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
7+
|
6
|
4
|
2
|
2.0
|
66.7%
|
|
Opt Out
|
NA
|
17
|
17
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
Renewals Previous Yr and Current Yr Interaction Volume
Only looking at NNLOAs in the below table.
- No patterns between previous year consumption, next year consumption, and renewal rates.
Renewal Ratio by Previous and Current Year Impact Interaction
|
II_PrevYr_Volume_Bins
|
II_Volume_Bins
|
N
|
ATL
|
Dropped
|
Ratio
|
Perc_Renewed
|
|
0
|
7+
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
0.0
|
0.0%
|
|
1
|
7+
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
0.0
|
0.0%
|
|
2-3
|
2-3
|
4
|
3
|
1
|
3.0
|
75.0%
|
|
2-3
|
4-6
|
5
|
1
|
4
|
0.2
|
20.0%
|
|
2-3
|
7+
|
3
|
3
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
4-6
|
2-3
|
5
|
2
|
3
|
0.7
|
40.0%
|
|
4-6
|
4-6
|
7
|
4
|
3
|
1.3
|
57.1%
|
|
4-6
|
7+
|
8
|
4
|
4
|
1.0
|
50.0%
|
|
7+
|
2-3
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
1.0
|
50.0%
|
|
7+
|
4-6
|
7
|
5
|
2
|
2.5
|
71.4%
|
|
7+
|
7+
|
20
|
11
|
9
|
1.2
|
55.0%
|
|
NA
|
4-6
|
3
|
1
|
2
|
0.5
|
33.3%
|
|
NA
|
7+
|
3
|
2
|
1
|
2.0
|
66.7%
|
Trend of Impact Interactions YoY, Binned
Note: (-1 = Negative Trend, 0 = Neutral, 1 = Positive Trend)
- Without knowing what the previous year volume was, you would still advocate for increased volume given the below.
- Stability YoY performs well below the average. We know from the above that this is
- Decreasing consumption YoY is correlated with higher renewal rates.
Renewal Ratio by Previous Year Impact Interaction
|
DecisionType
|
Volume_Trend
|
N
|
ATL
|
Dropped
|
Ratio
|
Perc_Renewed
|
|
Need New LOA
|
-1
|
33
|
20
|
13
|
1.5
|
60.6%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
0
|
4
|
1
|
3
|
0.3
|
25.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
1
|
32
|
16
|
16
|
1.0
|
50.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
-1
|
8
|
6
|
2
|
3.0
|
75.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
0
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
1
|
19
|
19
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
Simple Regression for Impact Interaction Volume
Note: Looking at NNLOAs, only.
- Not significant. More impact interactions does not tranlate to a higher percentage renewal rate.
Simple Regression Model with Impact Interaction Volume
|
term
|
estimate
|
std.error
|
statistic
|
p.value
|
|
Intercept
|
0.41
|
0.421
|
0.96
|
0.336
|
|
Impact Interaction Volume
|
0.03
|
0.054
|
0.61
|
0.539
|
Penetration by Event Grouping
- A few differences between Opt Out consumption and NNLOA consumption:
- Higher Research Interviews for Opt Outs
- PLW and Onsite consumption, and Expert Center calls are higher for NNLOA
Percent of Renewals w/ At Least 1 Interaction in a Group
|
DecisionType
|
Perc_Events
|
Perc_Service
|
Perc_SLLed
|
Perc_ResearchInt
|
Perc_PLW_Onsite
|
Perc_Experience
|
Perc_ExpertCall
|
|
Need New LOA
|
55.1%
|
85.5%
|
55.1%
|
27.5%
|
26.1%
|
0.0%
|
72.5%
|
|
Opt Out
|
51.7%
|
82.8%
|
51.7%
|
37.9%
|
13.8%
|
0.0%
|
51.7%
|
Renewal by Event Consumption
- [NNLOA] No lift from consuming an event
Renewal Ratio by Event Consumption
|
DecisionType
|
II_Events_Binary
|
N
|
ATL
|
Dropped
|
Ratio
|
Perc_Renewed
|
|
Need New LOA
|
0
|
31
|
17
|
14
|
1.2
|
54.8%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
1
|
38
|
20
|
18
|
1.1
|
52.6%
|
|
Opt Out
|
0
|
14
|
12
|
2
|
6.0
|
85.7%
|
|
Opt Out
|
1
|
15
|
15
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
Renewal by Service Consumption
- [NNLOA] Negative value from consuming a service impact interaction.
