The potential impact of small businesses on total employment An estimate of employment ratios in the retail sector

Transcription

1 The potential impact of small businesses on total employment An estimate of employment ratios in the retail sector Paul Cubbage TARGET BUSINESS ADVISORY SERVICES Jan 2014

2 Contents Overview 1 Key Points 2 2 Summary 3 3 Scope 5 - What we did - Why we did it - Who we are - Potential bias - Data used - What we didn t do 4 Interpretations Satisfying more demand through single store independent retailers 4.2 Satisfying more demand through bricks and mortar stores 5 Summary of results 11 Primary data results 6 Application data 12 7 TBAS mentoring data 14 8 Survey data 15 Secondary data results 9 BIS business population estimates Statutory accounts information for comparable businesses 18 Appendices Appendix 1 Glossary of terms 19 Appendix 2 Accuracy of data 20 Appendix 3 Retail Price Comparison summary 22 Appendix 4 BIS Business Population Estimate P age

3 1. Key Points This study uses data for the technology / office supplies sector to estimate results for the retail sector as a whole. Key findings are: Single store independent retailers employ 23.0 staff per 1million sales, almost five times more than multiple retailers (4.7 per 1m) and almost thirteen times more than internet retailers (1.8 per 1m) Primarily bricks and mortar multiple retailers employ 2.6 times more staff per 1m than internet retailers From this, we can estimate the impact of shifts in retail spend between multiple retailers and independent retailers: Every 1% of retail spend switched from multiples to independent retailers results in a net increase in employment of around 57,000 jobs. Since 1990 large businesses have doubled their market share in the retail sector. Reverting back to the relative market share of 1990 would create an additional net 1.2 million retail jobs. Sharing retail spend equally between large and small retailers would create an additional net 1.6 million retail jobs. We can also estimate the future impact on net employment of increasing internet sales: Allowing internet sales to grow at predicted rates will cost between 79,000 and 580,000 jobs by Shifting all online sales offline would create between 114,000 and 837,000 net additional jobs depending on whether sales were picked up by multiples or independents. This is the approximate cost of internet retail seen purely from the point of view of retail employment. Table 1: Numbers employed per 1million turnover Sample Ratio Single-store independents (estimate) 23.0 Multiples 4.7 Internet retailers P age

4 2. Summary BIS population estimates suggest micro-businesses employ twice as many as large enterprises. Judged purely from an employment perspective, this suggests that small businesses are more beneficial than large ones. We wanted to test whether this also applied in the retail sector where small and large retailers are relatively interchangeable. The results are far more dramatic than we expected. Even a relatively small say 20% - difference would have demonstrated a clear beneficial impact of small retailers on total employment. The results are way beyond this, suggesting single-store independents employ almost five times more than multiples and almost thirteen times more than online retailers. On face value, these are compelling figures, but they do throw up some immediate questions; are these results reliable, and what should we do about them? Reliability of results We have used three different data sources, all giving consistent results, so have reason to believe that they are representative of Target customers. We also believe that Target s independent retailer customers are representative of independent IT retailers generally. We are aware of no possible reason why they wouldn t be. Whether or not independent IT retailers are representative of the retail sector as a whole is less clear. Many small IT retailers focus heavily on repairs and less so on sales of new products. In this respect, the sector differs from other retail sectors, and the likely impact is an inflation of the employment ratio. Whilst it may be reasonable to say independents employ almost five times more than multiples in the IT retail sector, it may not be for other sectors. But it does suggest we need to find out. The simple premise that small retailers employ more than large ones seems irrefutable. It is widely accepted that large businesses enjoy labour economies of scale. The BIS population estimates indicate that this is the case, and these results confirm that. There is no obvious rationale why this might not be the case. The extent of the difference in different retail sectors may require further research to quantify, but we would expect the results to be differing degrees of more. What next? The logical conclusion is that we need more small retailers. The role of retailers is to satisfy demand. Based on estimated employment ratios, satisfying more of this demand through small retailers and less through large retailers would have a significant beneficial impact on total employment. Higher employment / lower unemployment would have a positive impact on total demand, hence by sharing the cake (existing demand) differently we can actually make the cake bigger. Furthermore, it is reasonable to claim that a rebalancing in favour of small retailers would provide additional benefits from more even wealth distribution, increased real wages, reduced leakages from the UK economy, regeneration of the high streets, and much more. It is a hugely compelling argument, but to act on it requires a radical shift in strategy. We have an existing framework that favours large retailers over small ones. To use this information positively, we need to reengineer the retail landscape and reverse the trend of the last 20 years. We need to attract more independent retailers through things like rates relief and employers NIC holidays. We need to invest in premises, to convert large empty units into a number of smaller units suitable for independents. We need 3 P age

