ELEVATING YOUR GAME FROM TRADE SPEND TO TRADE INVESTMENT

Transcription

1 Initiatives Strategic Mapping Success in The Food System: Discover. Anayze. Strategize. Impement. Measure. ELEVATING YOUR GAME FROM TRADE SPEND TO TRADE INVESTMENT Foodservice manufacturers aocate, in 2010, neary 18% of each saes doar generated on trade spend. Whie trade spend is the argest singe spend item on their P&L after COGS, yet it is approached as tabe-stakes, tactica and argey without performance expectations. Successfu manufacturers wi move trade spend from a tactica eve to a strategic investment. They wi raise their eve of panning and execution eevating their game.

2 Introduction This second Foodservice Trade Investment Survey was conducted jointy by The Hae and MarketInteigence in the spring/summer of 2010 poing a arger group of foodservice manufacturers. The first survey was conducted in by MarketInteigence. Looking back and ahead, trade has and continues to evove in foodservice Institutiona Era: Simpe programs were directed excusivey by the manufacturer consisting of abe aowances and participation in seected food shows. The industry was immature and the institutiona business was an afterthought to most retai companies. Most distribution was oca and most of the operators were independents Growth Era: Foodservice was in a growth cyce; manufacturers offered Earned Income and Sheter programs to distributors, rebates and deviated pricing to Nationa Accounts and LLOs to drive saes. The industry evoved as nationa distributors and chains began to grow. Trade spend became a cost of doing business and, unti ater in the 2000s, was manageabe Trade Investment Era: The industry enters a period of sower growth; however, distributors and operators continue to ook to the manufacturer for ower prices and deas. Contracted business and GPOs are capturing a arger portion of the higher margin street saes. Commodities are fuctuating and infation is being hed in check. Today, market share growth is increasing in importance, and the vehice to capture it is prudent trade investment. Manufacturers wi need to utiize their trade doars more efficienty and effectivey. Historicay, manufacturers have ooked at their spend with, and on behaf of, distributors and operators as Trade Spend. The resuts of this second survey indicate that moving forward, spend wi be redefined as Trade Investment with associated, expected performance outcomes. In order to make this shift, individua companies and the industry as a whoe wi need to take a highy anaytica approach to deveoping measurement criteria and systems. As everyone competes for the consumer s attention, and margins continue to be under pressure, the amount of spend on trade wi become a distinctive too, not a ine item. 2

3 Survey Background Over 68% of the companies surveyed sod both branded and private abe products The survey incuded a representative sampe of product categories Both private and pubic companies were incuded in the survey 70% of the respondents had foodservice saes of $250 miion or more Most respondents (90%) sod to both foodservice and retai Trade Survey Takeaways 1. Trade investment increased in Athough the industry experienced negative growth, the spend on trade went up; manufacturers desired to shift to more operator spend; but, the survey resuts show that this did not occur in a significant manner. 2. Trade is not measured. Trade is considered tabe stakes or pay-to-pay by many of the respondents and is currenty not measured for effectiveness due to a ack of actionabe information or a ack of anaytica resources / systems. 3

4 3. Trade investment is institutionaized. Over time, the spend on trade has become part of the margin equation for distributors and part of the gross margin cacuation for operators. 4. Trade management wi need to be an integrated process. The chaenge for the industry is to utiize the investment that is made in trade to grow market share. This may ead to coser reationships between distributors, manufacturers and operators working together to maintain and grow share. Manufacturers wi participate, but wi need to understand the inkages that exist or wi exist. 5. Trade management requires a technoogy soution. Technoogy in foodservice is rapidy reaching a point where the impact of price or promotion can be understood at the operator unit eve. The reationship and interdependence of operator and distributor trade programs wi become more tighty aigned and ROI can be measured. Recommended Next Steps: What Shoud I Do? Based upon survey resuts and migration from a tactica to a strategic response, a straight forward approach to the issue is iustrated beow. 4

5 The Current Situation Survey Resuts Trade investment is currenty averaging 18.01%; this is a combination of both distributor and operator programs and we beieve that this eve may be reaching a peak. If nothing ese, the survey resuts indicate that manufacturers are seeking to shift their investment towards the operator. Strategicay, this response is on target, yet this effort must be integrated with the needs of the distribution community. There is greater pressure on the manufacturer to provide the operator with a margin improvement. This is evidenced by the growth/expansion of buying groups. In an era where voume retention is growing in importance, the baance between ower margin or ost voume has become more critica. Trade investment is one of the argest items on a manufacturer s P&L. The 2010 survey average was 18.01%, higher than the 16.65% in the 2009 survey. This is second ony to COGS on a manufacturer s baance sheet. The vast majority of respondents (80%) stated that their T:S ratio stayed the same or increased from the previous year. This area is managed at mutipe eves, yet it acks strong anaytics. It has evoved over time and, in many cases, without a centra focus. Who trade reports to is a mix between saes (56%), finance (25%) and marketing (12.5%) and the majority of the respondents did not have a trade panning group (62%). Trade investment is not directed at growth; a arge portion of trade is to retain either voume or sots. Program doars are used as a base to negotiate current year pans. There appears to be a shift in the baance between operator and distributor trade investment. GPO s spend is increasing; 56% of respondents admit to increased spend. The Issues Around Trade Investment Trade panning and trade management are underdeveoped areas in most organizations. Most organizations (90%) manage trade internay, but do not have a dedicated group focused on this area. 5

