Having an accurate forecast of store traffic is an important part of setting staff levels. This is particularly true when converting store visits into sales depends heavily on consulting with in-store personnel. But how can a store build a good forecast? According to Businessweek, satellite imaging is a possible tool (The Most Powerful Sales Tool at Lowe’s: Satellites, Feb 26).
Lowe’s said on Wednesday that it has been gauging traffic at its almost 1,900 stores from space, scanning satellite images of its parking lots to find out how many shoppers it can expect at every hour of every day. It has also started syncing its parking lot observations with actual transaction counts to see how many people drove away without making a purchase.
The space snooping is a particularly great way for Lowe’s to manage its workforce, scheduling surges in floor staff when parking spaces are about to become hard to come by.
The basic premise is that there is a coherent strategy that firms can execute that works well for both its investors and customers while creating desirable, good jobs for its front-line employees. Furthermore, this does not depend on charging customers a premium. Indeed, her focus is on low-cost retail and she discusses several retailers that price quite competitively despite treating their employees quite well. Said another way, the fact that, say, Wal-Mart offers crummy jobs is a choice on its part, not an absolute necessity for being a low-cost player. (more…)
What follows Christmas? Returns, of course. This is especially true for on-line retailers who must generally offer more forgiving returns polices than conventional retailers. In Europe, this is a matter of law. In the US, it is often a necessary part of gaining customer trust. But how much do returns cost retailers? According to The Economist, it can be quite a bit (Return to Santa, Dec 21).
Return rates can be alarmingly high: for some online retailers up to half of everything they sell comes back. Studies find that just handling each returned item costs online sellers between $6 and $18, and that is before the losses from items that are returned in unsaleable condition. …
A new study by Christian Schulze of the Frankfurt School of Finance and Management seeks to put some hard numbers on the scale of the serial-returner problem. Mr Schulze studied 5.9m transactions in Germany, involving 166,000 customers, for a large European online retailer. He looked only at those who had bought at least five items over a five-year period, and found that 5% of them sent back more than 80% of the things they had bought; and that 1% of customers sent back at least 90% of their purchases. Without the cost of returns, the retailer’s profits would be almost 50% higher, the study found.
We have had several stories over the last couple years about retailers using inventories at their stores to fill web orders. At one time or another, there have been stories about Nordstrom, Wal-Mart and Macy’s all treating that big box at the mall as a warehouse. Now the Wall Street Journal reports that even more chains — including Sears and Office Deport – are hopping on the bandwagon (Retailers Turn Store Clerks Into Web Shippers, Dec 9). You can here the reporter discussing her findings here:
It is not surprising that more retailers are going this way. They are all facing pressure from on-line competitors and finding some way to utilize their existing physical network is appealing. If nothing else, I suspect that everyone in the C-suite wants to be able to tell the board they are trying something.
But how can you set up this up quickly? You need to develop a system that updates inventories in real time while dispatching staff to fetch what has been ordered and scheduling the shipper to pick stuff up. Nordstrom is often identified as the first mover on this. The New York Times reports that it took them a couple of years to get it set up. How can a Johnny-come-lately ramp this up quickly? By working with UPS and FedEx.
UPS and FedEx Corp. which were critical to helping launch the e-commerce boom, are now eager to help traditional retailers deal with it. They have engineered new strategies for jockeying inventory across the country to avoid overstocks and markdowns and to keep customers from defecting to Amazon, a big problem last year. The strategy is also important this holiday season as clothing retailers are threatened with heavy inventories.
UPS says it is working with about 40 retailers on implementing these strategies—about double the number a year ago. FedEx said these partnerships helped boost revenue in its ground delivery business 11% in its fiscal first quarter. Both forecast record holiday-season deliveries: UPS with 34 million packages on Dec. 16 and FedEx with 22 million packages on Cyber Monday.
In the case of Sears, UPS provided software that shows shipment statuses of all orders across the entire system. It also sends tracking numbers.
I have a long-standing interest in Black Friday — less because I want to go shopping but more because it poses some interesting questions on how firms compete and how they manage customers. The news this year is that Black Friday is creeping evermore into Thanksgiving proper as retailers keep moving up their opening times. So why are they doing that? Two posts on Businessweek.com put forward theories. The first posits that this is being driven by customer segmentation (The Game Theory Behind Macy’s Thanksgiving Opening, Oct 15).
Traditions are being trampled on by the Corporate Retail Complex! Of course, consumers don’t have to go. Some won’t, and that’s precisely what the strategy folks at Macy’s are betting on.
The purists scandalized by the thought of shopping on the holiday itself aren’t likely to avoid Macy’s altogether. And with the die-hard bargain-hunters swarming the stores on Thursday, Friday shopping will likely be much more pleasant for those who are a little less committed.
It’s only a two-hour wait. An ordinary Thursday afternoon at Apple’s flagship UK store in Regent Street, London and a long line of customers snakes across the first floor. The hip technology brand is used to queues for the launch of its latest must-have product, but these people have come carrying faulty iPhones and malfunctioning laptops, desperate for help from one of Apple’s increasingly hard to reach “Genius” experts.
When it opened in Virginia in 2001, the first Apple store was hailed as a retail revolution, allowing shoppers to play with expensive technology without any sales pressure. The emphasis on service, with blue-shirted Geniuses on hand to answer queries and fix broken products, has become almost as important to the Apple brand as the aesthetic appeal of its products. But the whole experience is under pressure as a relatively small number of shops struggle to cope with rapidly growing customer numbers. …
The Regent Street outlet, for example, employs at least 120 Geniuses. Each sees up to 30 customers a day but it is impossible to book an appointment less than a week in advance. If the problem is urgent you can turn up and queue, but it could be a very long wait. This week, a gaggle of well-trained, polite and friendly staff worked their way along the line trying to answer simple queries and advise people on alternatives to queueing. But it is hard to redirect people when every nearby shop has its Geniuses fully booked for days on end.