5 local planning to attract the right balance of independents in each area. We need to address obstacles, such as parking, access and bureaucracy. We need to stop new retail projects for multiple retailers they simply divert sales from other retailers, including independents, and cost rather than create jobs. We need to re-evaluate our approach to online retail. The list could go on and on. We also need a significant change in the way we think about retail. We have many preconceptions that are unhealthy in the context of making radical changes to our retail sector. Big retail is seen as almost entirely good. In its own right, it is responsible for significant employment, pays large amounts of tax, and stimulates the construction sector via retail developments. In isolation and from an economic perspective, it is easy to view big retail as entirely beneficial. Viewed in context of the retail sector as a whole, and particularly with the view that every 1 spent with big retail is 1 diverted from small retail, we get a wholly different perspective. We have now introduced an opportunity cost of big retail sales. If that cost is greater than the benefit in terms of employment it clearly is then big retail has a detrimental impact. New big retail developments are no longer about creating jobs, but costing them by diverting sales from smaller retailers. We need to stop viewing retail projects in isolation and evaluate only with regard to the overall impact. So should we act immediately? On the basis of these results alone, should we be taking steps to shift the balance of the retail sector back in favour of small businesses? In an ideal world, we could make a start. We could acknowledge that there is a clear case that smaller retailers are better for employment, and start to address some of the key barriers to small businesses. But to take meaningful action requires a radical change in outlook and strategy and - potentially - significant investment. We would need to know the full extent of the difference in employment ratios throughout the retail sector. We would need to evaluate the full economic impact in terms of jobs, wages, prices, leakages from the economy, jobs in related industries, taxes, and much more. We would need to formulate strategies and quantify the expected benefits of each. We certainly couldn t embark on a project of such magnitude simply on the basis of some indicative information from a small sample of IT retailers. As a starting point, we need robust and impartial research. A dose of realism In publishing these results, we don t expect to change the world. We don t have the influence, the ability, or even the time to try. Our aim is simply to highlight the issue to people in a position to make a difference, and at the very least to those who may commission or undertake the additional research that is the necessary next step. What we would stress is that there is some urgency. With the much-reported deterioration of the high street and the continuing growth of internet retail, we cannot simply wait and see what happens next. We need to start now, whilst we still have a high street to save. Contact If you wish to challenge, query, discuss, or comment on any aspect of this report, please contact me directly on paul.cubbage@targetcomponents.co.uk. 4 P age

6 3. Scope What we did We estimated the employment ratio - staff (and owners) employed per 1million sales - for small independent IT retailers. We then compared this with employment ratios for relevant major retailers and for online IT retailers. To estimate the employment ratios for independents, we surveyed our customers and compared the results with relevant information we already had from account applications and from business mentoring activities. To determine employment ratios for multiples and online retailers, we used information from statutory accounts. See Data Used below. Why we did it It seems pretty obvious that big businesses enjoy efficiencies that small businesses don t and are better at employing the smallest amount of people required. The logical extension would be that big businesses employ fewer staff than small ones for an equivalent level of sales, and by extension are bad for employment. Out of curiosity I decided to search for data that summarised this disparity in employment. I couldn t find any. It may be that I m not particularly good at searching, but it surprised me that something as potentially significant as this appears to have been ignored. The most relevant information I could find was the Business Population Estimates from the Department for Business Innovation and Skills. This data seemed to confirm that small business employ proportionately more than large enterprises and that micro-businesses employ approximately twice as many as larger businesses. However, whilst this might be broadly indicative, it isn t particularly helpful. It gives no breakdown by sector, and in certain sectors would be utterly irrelevant anyway. It s purely academic to know that a large bank is more labour efficient than a small retailer since there is no potential for substitution of one for another. Where the comparison does become relevant is for sectors where small businesses can essentially satisfy demand just as effectively as large enterprises. One area that immediately sprang to mind was retail. Small shops can easily supply the same type of products (and often a greater range of services) as major chain retailers. And since we supply a large number of retailers (see who we are ), we already had some information that could be used, and could easily obtain more by asking our customers, it seemed an interesting and worthwhile thing to do. Who we are We are Target Business Advisory Services (TBAS), part of Target Components Limited (co reg ) a trade only IT distributor. 5 P age