6 Trade investment / trade panning does not have a home. Organizations reported that trade coud report to finance, marketing, or saes. Whie this in itsef is not an issue, the integration and panning of trade spend across functions is a requirement. In over 36% of the cases, trade spend and trade management may report to more than one area. Trade investment management administrative costs are generay beow the previousy estimated 3.2% (Technomic survey 2009) and fa within a range of 2.25% to 3.25% of saes. Reative to the amount spent on saes efforts through brokers or a direct saes team, trade investment is approximatey 100% of what is spent on a brokered saes process or 30% of a direct saes effort (estimated by THG at %). Whie fied saes is invoved in setting promotions and caendars with key accounts (88%), they are not compensated or rewarded for savings or improvements in trade spend (ess than 40% have any program based on this). There is no cear methodoogy for setting the trade spend budget. It is an equa spit between bottom up, top down, and some combination. Trade investment is often set once a year (50% of respondents reported); and 30% either set budgets quartery or revise them every quarter. The process of setting and revising budgets is done as an expense item, not as an investment vehice. Defining Trade Investment Has Become More Difficut Over time, the trade bucket has expanded to incude a sorts of operator and distributorbased programs, contracted voume, and spending on unique trade initiatives (trade shows, etc.). We beieve that as the focus on the roe of trade investment grows, it wi begin to achieve carity. The use of anaytica toos and structured approaches to panning wi re-aocate the funds and have the potentia to incent share growth. Approximatey 50% of trade spend is directed at distributor programs in order to achieve pacement and retention. 6

7 Approximatey 50% of trade spend is going to operator programs. This is increasing (over 45% of the respondents) due to increased payments to GPO s. Whie we see this increasing, we do not see distributor programs being reduced. So, this is not a re-aocation, it is an additiona cost. Athough GPOs are reativey sma at this time as far as tota manufacturer trade spend, they are a growing group. Operator programs are increasing; 54% of respondents said that they increased in the ast year. Accounting for Trade Investment Has Improved Somewhat Industry eaders have made investments in the toos required to evauate and direct the return on trade investment. These toos require a significant initia investment and ongoing anaysis in order to achieve the necessary carity for action. Making the information avaiabe throughout the go-to-market system (interna and externa), defining the objectives, and measuring the resuts can be achieved through systematic approaches. Respondents reported that interna audits have increased (over 60% of respondents). More promotions (operator) are accounted for at the summary customer eve (76%), not the unit eve invoice (ULI). This needs to change. 93% accrue at either the customer or product eve for promotions. Measuring Effectiveness of Trade Spend Is Limited Overa, trade investment is accounted for. Increasingy, manufacturers are ooking at deveoping a detaied anaysis which wi provide a basis for measuring performance versus objectives. The current situation is such that: Distributors 70% of the respondents either did not measure effectiveness or did so on a random and infrequent basis. 65% of respondents do not aways anayze proof of performance on deviated pricing. The most ikey eve of evauation is at the summary eve. 7

8 81% of the respondents said that they receive ess than 50% of their distributor Proof of Performance (PoP) caims in a usabe eectronic format. Operators At the operator eve, over 77% of trade spend is anayzed, but ony at the headquarters summary eve. 43% of the respondents said they receive ess than 10% of their operator caims in a usabe eectronic format. Both Ony 16% of the manufacturers share data on past performance with distributors and operators; therefore, the annua agreement is not ikey to be a fact-based negotiation. Less than 50% of caims are reguary vaidated. Ony 16% of those surveyed are abe to measure the impact of mutipe programs (operator and distributor combined) to deveop a true P&L. There Is No Cear Technoogy Soution There is a number of different companies who provide technoogy patforms for documenting trade doars. However, the most widey used technoogy continues to be home grown. There is a shift towards a standard patform / approach. Caim detais are not saved in usabe formats, so there is no rea history for post-promotiona anaysis. Manufacturers are turning to Commerciay Off the Shef (COTS) Software versus internay deveoped software to manage trade investment. Trade investment systems are increasingy integrated into a manufacturer s Enterprise Resource Panning Systems (ERP) versus stand-aone systems. Eectronic caims and PoP are increasing, abeit from a smaer base, aowing more automated caims processing. The IFMA/IFDA GS1 project initiative wi acceerate this trend. Increased eectronic PoP data is beginning to aow for visibiity into the unit eve detai of an operator versus summary eve. Leaders are beginning to measure, utiizing existing data sources, the true P&L of programs. 8

9 Looking Ahead Trade investment is a major eement of the industry P&L. It is estimated to exceed $15 biion in tota; in many cases, it is the difference between profit and oss for industry participants. As the industry matures, evauating trade investment wi become more important, and wi come under greater scrutiny. Utiizing a structured approach to understanding the current base of trade spend is the start of the process of converting it to trade investment. The pressure to reduce trade investment wi shift to focus on managing and measuring. The use of technoogy and coordination throughout the go-to-market system wi aow for greater transparency. This wi begin to open the door to utiizing trade investment as a way of reaching the utimate consumer through the operator. Summary The survey was conducted in 2010 by the joint efforts of MarketInteigence and The Hae. The objective of this white paper is to gavanize organizations to rethink the roe of trade shifting from spend to investment. If you have observations which you beieve shoud be incuded or shared, pease contact us; in addition, if we can assist your organization to deveop, anayze, and engage, we woud wecome the opportunity. About Us MarketInteigence, LLC is a business strategy consuting firm focusing on foodservice trade investment and pricing optimization. Our extensive foodservice industry background provides cients with a unique perspective of the compex suppy chain. For more information about MarketInteigence, pease reach out to us at or at jimkass@marketiconsuting.com. The Hae provides strategic counse to the food system focusing on mapping and navigating opportunities for profitabe growth. The underying phiosophy of the firm s efforts on behaf of its cients, and in coaboration with them, is to formuate strategies that enabe cients to break through the market cutter to identify patforms for growth. For more information about The Hae, pease reach out to us at or at hae@haegroup.com. 9