The article goes on to note that this is not just an issue in London. It certainly can be an issue here in Chicagoland. While a quick check of my nearest Apple store shows that they currently have a number of appointments open for tomorrow, Friday morning already has no availability. There are even reports of scalpers hawking Genius Bar reservations in China.
So is there an easy fix to this problem? It seems like there are two issues here. First, to what extent should Apple accommodate walk-in customers? Second, is there any easy fix to expanding Genius capacity? These are related. If capacity is expanded then the ease of getting a reservation should take care of the walk-in issue. On the other hand, if capacity cannot be easily expanded, then there is a question of how to allocate it between walk-ins and appointments.
A few months ago I had a post on stair-step incentives. These are incentive schemes that car manufacturers offer dealers that essentially pay rebates on cars that have been sold once sales cross a specified threshold. In that post, I noted that these schemes had the potential to skew competition in local markets:
If you and I own competing dealerships across town, I have a serious leg up on you if I am the first to reach a threshold. I can price more competitively since I know that I am guaranteed to get a rebate while you are still striving to make the threshold. Note this makes everything all that more sensitive to how individual dealer thresholds are set. If mine were skewed low while yours were too high, it’s game over and I eat your lunch.
Obviously, from a dealer’s perspective, this is an issue. Dealers don’t necessarily know how car makers set their targets. They, for example, may be basing targets on national trends that may not apply locally. Further dealers may be facing challenges that the automakers don’t know (e.g., a top sales person just left). Even if a dealer knows how his target was set, he may not know what the target is for a neighboring dealer of the same brand or what is happening with a competing brand. Hence, he could be blind sided when a competing dealer reaches her threshold and starts pricing very aggressively. Is there an easy answer to this dealer’s conundrum?
Enter the New Hampshire state legislature. (more…)
I love self-service checkout, but it is again under attack. Here in Chicago, Jewel-Osco (one of the major local supermarket chains) is pulling self-service checkout lanes from some of its stores (Jewel scrapping self-checkout at some stores, Chicago Tribune, Sep 25). Their stated goal is to “reconnect personally with all of its customers.” Now the Wall Street Journal is piling on with an article declaring that computers just aren’t up for the job of letting people buy green beans (Humans 1, Robots 0, Oct 6).
The human supermarket checker is superior to the self-checkout machine in almost every way. The human is faster. The human has a more pleasing, less buggy interface. The human doesn’t expect me to remember or look up codes for produce, she bags my groceries, and unlike the machine, she isn’t on hair-trigger alert for any sign that I might be trying to steal toilet paper. Best of all, the human does all the work while I’m allowed to stand there and stupidly stare at my phone, which is my natural state of being. …
In a recent research paper called “Dancing With Robots,” the economists Frank Levy and Richard Murnane point out that computers replace human workers only when machines meet two key conditions. First, the information necessary to carry out the task must be put in a form that computers can understand, and second, the job must be routine enough that it can be expressed in a series of rules.
Supermarket checkout machines meet the second of these conditions, but they fail on the first. They lack proper information to do the job a human would do. To put it another way: They can’t tell shiitakes from Shinola. Instead of identifying your produce, the machine asks you, the customer, to type in a code for every leafy green in your cart. Many times you’ll have to look up the code in an on-screen directory. If a human checker asked you to remind him what that bunch of the oblong yellow fruit in your basket was, you’d ask to see his boss.
Let’s take this in two parts. First, if people prefer a conventional check out experience because that allows them to zone out then I have to wonder how Jewel’s plan to reconnect with its customers is going to work. I remember as a kid my mom having what seemed like endless conversations with cashiers. Of course, we were in a relatively small town and most of the women (they were virtually all woman) working the registers had either gone to high school with my mom or had a sibling who did. Now we live in a more class divided society. I suspect that none of the cashiers at my local Jewel are actually from the neighborhood or that the store’s staffing policies actually build in time for cashiers and customers to catch up on how their respective in-laws are doing.
But what of the claim that the information needed to run checkouts cannot be simply encoded for computers? (more…)
A Slate article asks a very simple question: “Ikea is so good at so many things. Why is it so bad at delivery?”
The author tells the story of an item that was purchased from Ikea and was supposed to be delivered by a third party. While Ikea claimed to ship the item, the third party claimed to never receive it. Since Ikea claimed the item was shipped, the order could not be cancelled without incurring a hefty cost. Apparently, this is not a unique experience:
The nightmare of Ikea delivery is a truth so universally acknowledged that even the company cops to it. Chief marketing officer Leontyne Green talked about her own “very frustrating” Ikea delivery experience in a December 2011 Ad Age profile, which stressed the firm’s ongoing efforts to improve delivery and overall customer service.
In trying to explain the above conundrum, the author recruits several of our colleagues from Dartmouth and Harvard:
“With sporadic orders over a wide geographic area, Ikea would need a fleet of trucks that might be idle one day and not able to handle the load the next,” says Robert Shumsky, a professor of operations management at the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth.
We have discussed several times, albeit in the context of grocery delivery, the fact that one of the main cost drivers of delivery services is density. Since Ikea tends to be quite far from urban and dense areas, it is usually difficult to build density and thus difficult to offer a cost efficient services. One may charge a high price for such a service, but given their target market, this may not be ideal. (more…)