7 TBAS was established in 2011 to provide free, impartial business support and advice to Target customers, principally IT resellers. This support is provided through one-to-one mentoring, workshops and presentations, plus advice, resources and research via the TBAS Shop Talk website. Potential Bias Around two thirds of Target customers are independent retailers. Many of the remaining third are online retailers, including some of our largest and most loyal customers. We also conduct a significant proportion of our own business online, both through Target and our specialist division Servers Plus. We are passionate about supporting all our customers, whether online or offline. If we have a bias, it is our affinity with small IT businesses. We have been conscious of this throughout and taken every effort to ensure that the results are accurate, impartial and free of bias. Data Used Primary data Survey data Data obtained specifically, collected by online survey of Target customers in March and April Application data Data from customer account application forms submitted to Target between 1 Jan 2011 and 31 Dec TBAS mentoring data Data collated from information provided by customers undergoing one-to-one mentoring support through Target Business Advisory Services (TBAS). All primary data has been treated with the strictest confidence. Data has not been shared with or exposed to any third parties. Secondary data BIS data from the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) Business Population Estimates for the UK and Regions Provides an overall estimate employment ratio for businesses by size category. Information for Comparable Businesses statutory accounts information for relevant comparable businesses, i.e. businesses in the same or similar sectors. What we didn t do Whilst there is an inherent case that it would be better for employment to have more small retailers and less large retailers (and internet retailers), we haven t considered or evaluated other factors. Only by estimating the impact on other factors can the net benefit or even the net impact on employment be evaluated. Some but not all of these factors are briefly highlighted below. If retail sales were to shift from multiples to independent retailers, how would this impact: Prices? Does the buying power of multiple retailers help to keep prices down? Do higher margin requirements of multiples mean that their prices are already higher than independents? Would more independent retailers increase competition and drive down prices? Note: see Appendix 3 for the summary of our national retail price comparisons - indicates independent retailer prices are typically lower than their closest major chain rivals. 6 P age

