Oct 13, 2015 | Customers, Marketing, retail, Sales, Small business
Innovation in supermarkets
Small business suppliers to supermarket chains are substantially compromised by the lack of resources to innovate.
Peter Drucker stated 50 years ago that innovation is the only really sustainable competitive advantage, and the passage of events have proved him correct.
Commercial survival requires that you are able to continually innovate, or you rapidly find yourself left behind, simply because everybody else is.
Knowing this does not however, make the challenge any less daunting, especially in an environment like FMCG where the retail gorillas stamp on variation as a source of transaction costs, and are actively seeking to reduce SKU numbers by pushing housebrands.
Lets define what we mean by innovation for the purposes of this post.
It does not include business model and process innovation. Both are terrific ways towards commercial sustainability, are paths every business must follow, but have little to do with innovation from the customer perspective, at least in the short to medium term.
By contrast, product innovation is concerned with new stuff that adds value to consumers.
Pretty simple definition, that precludes line extensions, which are just a fact of life, and product changes, which are again a fact of life. We are seeking to talk about the things that really make a difference, and how and why that happens.
Following are some thoughts on the nature of the strategic environment we find ourselves competing.
Innovation Paradox. Big businesses get big by being able to reproduce things without variation, their processes ensure consistency, and reject the outliers. This goes as much for people as it does products, so generally large businesses have more difficulty seeing and acting on something new than small ones. There are obvious exceptions, and large businesses everywhere are seeking ways to overcome the innovative inconvenience of their scale, with greatly differing levels of success. Nevertheless, the generality holds, but the small business end of the FMCG supply chain has been decimated, perhaps almost eradicated by the scale of the supermarkets and the power of their business model. Where is the innovation going to come from I wonder.
Risk. The risk profile of every business is different, but as a generality small businesses have a greater capacity to take risky decisions, but a less capacity to absorb them when they go pear-shaped. Large businesses survive on consistency as noted, and success for individuals in a large business is usually counted by their successes, failures are frowned upon, so the tendency to take risks is reduced, hence, their inability to innovate. Again there are notable exceptions, but they always occur when there is a leader who mandates and lives risk tolerance.
Wide view. Any organisation, no matter how big, only has a small proportion of the people thinking about the categories they compete in, so why do you think you will come up with the great ideas? Those using what I have always called “Environmental Research” always do better. This has nothing to do with hugging trees, and everything to do with understanding the context in which the behaviour of your consumers happens. When you understand the context, and see shifts, the opportunities suddenly become more easily identified.
Habit. Consumers are driven by their own habits, and once formed, it takes a lot of effort to break them. Habits work because they make our lives easier, and we are loathe to risk what we know works, for that for which there may be a question.
Boundaries. Innovation efforts need boundaries, or they tend to wander off into irrelevancy. I have found it far better to provide those boundaries in the pre-workshop, if that is what you are doing, material. It is necessary to encourage people to as the cliché goes, “think outside the box” but it is counter productive to have people thinking outside the municipality. Far better to ground the process in a context that is familiar, where there is market and customer knowledge available to feed the process. Without such grounding you tend to get uncertainty and irrelevancy, and ideas and conversation that skates across the surface rather than digging deep to where the problems and opportunities that provide the fodder of successful innovation are buried. I love the metaphor of Classical music and Jazz in the context of innovation, the score provides the boundaries. To be a good classical music player, you need to be a master of your instrument, and be able to reproduce note perfectly what the composer has written, the allowable variation is very small, the emphasis is on technique. Jazz by contrast requires that you are a master of the instrument, as well as the music to the extent that you can take what a composer has written and innovate around the base rhythm and melody, so you need to be not just a master technician, but a master of the music. Great innovation in a commercial environment has exactly the same characteristics.
