Description
Recent surveys of supermarket customers have identified some twenty factors as having a bearing on the choiceof the supermarket(s) shopped. Nine of the factors to be enumerated and rated are considered major determinants in the selecting of a supermarket, eleven are viewed by customers as of somewhat less importance. However, when the customer views the competing stores as similar in performance for major factors, the decision where to shop may be based on those factors associated with the less important.
CUSTOMERANALYSI S AND MARKET STRATEGY -
SUPERMARKETSVs, CONVENI ENCE STORES
by
Ed Watkins
Ohio State University
Columbus, Ohio
Food store customers are motivated
by numerous factors in the selection of
the store or stores in which they do
their food shopping. Of interest is the
relatively different set of criteria
involved in the selection of a conven-
ience store as compared with those
factors considered important by cus-
tomers in the selection of a supermarket.
Recent surveys of supermarket cus-
tomers have identified some twenty
factors as having a bearing on the choice
of the supermarket(s) shopped. Nine of
the factors to be enumerated and rated
are considered major determinants in
the selecting of a supermarket, eleven
are viewed by customers as of somewhat
less importance. However, when the
customer views the competing stores as
similar in performance for major factors,
the decision where to shop may be based
on those factors associated with the
less important.
The factors determined to be of
major consequence in the selection of a
supermarket by customers are listed as
follows in descending importance, Table
1. The first column identifies the
factor, the second the number of res-
ponses about that factor per 100 cus-
tomers, and the third column the range
in number of responses about that factor
when related to each of nine competing
stores.
The relative importance of all
store selection factors identified by
supermarket customers appears to shift
over time and between trading areas due
in part to economic competitive changes
and shifts in consumer’s priorities.
No store in the survey ranked
either uniformly high or low for all
factors. Even though a store was rated
generally high, there were factors that
customers rated rather low. Even for
the most highly rated store, one major
factor and seven on the less important
list received a bottom of the list rat-
ing. It is of interest that each super-
market was rated by its customers as
excelling for one or more selection
factors. Average weekly food store
expenditures were $11.34 per capita and
$43.52 per household.
When convenience store customers
were asked what considerationswere
important in choosing one of these
stores, six factors were identified,
Table 3.
The relative importance of these
factors associated with convenience
stores does not appear to shift signi-
ficantly over time or between trading
areas. The first three factors include
81% of the total responses of conven-
ience store customers while supermarket
shoppers required the first ten factors
in their list to include 81% of their
responses.
Very few customers identify con-
venience stores as their primary source
of food. Convenience stores are identi-
fied as a source for fill-in items.
February 76/page 110
Journal of Food Distribution Resea”
While price was not given as a factor
in the selection of one convenience
store over another it was definitely a
factor in limiting purchases at con-
venience stores or in not shopping con-
venience stores. With customers viewing
convenience stores primarily as a
source for fill-in items to supplement
total food store purchases, convenience
stores choice of a “right” mix of a very
limited product selection would seem
critical, Table 4. These six product
categories included 80% of all items
customers associated with convenience
stores. Average weekly convenience
store sales in the trading area were
$2.62 per household or $.96 per capita.
The competitive strategy of con-
venience stores first might well con-
centrate on location strategy, a loca-
tion possibly removed from locations of
other food stores both convenient and
supermarkets. In addition, building an
image of quick service, of long hours
open, and an excellent choice of items
associated with the relatively few prod-
uct categories customers identify with
convenience stores seems essential. As
stated earlier price differentiationby
customers of competitive convenience
stores did not appear to be a factor in
convenience store selection. Market
segmentation appears to have limited
possibilities for convenience stores.
Customers of supermarkets readily
identified these stores as a primary
source of nearly all food items.
Supermarket customers viewed some stores
as excelling in specific departments,
such as meat, produce and bakery. They
also differentiated stores on location,
prices, selection and variety of items,
store atmosphere, layout, services
offered, in-store displays, out of
stocks, and employee attitudes. Al-
though location was a primary factor
and checkout and hours open were per-
formance factors identified as recogniz-
ably different between stores, these
factors did not have the overriding
importance as with convenience stores.
Supermarket competitive strategy
may concentrate on price programs,
on quality perishable programs, on
cleanliness, or a broad appeal striving
for superior performance in most areas.
