Interpreting RFM scores After RFM scoring, a customer Mary Jones has a score of 1-1-5 (R-F-M). This implies Mary:

Introduction / Context:
RFM scores typically bucket each dimension from best to worst (e.g., 1 = best, 5 = worst) or vice versa, depending on implementation. Many exam and textbook conventions use 1 as most desirable. Interpreting a composite like 1-1-5 correctly is a common test of understanding.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• We adopt the common convention: 1 = best/most desirable, 5 = least desirable for each dimension.
• R = Recency, F = Frequency, M = Monetary value.
• Mary’s score is 1-1-5.

Concept / Approach:

Under the stated convention, R = 1 means very recent purchase; F = 1 means purchases are frequent; M = 5 means low spend (small orders) relative to peers. Therefore, Mary is active and loyal but with low order value—an ideal candidate for upsell to higher-value bundles or premium offers.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:

Many RFM tutorials explicitly show “111” as the best and “555” as the weakest segment. Substituting 1-1-5 fits a high-engagement but low-spend profile.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• A: Would require M=1 (high spend), not 5.
• B/D: Indicate poor recency/frequency, which contradicts R=1 and F=1.
• E: Contradiction—any positive frequency implies spend unless there are zero-value orders.

Common Pitfalls:

• Reversing the scale (5 best). Always confirm the convention used.

Final Answer:

Has ordered recently, orders frequently, but does not place a large order when she orders.