Think different. The great 1997 Apple advertisement said it all, but how many corporate entities will tolerate the crazy ones? Very few. If you are to truly be an innovator, somehow you have to accommodate some crazy ones. Generally they are tough going, irreverent, unconcerned with status and the status quo, constantly irritating the nice smooth flow of processes that deliver the consistency that corporates thrive on.
Problem definition. Innovation occurs when a problem is solved. Often it is an old problem solved in a new way, sometimes it is a problem unrecognised until the solution comes along, the classic example being the post-it-note. A huge part of the challenge of innovation is the identification of the problem. Rarely does a problem emerge with a fully-fledged solution, but as Einstein, in my view one of the greatest marketing thinkers who never receives any credit at all once said, “if I had an hour to solve a live changing problem, I would spend the first 55 minutes defining the problem, the rest is just maths.”
Margin maintenance. This is tangled up with risk profile, but is separate. Over the years I have done many proposals for new products killed at the gate by the margin problem. “If we launch this, it will erode our margins” often true, but the standard response I give is “better us than someone else”, but it is often a futile response when the ultimate decision maker is compensated by short term considerations. After all, Kodak managed to survive for 40 years after they invented the digital camera in1975, several generations of CEO had passed through in that time, all taking their packet, it was just the last in the line who had a problem.
Value not just price. Consumers look for “value”, but way too often that is translated by suppliers and the retailer into “price”. Price is just one way of reflecting value, but it is the most obvious, and easiest to articulate.
Barriers. Every industry has its own set of barriers to innovation in addition to the more general ones above. In the case of the Australian packaged goods industry, they are several, all associated with the concentration of power in the retail trade.
Margin squeeze
Speed of house brand copying the successful products
Timing of distribution and advertising
On shelf management of facings, cut in, position, promotional programs and stock weight
13 week “live or die” time
On shelf upfront costs
Category management if you are not the category captain, and few small businesses are, you are at a significant disadvantage
Risk averse retailers
Habit. Everyone is used to doing business in a certain way, so that is the way it is done.
Opportunities for suppliers.
Similarly to barriers, every industry has its own unique set of opportunities that when seen are open for businesses to chase.
Social media. FMCG suppliers have not yet solved the problems of how to best use social media to market their process in supermarkets.
Mobility. Engagement with the web and its tools is now mobile, a majority of net interactions are mobile, and most people have their smart phones with them all the time. Using this capability and the geo-location capability to foster a direct relationship between the brand owner and the consumer with the supermarket playing the distributor role is a real opportunity currently under-recognised and utilised.
Food service and ingredient. These are fragmented markets, where innovation, service and brand can still play a real role, and getting a return on your investment is still up to the quality of your business, not the whim of a buyer in a gorilla suit. Depending on whose numbers you use, sales outside the major chains of ingredient and to food service outlets from fine dining to fast food, is north of 60 $billion.
Digital coupons. Retailers in Australia have ensured that the redeemable coupon, so prevalent in the US does not get a start here, too much transaction cost, but a digital coupon? Why not? There have been several tries of various types, Groupon being the most obvious, but smartphones make it so much easier to collect coupons and redeem them in some way, not necessarily even associated with the retailer.
Range optimisation. Category management as it has evolved has always been data intensive, and from a retailers perspective, the objective has been margin optimisation. The next step I suspect will be range optimisation which is really just margin optimisation with a far greater understanding of consumer behaviour thrown into the mix. We have all operated with the view that our various research tools and their data gave us enough to work with, and they did, but suddenly there is the “big data” behaviour mining opportunity offered by social media and geo location, in addition to the fragmentation of times we shop, and how we place and receive orders. Range optimisation to accommodate all these changes just became in my humble view, the FMCG marketing challenge of the decade.
