Making Category Management More Practical Ron Larson
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Research Papers in Economics Making Category Management More Practical Ron Larson The historical roots of the category-management supermarkets reduced duplicate items a little, they concept can be traced back more than 20 years. could boost category sales. Stores that eliminated The concept came to the forefront in the early too many “duplicate” items experienced category 1990s as part of the Effi cient Consumer Response sales declines. Therefore, an optimal level of va- (ECR) initiative. One of the early diffi culties was riety exists that may be slightly below what many to defi ne category management, and many, some- supermarkets are offering. Category management what confl icting defi nitions have been presented attempts to identify the optimal level of variety for (Dussart 1998). Harris and McPartland (1993) a retailer. said it consists of three interrelated elements: a Early success stories encouraged retailers and philosophy for strategically managing a business manufacturers to adopt category management. In that recognizes categories as strategic business 1997, Giant (Landover) said they were pleased with units, a process through which retailers and sup- the concept and were expanding their efforts (Chain pliers jointly develop category plans, and an or- Store Age 1997). It helped Supervalu reduce items ganizational concept that dictates the integration in test stores by 12 percent and increase category of buying with merchandising. This paper uses a sales by 6.5 percent (Purpura 1998). In 2003, Spar- simplifi ed “process” defi nition: category manage- tan claimed category management was the key to ment is the use of sales data, buyer profi les, and rebuilding their retail business (Ghitelman 2003). store characteristics to make product-assortment As category management became more popular in and shelf-arrangement decisions. The logic behind the food industry, it also spread to other industries the concept is that faster-selling products deserve including automobile parts, apparel, hardware and more shelf space and better shelf positions. This home supply, and bookstores. research looks at how the concept has evolved and Even after 10 years, category management suggests a practical approach that seems to address is being employed in new ways. An ACNielsen many of the criticisms of category management. survey found greater use of many category-man- agement practices (Mass Market Retailers 2004). Contributions from Category Management Cannondale Associates reported that more retailers and manufacturers rated category management as One reason category management is important is highly important in 2004 than in other years (Con- that consumers like having choices. Ratner, Kahn, venience Store News Online 2004). Another survey and Kahneman (1999) found that people choose found that category management was the area with less-favorite options on some occasions to experi- the most collaborative progress in 2004 (Veiders ence variety. Stores that did not offer consumers 2004). A majority of food-industry members seem some variety probably would lose customers to to believe that category management offers much stores that gave people more choices. In addition, potential. the assortments people are exposed to and how products are organized effect their choices (Kahn Criticisms of Category Management and Wasink 2004). Therefore, shelf arrangement can be an important tool for infl uencing sales. Un- As category management was being embraced by fortunately, retailers sometimes provide too much many retailers and manufacturers, there was grow- variety. Research by Willard Bishop Consulting and ing criticism about how the concept was being used. Information Resources, Inc. (1993) found that if Glen Terbeek (1993) of Andersen Consulting argued that if category management is not selectively used Larson is associate professor, Department of Marketing, as a tactic within an overall marketing strategy, it Haworth College of Business, Western Michigan University, will cause serious problems. He was concerned Kalamazoo. that category management treats each category 102 March 2005 Journal of Food Distribution Research 36(1) separately and does not consider how changes will assortment developed using sales data from this affect complementary or competitive categories or period would give the product less shelf space and shopper experiences in the store. In addition, prac- less on-shelf inventory, so the out-of-stocks would titioners of the concept were using chain-level, not continue. New products present another problem. store-level, data and were measuring performance If a store chooses not to stock a new item that its with sales or gross-margin dollars instead of direct- customers would want, a category-management margin dollars per square foot of space or customer analysis of that store’s sales would not identify loyalty. Terbeek believed that tailoring each store to the mistake. The process also depends on accurate the needs of the customers who shopped that store sales information. Given that stores sometimes was essential for improving store profi tability. have scanning problems (e.g., scanned prices too After experimenting with category manage- high or too low, items missing from the scanner ment, some retailers decided that it was not useful. database, etc.), analyses that rely on this data could An executive from a large Southern supermarket be fl awed. A similar problem is that a manufacturer chain declared, “Category management is dead” could focus a brand’s promotions on the period used (Wellman 1997). Sainsbury, a large chain in the in a category-management analysis, gain additional United Kingdom, eliminated its entire category- shelf space based on the infl ated sales rates, and management department because the benefi ts did then stop promoting the brand. The development not appear to exceed the costs (Storey and Benady of category captains (i.e., manufacturers who are 2001). In a survey of retail executives by Ernst and selected by retailers to counsel them on assortment Young, 40 percent thought the benefi ts of category and shelf-arrangement decisions) has raised some management had been exaggerated and 73 percent legal issues because the advice given may be biased thought the industry had shown little improvement (Desrochers, Gundlach, and Foer 2003). with its use (Supermarket Business 1997). Stanton Many category management analyses work with (1999) agreed that category management should die aggregate data. This could be at the chain level, so because it is a bad practice. store variations may be ignored, or they could be The list of specifi c criticisms is fairly long. Ini- at the store level, so preference differences across tially, fi rms lacked an understanding of category customer segments may not be considered. The pro- management and needed considerable training. cess does not look at customer satisfaction. A study Because the focus is on individual categories, the by Clayton/Curtis/Cottrell found that when many defi nition of a category affects what products are stores started practicing category management, their considered in each analysis. Often the category shoppers did not notice any differences (Progressive defi nitions that manufacturers use may not make Grocer 1995). In general, the process provides few much business sense from a retailer’s perspective. consumer benefi ts. When one retailer started using it Another problem was that category sales drivers and in one category, prices increased and sales decreased the supply-chain costs were not usually considered. (Basuroy, Mantrala, and Walters 2001). Although The typical category-management analysis does not this may have increased retailer profi t, the change address when to expand the space allocated to one could also have encouraged some consumers to category at the expense of another category. Distri- shop at competing stores. Most category manage- bution- and handling-cost differences between items ment analyses also do not consider the benefi ts of were generally not incorporated into the analysis. consistently carrying the brands that a customer seg- As fi rms started using category management, ment wants to buy (Krishnan, Koelemeijer, and Rao they experienced diminishing returns from the 2002). Dropping slow sellers could lead people to process. A survey of manufacturers by Silvermine switch stores because a key item on their shopping Consulting Group revealed that 41.7 percent es- lists is no longer available. timated that it took between 100 and 500 hours There are also three technical problems with cat- to complete a category-management project and egory management analyses. First, category man- 19.4 percent thought it took more than 500 hours agement usually emphasizes the number of facings (Kelly 1996). Besides being time- and resource-in- for each brand, not shelf placement. Dreze, Hoch, tensive, the analysis can perpetuate in-store errors. and Purk (1994) concluded that shelf placement If a product is out-of-stock, its sales are reduced is more important than facings. Second, the role and competing brands may gain volume. A shelf of each category in a store’s marketing strategy is Larson Making Category Management Practical 103 undefi ned. Some analyses treat every category the because their buyers tend to make large transac- same. Dhar, Hoch, and Kumar (2001) suggest that tions. price, promotion, and assortment should vary by The second approach attempted to model sales category role.