8 Corporate tax revenues? To what extent would lower labour-efficiency result in lower profits and hence lower tax revenues? To what extent are independent retailers less tax-efficient than multiples, and to what extent would this increase total corporate tax revenues? How does the taxto-sales ratio differ between large and small retailers, and could this be used to estimate the total impact on business tax revenue of market shifts? The UK balance of payments? Would a weakening of major retailers reduce their ability to develop export markets, or would less domestic opportunity drive major UK retailers to attack export markets? Would there be a positive impact on BoP from independent retailers purchasing or producing goods locally that would otherwise be imported? Innovation? To what extent would the weakening of opportunities for multiples reduce the resources available to invest in innovative products and solutions? Conversely, would greater competition from independent retailers provide a catalyst for multiples to innovate to improve competitiveness? To what extent are independent retailers drivers of innovation? Product development? Would weakening multiples have less ability to innovate products? Would a stronger independent sector create more unique, new products? Would a stronger independent sector offer easier routes to market for innovative new products? Emotive measures such as wellbeing and happiness? Would more independent retailers create a greater sense of local identity, differentiation, community, and vibrancy? If so, to what extent? Could this be measured and valued, and if so, how? Real incomes? To what extent would higher employment increase aggregate disposable income and hence demand? To what extent would an increased demand for labour push up wages? What would the impact be on prices, and would this be offset by increased competition in the independent sector? If retail sales were shifted from the internet to bricks and mortar retailers, how would this impact: Non-retail jobs? To what extent if at all would jobs be lost or created in related sectors such as logistics, marketing, and technology? Would a shift offline boost jobs in service sectors e.g. cafes, transport etc. as more consumers visited town centres? The quality of jobs? If there is some element of job substitution, would there be an impact on quality of jobs and if so how could it be measured and valued? Innovation? Would a weakening of internet retail result in less internet innovation or would it result in more as internet retailers were forced to compete in areas other than simple price advantage? Prices? What would the impact be on disposable income, assuming that 10% of current retail spend is placed online to take advantage of lower pricing? To what extent would this be offset by increased competition in the independent sector and / or other factors? Leakage? To what extent would a substitution of internet sales for bricks and mortar retailers shift a greater proportion of sales to UK businesses and retain more money in the UK economy? Corporate tax revenues? To what extent would the shift impact the amount of corporate tax collected as a proportion of overall retail spend? 7 P age

9 4. Interpretations The difference in employment ratios between small and large retailers and between online and offline suggests two obvious potential implications to supply more retail demand through small rather than large retailers, and supply more offline rather than online. We can now estimate the impact in terms of total employment of these two scenarios. 4.1 The impact of satisfying a greater proportion of existing consumer demand through single-store independent retailers rather than multiples. Our sample data suggests that small retailers employ roughly five times more staff per equivalent 1million of sales than large retailers. Based on 2012 total retail sales (excluding auto fuel) of 310,787m, every 1% of spend switched from multiples to independents would create a net additional 56,874 retail jobs. The last twenty years or so have seen a steady shift towards major retailers, with the market share of small businesses in the retail sector halving from 42% in 1990 to 21% in Reversing this trend would significantly impact employment. If market share of small retailers simply reverted to 1990 levels, we would create a net 1.19 million additional retail jobs. There are additional benefits associated with increasing employment increased aggregate demand, increases in real earnings (and a further boost to demand), better retention of money in both local and the UK economies, and potentially more even distribution of wealth which can all in turn contribute to further increases in employment. We have not evaluated any of these factors and they are not incorporated in the results above. It could be argued that conditions for such a change seem favourable based on: - The recent failures of major chain retailers, the expectation that this will continue in the near future, and the desire generally amongst multiples to reduce their property portfolio - Retail vacancy rates, i.e. the availability of retail premises that could be converted to more appropriate uses or sizes - A shift towards self-employment / owners-only businesses as evidenced by BIS business population data - Apparent public support for and a consumer shift towards local retail models as evidenced by the growth of buy-local schemes and the popularity of local models such as farm shops - A slowdown in the rate of increase of large businesses retail market share see table 2 Table 2: Market share of large businesses all retailing excluding auto fuel Source: ONS retail sales data March 2013 VolNSAT volume non-seasonally adjusted total sales Years From To Growth Growth (absolute) (relative) % 57.8% 0% 0% % 65.6% 7.8% 13.6% % 71.3% 5.7% 8.7% % 75.3% 4.0% 5.6% % 78.4% 3.1% 4.1% % 78.9% 0.4% 0.6% March est 78.4% 79.4% 1.0% 1.3% * * assuming the same rate of growth from 2010 March P age