Innovation from the waste. Until very recently, produce that was outside the specs for appearance was consigned to the waste bin, juicing, and other marginal uses, it was not deemed good enough by retailers to sell, not because it was nutritionally or organolepticly deficient, but because it looked crook. Along came the idea of highlighting the products visual imperfections, “Imperfect pick” is the term Harris Farm have used, Canadian chain Loblaws has successfully rolled out “ugly fruit” in Canada, and both Woolies and Coles appear to be tinkering with the idea currently. There are a myriad of opportunities to utilise undervalued product to build a category, for example, shin bones are the foundation of Osso Bucco, many of us will sample great Osso Bucco at an Italian restaurant, but never cook it at home, when it is an easy, tasty meal with a very low meat cost. Pretty simple marketing I would have thought.
Innovation is tough, but it is also fun and makes the future. Those who just wait for the future to happen will be overwhelmed by it, those who take a role in shaping it will at least have the chance to do well.
This post is the 8th in the series examining the means by which small businesses can deal with the retail gorillas.
The one that started it, back in October 2014, is a summary of the 10 ways to beat the gorillas at their own game, a summary post that generated a lot of interest, so I expanded the individual points in subsequent posts.
The first expanded post was the 3 essential pieces of the business model
The second, 5 ways to compete with data
Third, 6 category management ideas for small business at Christmas
Fourth, 9 imperatives for small businesses to build a brand
Fifth deals with the reality for all supermarket suppliers, that they have two customer types, requiring different approaches.
Sixth, deals with the least understood large cost impact on small businesses: Transaction costs.
Seventh suggested ways for small businesses to collaborate for scale,
Jun 22, 2015 | Branding, Customers, Marketing, retail, Small business
retail crash test dummies abound
Watching the rather sloppy way Grant O’Brien was moved on by Woolworths last week, I got to thinking about all the converging things happening that will impact the FMCG landscape over the next few years. A superficial look would suggest that things are pretty set, and change that happens will be incremental, but a closer look would suggest there is a lot of paddling going on under the surface.
These are the things I see:
Coles resurgent.
In the 40 years I have been around, I have seen the pendulum swing a couple of times, and it looks like Westfarmers have pulled off another mighty swing with Coles. Across pretty much any parameter you choose to look at, they are catching or have caught Woolworths, and remain on the improve.
Woolworths momentum.
In this high fixed cost retailing game, momentum is a huge contributor, not just to the financial outcomes, but to the day to day operations and shop floor “feel”. The momentum seems to be all against Woolies now, after enjoying the benefits for a long period. Their failure to drain cash from Coles by putting pressure on Bunnings with Masters has not just crunched their financial results, but it seems to have knocked the wind out of their confidence at the sales face across all their formats except perhaps Dan Murphy’s, which seems to be bucking the trend. Woolworths do not have a player in the office supplies game, which must be hurting them, further draining competitive resources.
Discounters are winning.
Aldi is doing really well, opening stores and taking share hand over fist. I have not seen the figures that would substantiate the notion that woolies are losing more to Aldi than Coles, but it would not surprise me at all. On top of Aldi’s blitzkrieg, it seems that their German competitor Lidl is coming. Lidl is a potent long term competitor with substantial experience across many markets.
Costco is seemingly carving out a niche, although not as aggressively as was first forecast, but the crowds in the Costco store at Auburn in Sydney would suggest they are not going away any time soon.
The $A.
After a period well above US $ par, the Aussie is back to more like its long term position. However, the carnage wrought by those few years on the mid sized supplier base cannot be turned around. Retailers by going offshore when they could and leaving their local supplier base to contract will have a continuing impact, as now the dollar is sensible again, there are few suppliers left with the wherewithal to be reliable national suppliers. It is also clear that those who have survived are a pretty resilient bunch, and are disinclined to replace their eggs back in a basket they cannot control.
Housebrands.
Coupled with the carnage of the high $A, the retailers strategic decision to rationalise proprietary SKU’s and replace them with tiers of housebrands to capture the proprietary margin has further led to the rout of the mid sized suppliers. Those left who might be inclined to chance their arm are generally not large enough, and lack the sophistication to manage a business relationship with a major retailer, but some will probably go broke trying.
