Using Operations to improve customer service

Way back in 1969, Wickham Skinner had written an article in the Harvard Business Review saying that if designed, manufacturing can be a potent strategic weapon for firms. The key was in making manufacturing decisions, or in other words operations decisions, a part of corporate strategy making. Almost 45 years after the article was written, I was sad to see that a firm like Shoppers Stop had completely ignored basic operations principles in ground level operations. So, while operations parameters surely do not seem to be a part of strategy, they are not even a part of routine operations.

July 2nd, 2014 was the first day of supposedly a special sale for their First Citizen members of Shoppers Stop. Obviously they must have expected a higher number of customers as the sale proposition mentioned in the advertising was fabulous. As expected, the customers were surely higher and the number increased towards the evening. There were no major problems in the store, the culprit were the checkout counters.

When the number of customers are expected to be higher, the checkout, which would usually be the constraint, should have been designed to be as fast as possible. The number of customers would be more, and the number of SKUs per customer would also he higher. This one single factor could be a huge factor in realising the sale, as with larger queues, customers could just walk off.

And this was precisely what was happening. It was not a hoard of customers walking off, but a few surely were. The checkout time at around 5:30 pm was more than 25 minutes and it was getting worse. There were loud, irritating discussions in the queue about this.

The long checkout time had many reasons:

1. The discounts were being manually entered. The problem was not just the entry, but since it was manual, the customers had lots of queries. Many were checking the calculations with the counter staff to confirm the discount amount. It is normal for customers to trust manual calculations lesser than automated ones.
2. There was a confusion with the fine print of discounts. There was a 5% additional discount for something and as per the new policy the discount would not be given as cash, but would be added as points. Customers were inquiring about the timing of this policy change, the reason and lots of other things that were in no way helping increase the speed of checkout. 
3. Because the discounts were not cash (but points) a few customers were spending a lot of time at the counter debating if it was worth buying the material. Thus they were using up valuable time at the bottleneck process. 
4. The concept of cash back on credit cards is clear. But, many customers did not know about this and again had loads of queries. 
5. A few items had the bar codes missing. Though this was rare, even one item with a missing bar code could take up around 5 - 10 minutes to locate and clear.
6. The invoice was another classic document. Though it was correct, it was cryptic. You needed a good head in mathematics to match the discounts mentioned to the actual value. Customers would obviously ask questions on this.

There were many other minor reasons. Like one customer debated about the VAT. Another did not trust the manually written product code and insisted to see a similar product. One genius customer was calling someone from her mobile phone to decide on the purchase.

My point is that none of these reasons are radically new. Shoppers Stop has been in this business for around 20 years now. They should have seen through this. Designing for quick check outs is no rocket science. For some reason however businesses routinely ignore the operational issues that arise out of some marketing actions and do not take adequate actions to manage performance. I could hear a lot of talk among sales people in the Shoppers Stop store about their huge targets during the sale period. There was no talk about the queue at the check out counters. Yes, the counter staff were very courteous and patient, almost all the counters were open, but the clear lack of attention to the customer flow through was clear. Come on Shoppers Stop, you can surely do better!!

Question of Scale in Indian retail

An issue very close to my heart has brought me back to blogging. It also gives me an opportunity to say - "I had told you this". It was the news in the Economic Times dated 19th March, regarding Office Depot and Staples putting a halt to their India plans.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/news-by-industry/services/retail/office-depot-staples-concede-fight-to-kiranas-pack-up-retail-plans/articleshow/19055125.cms

 It is very clear that the large format retailers have a significant overhead and would need a huge scale to be able to sustain their business model. The MD's salary for Shoppers Stop is around 0.15% of the total revenue. For Walmart, this percent is 0.000045%. Well there are lots of difference between WalMart and Shoppers Stop, but the differences in the proportion mentioned above are too large to be ignored. (WalMart does not reveal the salary expenses and based on newspaper reports the remuneration for Mike Duke has been assumed to be 20 million USD). To put this into perspective roughly one third the gross margins (not profits) of one Shoppers Stop store are expnesed in paying the MD's remuneration. With only 53 stores this is way too much money spent on one person. (The expenses of Shoppers Stop considered for Gross Margin inclde the COGS and the employee costs)


According to a report, 90% of Americans have a WalMart within 15 minutes of their house. It is only with this huge scale and the superlative use of technology that WalMart makes the money that it does. For a population around 2 million, Dubai has six super stores of Carrefour. Thus there is one Carrefour for every three hundred thirty three thousand (333,000) people. Mumbai metropolitan area which is about the same size as Dubai and a population of around 20 million has six Big Bazaar stores. This makes it around one Big Bazaar store for 3.3million people.

Again, it is debatable if Mumbai and Dubai can be compared. The idea here is to indicate the stark difference and the lack of scale among Indian retailers. Overheads like salaries, IT expenses, etc are not very linear to the scale of Operations. Shoppers Stop is not even 0.1% of the size of Walmart in terms of revenue, but the compensation to the Shoppers Stop MD is around 3% of the WalMart CEO compensation.

Unless these large retailers in India plan for scale, it will be impossible for them to sustain. They have to have planned growth that has a significant multiplier effect to the number of stores. Shoppers Stop has managed 53 stores in 20 years, and in ten years Big Bazaar has managed 214 stores. That they still have such a small footprint does not seem right. Walmart has 3000 stores in the US. Even Toys "R" Us has around 875 stores in the US. Tesco has 471 super stores in UK which is 80% of the size of Maharashtra. In all formats combined Tesco has almost 3000 stores in the UK. France, which is just around twice the size of Maharashtra has 1200 super and hyper markets of Carrefour. Across formats the number of stores is more than 5500. An Asian country like Taiwan, which is around 12% of the size of Maharashtra has 70 Carrefour stores.

It is clear here that scale is an essential component for survival in organised retail. And, this scale is more about the stores in the same retail format than across formats Given this common knowledge the behaviour of Indian retailers is surprising. McDonald's India has managed to create around 250 restaurants in 15 years and now they plan to double the number in West and South India in the next two years.The message here is that it is okay to have a lower number of outlets now, but without a significant increase in capacity the survival of the organised retail market in India is questionable.