Renewal Ratio by Service Consumption
|
DecisionType
|
II_Service_Binary
|
N
|
ATL
|
Dropped
|
Ratio
|
Perc_Renewed
|
|
Need New LOA
|
0
|
10
|
7
|
3
|
2.3
|
70.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
1
|
59
|
30
|
29
|
1.0
|
50.8%
|
|
Opt Out
|
0
|
5
|
5
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
1
|
24
|
22
|
2
|
11.0
|
91.7%
|
Renewal by SL Consumption
- [NNLOA] Small bump for SL Led consumption - 4% - as compared to overall average.
Renewal Ratio by SL-Led Consumption
|
DecisionType
|
II_SLLed_Binary
|
N
|
ATL
|
Dropped
|
Ratio
|
Perc_Renewed
|
|
Need New LOA
|
0
|
31
|
15
|
16
|
0.9
|
48.4%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
1
|
38
|
22
|
16
|
1.4
|
57.9%
|
|
Opt Out
|
0
|
14
|
12
|
2
|
6.0
|
85.7%
|
|
Opt Out
|
1
|
15
|
15
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
Renewal by Research Interview Consumption
- [NNLOA] Relatively high lift above average NNLOA renewal rate - 10%
- [NNLOA] Difference between consuming and not consuming is roughly 13%
Renewal Ratio by Research Interview Consumption
|
DecisionType
|
II_ResearchInterview_Binary
|
N
|
ATL
|
Dropped
|
Ratio
|
Perc_Renewed
|
|
Need New LOA
|
0
|
50
|
25
|
25
|
1.0
|
50.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
1
|
19
|
12
|
7
|
1.7
|
63.2%
|
|
Opt Out
|
0
|
18
|
16
|
2
|
8.0
|
88.9%
|
|
Opt Out
|
1
|
11
|
11
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
Renewal by PLW OR Onsite Consumption
- [NNLOA] Onsite and/or PLW positively associated with renewal.
- [NNLOA] Close to a 14% bump above the average.
Renewal Ratio by PLW OR Onsite Consumption
|
DecisionType
|
II_PLW_Onsite_Binary
|
N
|
ATL
|
Dropped
|
Ratio
|
Perc_Renewed
|
|
Need New LOA
|
0
|
51
|
25
|
26
|
1.0
|
49.0%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
1
|
18
|
12
|
6
|
2.0
|
66.7%
|
|
Opt Out
|
0
|
25
|
23
|
2
|
11.5
|
92.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
1
|
4
|
4
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
Renewal by Experience Consumption
- No data.
Renewal Ratio by Experience Consumption
|
DecisionType
|
II_Experience_Binary
|
N
|
ATL
|
Dropped
|
Ratio
|
Perc_Renewed
|
|
Need New LOA
|
0
|
69
|
37
|
32
|
1.2
|
53.6%
|
|
Opt Out
|
0
|
29
|
27
|
2
|
13.5
|
93.1%
|
Renewal by Expert Call Consumption
- [NNLOA] Not engaging in an expert call is related to renewal. About 20% bump above the NNLOA average.
Renewal Ratio by Expert Call Consumption
|
DecisionType
|
II_ExpertCall_Binary
|
N
|
ATL
|
Dropped
|
Ratio
|
Perc_Renewed
|
|
Need New LOA
|
0
|
19
|
14
|
5
|
2.8
|
73.7%
|
|
Need New LOA
|
1
|
50
|
23
|
27
|
0.9
|
46.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
0
|
14
|
14
|
0
|
Inf
|
100.0%
|
|
Opt Out
|
1
|
15
|
13
|
2
|
6.5
|
86.7%
|
Correlation betwen Event Groupings, and Renewal (for fun)
- Correlation with Renewal: Similar to the above, Onsites and SL Led impact interactions.
- Negative correlation with Renewal: Expert Center CAlls
- Expert Calls and Events are negatively related to other impact interactions, which a rare.
##### Multivariate Regression (still kind of simple)
Note: Looking at NNLOA, only.
- Nothing correlated with renewal.
Regression Estimates for a Model Fitted on Event Grouping Volumes
|
term
|
estimate
|
std.error
|
statistic
|
p.value
|
|
(Intercept)
|
-0.17
|
0.530
|
-0.33
|
0.74
|
|
II_Events_Volume
|
-0.02
|
0.223
|
-0.08
|
0.94
|
|
II_SLLed_Volume
|
0.15
|
0.170
|
0.85
|
0.39
|
|
II_ResearchInterview_Volume
|
0.10
|
0.232
|
0.44
|
0.66
|
|
II_PLW_Onsite_Volume
|
0.72
|
0.554
|
1.30
|
0.19
|
|
II_ExpertCall_Volume
|
0.02
|
0.177
|
0.09
|
0.93
|
|
II_Service_Volume
|
-0.03
|
0.094
|
-0.36
|
0.72
|