10 4.2 The impact of satisfying a greater proportion of existing consumer demand through bricks-andmortar retail rather than the internet. The Centre for Retail Research estimates the share of online retail sales at 12.7% in 2012 and predicts a rise to 21.5% by Using ONS 2012 retail sales data and our employment ratios, we can estimate the likely employment impact of this growth, and alternatively satisfying internet sales by other methods. Replacing all internet sales with offline sales by single-store independent retailers would create an additional net 836,763 jobs. Replacing all internet sales with offline sales by multiple retailers would create an additional net 114,463 jobs. Replacing all internet sales with offline sales by both multiple retailers and independent retailers (at 2012 market share ratio) would create an additional net 266,868 jobs. Conversely, allowing online retail sales to increase from 12.7% to 21.5% by 2018 would cost 580,000 jobs if all those sales were taken from independents, 79,000 jobs if sales were at the expense of multiples, and 185,000 jobs if sales were at the expense of both small and large retailers at the current market share ratio. Whilst our research suggests that internet retailers create almost 13 times less jobs than independent retailers and 2.6 times less jobs than multiples, these figures are likely to be understated. Most bricks-andmortar retailers have at least some existing element of internet sales which dilutes their overall employment ratio. The true impact on jobs could well be more severe than set out above. There is widespread belief that the growth of online sales has a detrimental impact on traditional retailing. There is also a widespread understanding that internet retailing is less labour-intensive than traditional channels. Despite these facts, there appears to be little or no research attempting to quantify the impact on employment. Online sales tax There has been some debate recently about the need for an online sales tax. To date, this has been fairly vague in definition, but appears to suggest a tax on the profits on online retailers. There has also been no clear definition of the need for an online tax, i.e. what specific problem online sales causes. The difference in employment between online and offline retailers particularly independent retailers suggests that the continued growth of online retail may be detrimental to retail employment. If there is a problem to address, it would appear primarily to be this one. It is largely the greater labour-efficiency of online retailers that facilitates a significant online price advantage, which in turn attracts consumers online. Any attempt to levy additional taxes on the profits of internet retailers would not address the price advantage and would result in driving online retailers to increase sales to compensate for the tax using their price advantage to drive this. Taxing profits of online retailers would simply exacerbate the problem. The only effective way to introduce an online tax would be as a consumer tax rather than a tax on profits, thus addressing the online price advantage whilst ensuring that it was applied equally to all online retailers regardless of size or tax-efficiency. This could be applied as an additional rate of VAT for online sales. 9 P age

11 We can now estimate the range of impact of, for example, a 10% additional online VAT rate. If it had no effect on the level of online sales, it would generate additional tax revenue of approximately 4bn. At the other extreme, all online sales were diverted offline, we would increase retail employment by between 114,000 (if internet sales transferred to multiples) and 837,000 (if transferred to independents). 10 P age

12 5. Summary of Results 5.1 Primary Data Table 3: Summary of results, primary data (results for retailers only, middle 80% of sample) Sample Size Ratio Ave of Reference ratios Application data (mid-points) Section 6 TBAS mentoring data Section 7 Survey data Section 8 We can see from above that despite differing sample sizes and reasons for data submission and subject to the weaknesses discussed within each relevant section the results are relatively consistent. It would be reasonable from the above to estimate that the overall sector employment ratio for singlestore independent IT retailers is around Secondary Data Table 4: Summary of results, BIS data see Section 9 Sample # of businesses Total sales ( m) Owners-only + microbusinesses All businesses 10+ employees Total emp (000s) Ratio 4,579, ,967 7, ,155 2,507,583 16, BIS business population estimates indicate that micro-businesses (including owners-only businesses) employ almost twice as many staff per 1million sales than businesses with 10 or more employees. Table 5: Summary of results, comparative data see Section 10 Business type Turnover Employees Ratio ( m) Tech / office major retail 9, , Internet technology retailers , P age