Supermarket strategy may develop some
version of market segmentation by
identifying that store to customers
interested in superior department opera-
tions or recognizably different pricing
programs. In addition, market strategy
of supermarkets may shift over time to
meet changing competition or in response
to altered economic conditions.
wrnal of Food Distribution Research February 76/page 111
Table 1. Factors Considered by Customers in the Selection of a Supermarket
Supermarket Average Number Ranges in Number of Responses
Selection Responses per 100 per 100 Customers Between
Factor Customers Competing Stores
1. Prices 62 55 - 82
2. Cleanliness 36 25 - 48
3. Food Quality 34 25 - 48
4. Selection-Variety 33 8 - 48
5. Store Location 34 8 - 42
6. Employee Attitude 30 16 - 54
7. Meat Quality-Freshness 28 15 - 39
8. Produce Quality-Freshness 23 8 - 44
9. Store Atmosphere 13 6-28
Table 2. Factors of less Importance in the Customer’s Choice of a Supermarket
Supermarket Average Number Ranges in Number of Responses
Selection Responses per 100 per 100 Customers Between
Factor Customers Competing Stores
10. Store Layout 8 4-15
11. Services 8 4-16
12. Checkout 6 3-16
13. Specials 6 3-17
14. Displays 5 3-14
15. Well Stocked 5 0-11
16. Brands Available 4 0-6
17. Parking 4 2 - 10
18. Advertising 3 0-14
19. Product Availability 3 0-6
20. Hours Open 2 0-14
Table 3. Factors Considered by Customers in the Selection of Convenience Store
Average Number Ranges in Number of Responses
Convenience Store Responses per 100 per 100 Customers Between
Selection Factor Customers Competing Stores
Quick Service 64 53 - 80
Hours Open 58 28 - 64
Location 59 55 - 72
Products Available 24 22 - 44
Employee Attitude 8 8-9
Parking 4 3-11
February 76/page 112 Journal of Food Distribution Resear
Table 4. Product Items Customers Commonly Associated with Convenience Stores
% of Customers Range in % of Customers
Identifying this Identifying this Category
Product With Convenience Between Competing
Category Stores Convenience Stores
Bread
63 59 - 84
Milk 61 58 - 73
Beverages 36 36 - 43
Cigarettes & Tobacco 17 16 - 18
Snack Foods 16 16 - 18
Newspaper & Magazines 10 8-10
7’C*>’+7WC$C$C ***7’C7W*
ANOTHER LOOK AT CUSTOMER I MAGE STUDI ES
by
Theodore W. Leed
Professor of Food Marketing
University of Massachusetts
Amherst, Massachusetts
It has been about 15 years since
Ricker first used the mail survey rating
system to develop customer images of
competing supermarkets in market areas.
Since that time the technique has been
used by Leed, Marion, Watkins, Skinner
and others as a means of developing
competitive strategy recommendations for
food retailing firms. Although some
adaptations have been made, the basic
format of the questionnaireremains
essentially the same with respect to
the attribute ratings. (Exhibit 1)
It would seem appropriate at this
time to review the “state of the art”
in relation to what we have learned
about customer perception or image, how
the knowledge has been used and how we
can improve the technique and its
application to the management decision-
making process. I will use the technique
and results of our latest consumer image
survey in Massachusetts as illustrations.
What We Have Learned
Based upon our rating studies in
Massachusetts as well as those con-
ducted elsewhere, we can formulate some
general conclusions.
1. Relatively high rates of
response, usually greater than 30%.
2, Consumer selectivity in evalua-
tion of quality and prices among major
product categories.
)urnalof Food Distribution Research
February 76/page 113
doc_587517429.pdf
Recent surveys of supermarket customers have identified some twenty factors as having a bearing on the choiceof the supermarket(s) shopped. Nine of the factors to be enumerated and rated are considered major determinants in the selecting of a supermarket, eleven are viewed by customers as of somewhat less importance. However, when the customer views the competing stores as similar in performance for major factors, the decision where to shop may be based on those factors associated with the less important.
CUSTOMERANALYSI S AND MARKET STRATEGY -
SUPERMARKETSVs, CONVENI ENCE STORES
by
Ed Watkins
Ohio State University
Columbus, Ohio
Food store customers are motivated
by numerous factors in the selection of
the store or stores in which they do
their food shopping. Of interest is the
relatively different set of criteria
involved in the selection of a conven-
ience store as compared with those
factors considered important by cus-
tomers in the selection of a supermarket.
Recent surveys of supermarket cus-
tomers have identified some twenty
factors as having a bearing on the choice
of the supermarket(s) shopped. Nine of
the factors to be enumerated and rated
are considered major determinants in
the selecting of a supermarket, eleven
are viewed by customers as of somewhat
less importance. However, when the
customer views the competing stores as
similar in performance for major factors,
the decision where to shop may be based
on those factors associated with the
less important.
The factors determined to be of
major consequence in the selection of a
supermarket by customers are listed as
follows in descending importance, Table
1. The first column identifies the
factor, the second the number of res-
ponses about that factor per 100 cus-
tomers, and the third column the range
in number of responses about that factor
when related to each of nine competing
stores.
The relative importance of all
store selection factors identified by
supermarket customers appears to shift
over time and between trading areas due
in part to economic competitive changes
and shifts in consumer’s priorities.