Margins.
Many FMCG suppliers lose money on most sales to supermarkets. The negotiating power of the retailers, resulting trading terms and promotional guarantees that enable retailers to never pay beyond the discounted price, while restraining top line price increases to compensate has led to the situation where only a madman or the financially illiterate would stake their house on success in FMCG.
Innovation avoidance.
Markets evolve with innovation, but the barriers against success are so large that risk avoidance is the priority. Suppliers trumpet a new pack colour scheme as an “innovation”, and retailers get serious by asking the few second tier suppliers left to copy the proprietary market leader for yet another housebrand “innovation” . Retailers think they are good at innovation, but the experience from around the world as well as locally is to the contrary.
Promotion as marketing.
Continual price promotion only erodes the value of a brand, but brand building is a long term proposition, while staying on shelf is an immediate priority. Guess which wins, and we are rapidly approaching a brandless future beyond the few global mega brands that have the grunt to stay on shelf while spending with consumers to brand-build. Marketing budgets have been consumed by promotion spend. We have a generation of marketing people who have never experienced or even seen real marketing in FMCG.
Wholesale death.
Metcash as pretty much the last man standing is being squeezed by overheads and competing access to consumers outside the major chain supermarkets. Their recent financial results demonstrate the challenge of being the middleman in an environment where it is increasingly easy, and there is increasing motivation to go around the middleman. They seem to be trying with IGA, and with some success, but the local positioning of IGA mitigates against the mass merchandise wholesale business model they operate. Nevertheless, I do see IIGA as a potential bright spot for smaller suppliers who are unwilling or unable to service Woolies and Coles.
Opportunity?
Amongst the doom and gloom, I see several bright points of opportunity.
- While the traditional marketing strategies no longer work, it remain a fact that it is consumers who actually put their hands in their pockets to buy something. Retailers are just a choke point in the system exercising control, and the emergence of digital marketing offers small businesses the opportunity to engage and motivate their consumers to ignore the predations of retailers and express their purchase preferences with their money.
- The shortage of retailer suppliers may lead to a loosening of the noose around those remaining, and open opportunities for them to focus on a niche to deliver a product offer that the retailers do want, but that is hard to copy effectively. Combined with digital marketing, there are opportunities to engage with consumers in ways not dominated by price promotion and generic substitution.
- Local suppliers with a following in a region do have an opportunity to build a business. Coles have been playing with this for a while, and it does work, although the model of local supply does not sit very comfortably alongside the national supplier mentality that exists. For retailers to really get behind this opportunity to nurture “local” they will have to wear an increase in transaction costs, as well as make exceptions to their trading patterns. The big blokes may not, but there are real opportunities in the independents and non chain retail segments.
- Niche retailing will boom, and suppliers have the opportunity to participate. Harris Farm in Sydney continues to rise and rise, and even Thomas Dux, owned by Woolworths but operated largely separately are harbingers of the future. Consumers are increasingly engaged in their retail food shopping, they want their concerns and individual tastes to be met, and that cannot happen in a mass retail outlet focussing on discounting and housebrands.
I am sure there are thoughts I have missed, and would welcome feedback on them as well as comment on those above.
Mar 16, 2015 | Branding, Customers, Innovation, Marketing, retail, Sales
Words spoken cannot be taken back
Gaining distribution in supermarkets is really hard, and more to the point, expensive.
Supermarkets control the key “choke point” between you as a supplier, and consumers. On occasions when you are pitching a “me too” product, a decision just comes down to the retailer margin and the amount of promotional and advertising dollars that are being thrown at the launch, which both reassures the buyer that you are committed, and offers some confidence that consumers may be receptive. Generally with a “me too” product, you need to be prepared to take something out of your own range to make space, or be able to pinpoint with data an under-performing competitors product that can be deleted.