13 6. Application data Data Acquisition Target supplies IT trade customers only. To open an account, customers must first complete an application form. The data required includes turnover, number of employees split into bands 1-4, 5-9, 10-24, 25-49, and 50+, and an indication of whether or not the applicant has retail premises. The data reviewed is from completed application forms submitted over a two year period from 1 Jan 2011 to 31 Dec During this period, a total of 1,700 account applications were received. Of these, over 1,200 either did not answer or clicked no in response to the question: Are your premises a retail outlet?. A further 67 applications failed to meet the criteria for an IT trade account and were rejected, 86 did not provide turnover figures, 7 were excluded due to inconsistencies in data, and 17 were excluded due to the low turnover threshold (see Appendix 1). The remaining 304 accounts represented all accounts that had specified that they had retail premises, had provided turnover and employee data as part of their application, and had not been excluded by virtue of having turnover below 20,000. Because the numbers employed are entered in bands, it is not possible to derive a ratio of employees per 1million sales, but we can derive minimum and maximum ratios based on the lower and upper points of the employment bandings and the mid-point between the two. For example, an applicant with 1million turnover and employees has an employment ratio between 10 and 24 with a mid-point of 17. Results (see Table 6 below) The sample has been broken down into micro-businesses 93% of applicants, and our main area of interest and businesses with ten or more employees. The middle 80% methodology has then been applied to micro-businesses to reduce the impact of exceptions (see Appendix 1) and derive an estimate of the employment ratio. From these results, we would estimate the employment ratio for micro-business IT retailers to be We can also see that micro-businesses have a much higher employment ratio than larger businesses (21.1 v 12.0). Table 6: Summary of application data results Sample # of appl Total sales ( m) Total emp min Total emp max Ratio min Ratio max Ratio mid Ave of ratios min Ave of ratios max Ave of ratios mid All , Microbusinesses > 10 employees Micro middle 80% , , P age

14 Potential Weaknesses The data suffers from the following known or potential weaknesses: 1. Whilst there is no reason to think that Applicants for a trade account with Target aren t representative of the sector as a whole, we have no evidence to demonstrate that they are. 2. This is a small sample of overall applicants that have identified themselves as having retail premises. Activities carried out as a normal part of business consistently indicate that retail customers make up approximately two thirds of Target s customer base, therefore the sample is not necessarily representative of retail applicants as a whole. 3. There is no process of verifying and correcting data submitted on application forms, therefore no process to indicate likely accuracy of applicant input. 4. There is a perceived incentive in some cases to overstate size by inflating turnover and / or employment figures to increase the likelihood of the application being successful. There is no obvious consequence to misstatement, hence no disincentive to overstatement. 5. Employment figures are given in bandings, thus employment ratios can only be stated as minimum and maximum figures and as a mid-point between the two. 6. The type of IT business that has retail premises can vary widely, making the definition of a typical IT retailer somewhat vague. Most retailers now offer one or more of a wide range of services including maintenance, repairs, home installation, B2B support, consultancy, web design, internet sales, software services, and much more. At one end of the scale, an IT retailer may offer repairs and support only and offer few if any products for sale. These businesses typically have relatively high employment ratios. At the other end of the scale, retailers that have become largely internet based have relatively low employment ratios. There is no basis to subdivide the data based on primary business activity. 13 P age

15 7. TBAS mentoring data Data Acquisition Target Business Advisory Services (TBAS) works closely with clients to provide one-to-one mentoring in a diverse range of business areas dependent upon client reqirements. Key business information including turnover and numbers employed is normally obtained to assist the process. This data has been collated and used to estimate the employment ratio. There is a perceived greater degree of credibility to this information in comparison to account application data on the basis that: - This data is provided first hand in person - There is a likelihood that inaccurate information would become apparent during the mentoring process, hence an incentive for the client to provide accurate information in the first place to avoid potential embarrassment later - There is no perceived incentive to overstate size or performance as there may be when applying for a trade account The small sample size means that the data is particularly vulnerable to the disproportionate impact of the largest and smallest businesses, and provides an example of the need for the middle 80% methodology (see Appendix 1). Results Results are shown in Table 7 below. Retail businesses have been separated from the full sample, and the middle 80% methodology applied. From this small sample, we would estimate that the employment ratio for independent IT retailers is Table 7: Summary of TBAS mentoring data results Sample # of clients Total sales Total emp Ratio Ave of ratios ( m) All Retailers Retailers middle 80% Potential Weaknesses We should note three particular weaknesses in this sample data: 1. The sample size is very small. 2. It is a sample of Target customers, and whilst there is no reason to think that Target customers aren t representative of the sector as a whole, we have no evidence to demonstrate that they are. 3. This particular sample is of customers undertaking a business mentoring process. They may not be representative of Target customers as a whole. 14 P age

