March 25, 2009: 

A four bank Michigan holding company requested this special analysis in order to show how account relationships may have changed since implementing the Matrix Mail program.  Three banks participated in the Matrix during the study period, one did not.

Matrix Mail targets prioritized customer segments with serialized product recommendations.  Typical summary reports review response rates, but do not directly compare over an extended period of time such slower changing relationship indices as changes in services-per-household and accounts-per-household.

Five data points were selected for this analysis. The comparison was restricted to just those households who were active in each of the measurement periods.  In other words, this study looked out how the account relationship changed for all households which were active with the bank between the periods of Dec. 2002 and June 2005.  If a household was a new customer, for example, as of June 2003, that household was not considered for this study.

The control group involves all customer households active as of December 2002, but had never entered the Matrix as of June 2005.

The measurements offered in this report included Services per Household, and Accounts per Household. Gross measures of deposits balance normally grow over time by virtue of interest retention. Inflation and real estate appreciation can lead to loan growth over time. Services per Household and Accounts per Household, however, can only grow as a result of sales and customer demand.

Accounts included in this analysis were limited to deposit and loan products and did not include such services as debit cards and safety deposit boxes. 

Results (see Table One) indicated that accounts-per household grew, during the 30-month measurement period 288% faster than the control group average.  Services-per-household grew at a rate 400% faster than the control group average.   The non-participating bank ended the measurement period with services and account per-household ratios nearly identical to the control group measures.

This study confirms that Matrix style relationship marketing, as practice under the partnership of Financial Marketing Systems, Inc. and the Biltmore Group leads to long-term product relationship benefits.


Table One
Customer Relationship Measures
Between Dec. 2002 and June 2005
With Control Group Comparisons

		Accts/HH		Services/HH
		Matrix	Control	Matrix	Control
South Michigan Bank	Dec. 2002	2.04	1.55	1.67	1.36
	Dec. 2003	2.35	1.63	1.84	1.40
	June 2004	2.44	1.66	1.89	1.41
	Dec. 2004	2.56	1.68	1.94	1.41
	June 2005	2.64	1.69	1.97	1.41
Percent change over measurement period		30%	9%	18%	4%
West Michigan Bank	Dec. 2002	1.70	1.53	1.52	1.38
	Dec. 2003	2.15	1.62	1.75	1.43
	June 2004	2.26	1.65	1.80	1.44
	Dec. 2004	2.37	1.69	1.85	1.45
	June 2005	2.50	1.69	1.92	1.44
Percent change over measurement period		48%	11%	26%	4%
Central Michigan Bank	Dec. 2002	1.82	1.48	1.58	1.31
	Dec. 2003	2.00	1.50	1.67	1.33
	June 2004	2.05	1.51	1.69	1.33
	Dec. 2004	2.23	1.58	1.78	1.35
	June 2005	2.33	1.57	1.82	1.35
Percent change over measurement period		28%	6%	15%	3%
Average Percent Change		35%	9%	20%	4%
East Michigan Bank (Did not participate in Matrix program)	June 2005		1.84		1.58