New products are usually a bit more complicated. For a retailer to put a new product on shelf, in addition to their existing ranges, it is often more than just a simple one in one out decision, particularly if the new product claims to be opening up a new category or subcategory.
In either case, the simple fact is that retailer stores do not have elastic walls, and space needs to be made somehow.
Over the years, I have launched many new products, some category creating products that have been a huge success, and some not so much, and many line extensions of various kinds. However, in the launching of them, I have done hundreds, if not thousands of presentations to supermarket buyers, and found a number of things that should not be said of you are to be successful.
It really is important to recognise that even though you may think your new product is the best thing since sliced bread, supermarket buyers see hundreds a year, and have heard it all before, so your presentation must be sympathetic to that simple fact.
Some of the wrong things to say which have come out of long experience are:
- “Our research says that this product will increase the total size of the mart by $50 million in three years”. You both know that research is usually rubbish, and that everyone lies to supermarket buyers about theirs. If you cannot support the research claims with very solid data, just be honest about it, recognising that even supermarkets buyers cannot tell the future, and be realistic.
- “Our sales forecasts are conservative” See above, and the truth is that the forecasts are usually these days just spreadsheets with autofill, and are really meaningless. Speak more about the assumptions that are the foundation of the numbers rather than the numbers themselves.
- “You are the only chain that has yet to confirm their acceptance and promotional program for this product“. Nonsense. While someone is always last, it will not usually be one of the big retailers. They know you need them more than they need you, so better to honest, although being desperate is also the wrong tactic.
- “XY company, the current category leader is too slow and locked into their ways to react quickly, so we will have this new segment to ourselves for a long period”. Big companies do not usually get big by being stupid, they may be a bit slower than the small guys, but they do know their stuff, and can move quickly when necessary. A buyer will see your confidence as misplaced, and react accordingly.
- “ABC Co do not have the will to risk their cosy positon by innovating” or some similar comment. Denigrating a competitor is a common fault, and should never be done, you just might be denigrating the people who give the buyer his most profitable products, and he will not take kindly to having his stocking decisions being questioned.
- “This product has been protected by patent” More rubbish. Only very few companies have the resources to develop something genuinely new, patent it, then be prepared to spend the megabucks to protect the patent. The last one I can remember is the Nestles cappuccino product in a pouch, a genuine innovation that gave them just a small amount of time before the copy cats arrived. If Nestles cannot so it, you almost certainly cannot, and the buyer knows it, so do not kid yourself.
- “We have first mover advantage“. This is sometimes true, but is may not worth all that much unless there are long lead times involved in equipment. When a new product can be made on existing plant, you cannot usually count on more than about 12 weeks start, after which the copy cats can arrive, correct any mistakes you have made, and capitalise on your investment with consumers to open up the new category. Sometimes it is better to be second mover, and step over the carcass of the pioneer, who gets the arrows in his back. Having said all that, First mover in a genuine innovation does give you a good chance at distribution.
- “Our plant is state of the art“. Retailers do not care much about your plant, so long as their orders are filled, the product is safe for consumers, and moves quickly off their shelves.
There are 40 years experience in these points, some of it painful, but there is no greater (commercial) feeling than seeing a product you have conceived, developed and successfully launched still on the shelves 20 years later, still meeting consumers needs and delivering profits to all concerned.
Dec 4, 2014 | Category, Marketing, Operations, retail, Small business
Data management & analysis
The second of 10 ways to beat the supermarket gorillas at their own game, after understanding the way the supermarket business model works, is to be savvy with data.
Supermarket retailing is heavily data intensive. These days, any retailing beyond the archetypical lemonade stand by the side of the road is data intensive, but particularly supermarkets. Commonly a supermarket range is up to 30,000 Sku’s across a number of different formats and geographic and demographic locations, and several thousand suppliers, all with their own focus and story to tell.
The supermarkets physical space needs to be allocated across the Sku’s chosen to be on range in the way that best delivers a return on their investment in the particular store and strategically across the chain.