16 8. Survey Data Data Acquisition Data was collected by online survey of Target customers (IT businesses) during March and April 2013 on Target s website. Submission of data was restricted to account holders to ensure that only IT trade businesses could input data. To avoid potential bias, participants were not told why the data was required, but simply asked to give turnover and employment data, state whether or not they have retail premises, and tick a declaration that the information submitted was true and accurate to the best of their knowledge. During the period, a total of 1,952 account holders logged into the website of which 183 completed the survey, or 9.375% of the population. Some of the information was clearly incorrect, e.g. turnover figures of 0, 1, etc. We also applied the minimum turnover threshold (see Appendix 1) below which submissions were disregarded. The purpose of this was two-fold: 1. To reduce the risk of under-statement errors (e.g. input 5,000 instead of 500,000) 2. To remove businesses that are potentially part-time or not the main source of employment. A total of 27 accounts were excluded on this basis, leaving 156 accounts with a combined turnover of 51m and 840 staff. Of the remaining 156, 104 participants stated that they had retail premises the sector we are particularly interested in. It is notable that two-thirds of the sample are retailers. This corresponds with what we know to be the case from our normal business activities, suggesting that the data is more representative of the overall Target customer base than the data obtained from account applications or from TBAS mentoring. Results Results are shown in Table 8 below. From this sample, we can say that a small IT retail business typically employs an equivalent of 27.6 staff per 1million sales, whilst the employment ratio for small IT retailers collectively is 22.7 staff per 1million sales. Table 8: Summary of survey results Sample # of customers Total sales Total emp Ratio Ave of ratios ( m) All All retailers Retailers middle 80% P age

17 9. Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) Business Population Estimates for the UK and Regions 2012 Table 1 of the report shows the estimated number of businesses in the UK private sector and their associated employment and turnover by size of business at the start of There are a total of 4.8m private sector businesses with 23.9m employees and combined turnover of 3,132bn. By dividing total employment with turnover in millions, we can determine that on average UK businesses employ 7.6 staff per 1m turnover. The table provides a breakdown of the data by size of enterprise. Almost three quarters of businesses are described as with no employees with the definition as follows: "With no employees" comprises sole proprietorships and partnerships comprising only the self-employed owner-manager(s), and companies comprising only an employee director. For the purposes of this report, and to more accurately represent them, we will refer to these businesses as owners-only businesses. Owners-only businesses employ on average 18.8 staff per million sales. From the same data we can see that micro-businesses those with less than 10 employees employ 9.2 staff per million sales, other small businesses (10-49 employees) 7.6, medium enterprises ( employees) 6.5, and large enterprises 6.1. It is immediately apparent that owners-only businesses employ over three times more staff per equivalent level of turnover than large enterprises, and micro-businesses over 50% more. Assuming that owners-only businesses are effectively micro-businesses it is unlikely that a company with 10 or more directors or partners would not employ any other staff we can combine the figures for owners-only and micro-businesses to arrive at true micro-business results. Unless stated otherwise, all further references to micro-businesses will include owners-only businesses. Micro-businesses average 12.4 employees per million sales, almost double the 6.4 average for all other businesses. Moving all of the revenue from medium and large enterprises to microbusinesses at these averages would increase private sector employment by over 50% and create almost 13 million extra jobs. Of course, we do not suggest that it is feasible to move all revenue from medium and large to microbusinesses, but it does suggest that there is some scope to encourage this movement in certain sectors and have a significantly positive impact on employment. There is some evidence that this is already happening to a degree; the number of owners-only businesses has increased by 18% since 2008 (per figure 3 and associated data from the BIS report), whilst numbers of businesses of other sizes have stood still. A continuation of this trend in 2012 and 2013 may help explain why employment numbers have risen despite poor GDP figures. One area in particular where it would appear feasible to encourage a move from medium and large enterprises towards micro-businesses is the retail sector. This sector essentially satisfies domestic demand. There is no obvious reason why this demand could not be equally satisfied by micro-businesses typically single store independent retailers than by large enterprises. If employment in the retail sector follows a similar pattern to the national average, revenue transferred from major chain to independent retailer should create twice as many new jobs as those lost in major chains. 16 P age

