
The behavioural science of supermarkets - robg
http://www.economist.com/science/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=12792420
======
robertk
This is why I hugely prefer shopping online to shopping at a store. Even not
counting the time it takes to drive there, at a real store you are the store's
bitch, to manipulate for maximum benefit. An online store, on the other hand,
is your bitch--it has to attract you right away to the things you're looking
for, rather than prolong contact with those for as long as possible.

~~~
yagibear
I'm not sure that online shops are any less likely to try "to manipulate for
maximum benefit". The palette may change (fresh bread smells & video
surveillance get replaced by cookies and Referer fields) but the motivations
and biases stay the same.

~~~
robertk
Of course, but my point is that the online shops have a much narrower range to
work in. If a grocery store makes you walk around a quarter of a mile to get a
ten-item list of necessities, people will accept it. If an online store makes
you view half its inventory before you can purchase something, it's not going
to make much business.

------
ryanmahoski
On the CS side, I would add that if you mash POS data with marketing spend the
results are often shocking. Consumer goods companies have terrific raw data
but they ignore a surprising amount of it to their peril.

I built a little sales analysis tool for Accenture that they have since sold
to several consumer goods clients. It pulls in raw marketing data--pricing,
promotion types, locations, revenues--then calculates a few dozen metrics
related to ROI, cannibalism etc. Client managers then drill into their
marketing data from a couple layers of abstraction and from there they can see
fairly clearly how their choices are affecting P&L.

We built that because the leading consumer goods companies were essentially
guessing at the repercussions a given sales promotion would have on the bottom
line. Today the leaders are more sophisticated but the little guys continue to
revere intuition and gut instincts over statistics.

Our pilot client was Procter & Gamble. I pulled in their POS sales and
marketing data e.g. endcap on Tide detergent at [x% discount] in [region y]
during [phenomenon z]. I mashed that with private and public data sources,
laying out the results for trending and drilldown. P&G bought as did L'Oreal
and some others. I'm curious how things are going so if anyone reading has
worked with these or similar tools, I would love to know how they've evolved.

It's amazing how many expensive marketing decisions are done without regard
for scientific analysis. A lot is decided on the basis of how the marketing
director/committee feels. In the 90s that was acceptable technology but today
it is called Not Learning From Your Mistakes. Compare Google's A/B testing
with "throwing ideas at the wall to see what sticks" and you begin to see the
problem. Trust me, there are big P&L opportunities in this stuff.

------
nazgulnarsil
I disagree. It's more depressing than sinister. Getting people to buy more
frozen pizza is what passes for sinister at the economist?

------
ardell
Given the razor-thin margins of grocery stores I'm not sure why they don't try
a more ad-supported model. Hang huge colorful printed ads over each aisle,
charge fees to the name-brands if they want to be placed anywhere but directly
behind the store brand, etc. Seems like they could squeeze more profit than
they're currently getting.

~~~
undertoad
I think they do some of those things now, with ads on the floor, blinky-
lighted coupon dispensers, end-caps (?) and so on. I suppose it could get
uglier, though. ;)

I also think they've become savvier about promoting their generic brands.