SME suppliers to chain supermarkets usually are playing from a position of weakness, as they lack the scale to have the data and category management resources that supermarkets demand. However, their strength is that they can be far more agile and market sensitive that their bigger rivals, often SME’s can develop and launch a product before a multinational can get the first development workshop together.
Whilst supermarkets have a wealth of data at their fingertips, both their own, and that supplied by their large suppliers, they recognise that not every piece of data is worth the digits it is written with. Data is only of any value if it leads to some sort of actionable insight, and it is here that SME’s have an advantage despite the disadvantage of small size. Making the connections between differing seemingly disconnected data points is where the gold is hidden.
There are several points at which data can be collected, from which insights can be gained. Internal, observed and purchased.
- Sales and margin history. No SME should be without a robust and detailed sales and margin analysis of their own sales history, and thus ability to forecast with some certainty. Every SME has a sales history in their accounting package, most do not use it. Most use the “Office” package, which included Excel, but many do not use the power of the tools in excel. Pivot tables are the most underutilised and useful tool I have ever seen for SME’s. If you are one of the majority who do not use them, wake up, spend 30 minutes on YouTube figuring out the basics, and start generating insights. Also in excel is the V-Lookup tool, which can be enormously valuable to SME’s to keep accurate track of a whole range of variables in their business.
- Sales intelligence. SME’s are usually in a position to have unfiltered market intelligence in the hands of decision makers easily and quickly. Usually the people best positioned to see change as it is evolving are those in direct contact with customers and consumers, often the lower paid front line staff. Being engaged with these staff, or indeed as is the case for many, being that staff as a part of the role of the SME business owner puts you in a position to see shifts as they occur, if you are watching. Finding a way to turn these random conversations and insights into data points that can be connected and acted on can build into a significant competitive advantage. There is no substitute for the insights gained by simply watching and understanding the drivers of consumer behaviour, then crafting an offer that adds value.
- Agile operations. Scale brings its own momentum, despite the huge improvements over the last 20 years by the adoption of Lean practises. Large suppliers to supermarkets, with large factories, fixed planning cycles and extended supply chains are often caught short by the unexpected and unplanned. Agile suppliers can often fill the gaps created, but do so they need to be able to make very quick decision on costs, time frames, and operational priorities and limitations. To make these decisions, they need absolute understanding of their cash and financial position, costs and decision drivers like break even points, the impact of discounts, and negotiation trade-offs they can make. To be truly agile, you need accurate and detailed financial and operational data that is easily useable to make well informed decisions, then track the outcomes of those decisions.
- Be experimental. Having good data enables experimentation on a scale that offers great insights, but minimises risk. The supermarkets are increasingly amenable to enabling SME’s to experiment with all sorts of offerings as they learn as well from the activity. However, you cannot just walk in and expect to be taken seriously without a history of sensible innovation and a relationship with the individual decision makers in the retailer. Having robust, realistic and well understood strategic and operational planning in place is a must if you wish to be experimental and stay in business.
- Purchase syndicated data. Scan data can be purchased in many forms, and to varying degrees of analysis and detail. There is a significant cost to this information, firstly the purchase costs, but more importantly, the data analysis capabilities. Increasingly scan data is being matched to the behavioural data emerging from store loyalty cards to add another dimension to decision making, and this trend will only accelerate. SME’e can dip in and out of this data, taking a slice here and there to provide insights without the significant investment of being fully engaged. Treated sensibly, it can be used a bit like market research, taking a small and well defined sample and using it as representative of the whole picture.
None of this is easy, which is OK, because if it was, everyone would be doing it. However, many SME’s simply think it is all too hard, and stay away, effectively walking away from 75% of the volume in the market. For many, this is a sensible decision, but for some, those SME’s with a genuine opportunity to become larger businesses, building solid capabilities in collecting and leveraging data is essential.