18 The purpose of this study is to ascertain whether or not the overall national average employment ratio is reflected in the retail sector, and hence whether there is the potential to create additional jobs by encouraging a shift in consumer spend from major chain retailers to single-store independent retailers. Table 9: Summary of BIS results Sample # of businesses Total sales ( m) Total emp (000s) Ratio All businesses 4,794,105 3,131,549 23, Owners-only 3,557, ,805 3, Micro-businesses 1,022, ,162 3, Owners-only + microbusinesses 4,579, ,967 7, employees 177, ,327 3, employees 29, ,384 2, employees 6,455 1,602,870 9, All businesses 10+ employees 214,155 2,507,583 16, Since this report was prepared, BIS have released the 2013 business population estimate. See Appendix 4 for details. 17 P age

19 10. Statutory Accounts Information for Comparable Businesses The combined results from the survey, application data, and TBAS mentoring data provide comparison with the BIS averages for the economy as a whole, but they do not place any comparative context against employment ratios for larger retailers, and more specifically large retailers in the same or similar sector(s). Whilst the number of major retailers specialising in IT and related products is limited, there are a number of primarily or entirely internet-based retailers who do specialise in these products. Data from these businesses is of interest in comparing employment ratios for both small and major retailers with those of internet retailers. The bricks and mortar major retailers in the same or similar sectors selected for comparison are Dixons Retail PLC (owner of PC World, Currys, and Dixons), Comet Group Ltd, and Staples UK Retail Ltd. Exclusively, or primarily, internet based retailers listed are those widely recognised as specialising in IT and technology products. There has been no bias applied in selecting comparatives, and no businesses have been excluded because they don t fit the results. All businesses have been included based on the information included in their most recent available statutory accounts. The process is very simple to follow simply take the total number of employees and divide it by turnover in millions so other results can easily be added as required. Table 10: Summary of results for comparable businesses Business Accounting Turnover Employees Ratio period ( m) Staples UK Retail Ltd Jan , Dixons Retail PLC Apr , , Comet Group Ltd Apr , , Tech / office major retail total 9, , Scan Computers International Ltd Jun Ebuyer UK Ltd Dec OCUK Ltd Apr Buy IT Direct Ltd Mar Dabs.com PLC Mar Misco UK Ltd Dec Internet retail total , P age

20 Appendix 1: Glossary of Terms Target Target Components Limited, a trade only IT distributor, co reg TBAS Target Business Advisory Services, a service operated by Target to provide free, impartial business advice to Target customers We, us, our and similar refer to Target and / or TBAS. Target and TBAS may usually be used interchangeably. Where the distinction between Target and TBAS is relevant, it has been pointed out Employment ratio the number of employees, including business owners, per 1million sales Sector ratio the overall ratio, comparing the sum of the numbers employed with the sum of turnover for a sample of businesses. Typical ratio the average of the individual employment ratios for a sample of businesses. Independent retailers A non-multiple retailer operating separately and outside of a larger company chain. Typically used to describe size and geographical reach. For the purposes of this report, we will use independent retailers to define retailers with less than ten stores with a specific regional, rather than national, reach. Single store independent retailers are those with just one store. Multiple retailers retailers with several stores and extensive regional or national reach. For the purposes of this report, fall into the criteria for large enterprises (250+ employees). Major retailers see Multiple retailers Internet retailers retailers that operate and conduct transactions wholly or primarily online. Owners-only businesses Described by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills as businesses with no employees" - sole proprietorships and partnerships comprising only the self-employed ownermanager(s), and companies comprising only an employee director Bricks-and-mortar retailers Retailers operating from a physical retail store Traditional retailers See bricks-and-mortar retailers Middle 80% see Appendix 2. Methodology adopted to make relatively small sample sizes representative of the larger population by removing the largest and smallest 10% by turnover. 19 P age