ANLY482 AY2017-18 T2 Group 05 Project Findings
| Mid-Term | Finals |
|
|---|
Data Exploration
Due to the sensitivity of the data, please refer to the interim report for more details.
We have identified the top merchants in terms of total number of approved transactions, and approved transaction monetary value.
General Descriptive Statistics
Moving on, we also find out the top merchants contributing to the other types of transaction in each bin.
One Way Anova
As shown in Figure 6a, there are significant difference between the mean number of transactions per merchant for each bin
- e.g. Bin 1: average 3 transactions per merchant, Bin 2: average 25 transactions per merchant, Bin 3: average 135 transactions per merchant, Bin 4: average 714 transactions per merchant and as expected, Bin 5: average 30818 transactions per merchant.
Figure 6a: Oneway Anova Analysis of Number of Transactions per merchant by bins
However, in Figure 6b, while there is a significant difference between the mean transaction monetary value among the 5 different bins, interestingly, we note that Bin 5 does not has the highest mean transaction monetary value (only $96.34). In fact, Bin 1 has the highest mean transaction monetary value of $3124.43.
This means that while Bin 5 consist of merchants with the highest volume of transactions, they are not necessarily the most valuable group of merchants. Moving forward, RDP will provide the total revenue it earns from each merchant, and we will create interactive binning and Line of Fit graphs again to identify the top merchants most valuable to RDP.
Figure 6b: Oneway Anova Analysis of ‘converted value’ by bins
Line of Fit
As mentioned under ‘Objectives’, we want to visualise and compare the performance among merchants in the same bin. Initially, we wanted to use funnel plot to perform this visualisation. Funnel plots are a form of scatter plot in which number of approved transactions per merchant are plotted against number of transactions per merchant. Control limits, similar to confidence limits are then overlaid on the scatter plot. The control limits represent the expected variation in number of approved transactions assuming that the only source of variation is stochastic. Thus, those who lie outside of the control limits would allow us to identify the star and laggard merchants in the same bin.
However, we were unable to obtain proper model fit for the funnel plots for each bin, as seen in the example under Figure 7, where we plot the funnel plot for Bin/Group 5.
Figure 7: Funnel plot for Bin/Group 5s
Thus, we decided to use Line of Fit graphs instead. We plot the Line of Fit graphs for each bin, by comparing the number of approved transactions per merchant against total transaction per merchant in that bin. As shown in Line of Fit graphs in Figure 8a to 8e, we were able to get more proper model fit, and realised that merchants that lie outside the confidence interval can be grouped into over-performing (star) and under-performing (laggard) merchants. These merchants can be identified using the JMP’s brush tool. Merchants that fall above the confidence interval and regression line are identified as star merchants. Our client should focus on identifying factors that have led to the higher than average approved transaction rates of the star merchants. Merchants that fall below the confidence interval and regression line are identified as laggard merchants.
Merchants who lie within the confidence interval (blue shaded area) follow a stochastic trend and will not be analysed. In addition, we realised that the Line of Fit graph for Bin 1 does not provide a good model fit for analysis. Thus, the Line of Fit graph for Bin 1 will also not be analysed.
Figure 8a: Group 5 Line of Fit Graph
Figure 8b: Group 4 Line of Fit Graph
Figure 8c: Group 3 Line of Fit Graph
Figure 8d: Group 2 Line of Fit Graph
Figure 8e: Group 1 Line of Fit Graph
While we have identified laggard merchants from Line of Fit graphs, we should also set individual benchmarks for each merchant. Based on each merchant’s volume of transactions, we will identify the respective average number of approved transactions they should have in order to be within the confidence level. Thus, our client can highlight how each individual laggard merchant compares to other merchants within the same bin and set benchmarks based on the regression line. This will motivate merchants to improve their own performance.