No store in the survey ranked
either uniformly high or low for all
factors. Even though a store was rated
generally high, there were factors that
customers rated rather low. Even for
the most highly rated store, one major
factor and seven on the less important
list received a bottom of the list rat-
ing. It is of interest that each super-
market was rated by its customers as
excelling for one or more selection
factors. Average weekly food store
expenditures were $11.34 per capita and
$43.52 per household.
When convenience store customers
were asked what considerationswere
important in choosing one of these
stores, six factors were identified,
Table 3.
The relative importance of these
factors associated with convenience
stores does not appear to shift signi-
ficantly over time or between trading
areas. The first three factors include
81% of the total responses of conven-
ience store customers while supermarket
shoppers required the first ten factors
in their list to include 81% of their
responses.
Very few customers identify con-
venience stores as their primary source
of food. Convenience stores are identi-
fied as a source for fill-in items.
February 76/page 110
Journal of Food Distribution Resea”
While price was not given as a factor
in the selection of one convenience
store over another it was definitely a
factor in limiting purchases at con-
venience stores or in not shopping con-
venience stores. With customers viewing
convenience stores primarily as a
source for fill-in items to supplement
total food store purchases, convenience
stores choice of a “right” mix of a very
limited product selection would seem
critical, Table 4. These six product
categories included 80% of all items
customers associated with convenience
stores. Average weekly convenience
store sales in the trading area were
$2.62 per household or $.96 per capita.
The competitive strategy of con-
venience stores first might well con-
centrate on location strategy, a loca-
tion possibly removed from locations of
other food stores both convenient and
supermarkets. In addition, building an
image of quick service, of long hours
open, and an excellent choice of items
associated with the relatively few prod-
uct categories customers identify with
convenience stores seems essential. As
stated earlier price differentiationby
customers of competitive convenience
stores did not appear to be a factor in
convenience store selection. Market
segmentation appears to have limited
possibilities for convenience stores.
Customers of supermarkets readily
identified these stores as a primary
source of nearly all food items.
Supermarket customers viewed some stores
as excelling in specific departments,
such as meat, produce and bakery. They
also differentiated stores on location,
prices, selection and variety of items,
store atmosphere, layout, services
offered, in-store displays, out of
stocks, and employee attitudes. Al-
though location was a primary factor
and checkout and hours open were per-
formance factors identified as recogniz-
ably different between stores, these
factors did not have the overriding
importance as with convenience stores.
Supermarket competitive strategy
may concentrate on price programs,
on quality perishable programs, on
cleanliness, or a broad appeal striving
for superior performance in most areas.
Supermarket strategy may develop some
version of market segmentation by
identifying that store to customers
interested in superior department opera-
tions or recognizably different pricing
programs. In addition, market strategy
of supermarkets may shift over time to
meet changing competition or in response
to altered economic conditions.
wrnal of Food Distribution Research February 76/page 111
Table 1. Factors Considered by Customers in the Selection of a Supermarket
Supermarket Average Number Ranges in Number of Responses
Selection Responses per 100 per 100 Customers Between
Factor Customers Competing Stores
1. Prices 62 55 - 82
2. Cleanliness 36 25 - 48
3. Food Quality 34 25 - 48
4. Selection-Variety 33 8 - 48
5. Store Location 34 8 - 42
6. Employee Attitude 30 16 - 54
7. Meat Quality-Freshness 28 15 - 39
8. Produce Quality-Freshness 23 8 - 44
9. Store Atmosphere 13 6-28
Table 2. Factors of less Importance in the Customer’s Choice of a Supermarket
Supermarket Average Number Ranges in Number of Responses
Selection Responses per 100 per 100 Customers Between
Factor Customers Competing Stores
10. Store Layout 8 4-15
11. Services 8 4-16
12. Checkout 6 3-16
13. Specials 6 3-17
14. Displays 5 3-14
15. Well Stocked 5 0-11
16. Brands Available 4 0-6
17. Parking 4 2 - 10
18. Advertising 3 0-14
19. Product Availability 3 0-6
20. Hours Open 2 0-14
Table 3. Factors Considered by Customers in the Selection of Convenience Store
Average Number Ranges in Number of Responses
Convenience Store Responses per 100 per 100 Customers Between
Selection Factor Customers Competing Stores
Quick Service 64 53 - 80
Hours Open 58 28 - 64
Location 59 55 - 72
Products Available 24 22 - 44
Employee Attitude 8 8-9
Parking 4 3-11
February 76/page 112 Journal of Food Distribution Resear
Table 4. Product Items Customers Commonly Associated with Convenience Stores
% of Customers Range in % of Customers
Identifying this Identifying this Category
Product With Convenience Between Competing
Category Stores Convenience Stores
Bread
63 59 - 84
Milk 61 58 - 73
Beverages 36 36 - 43
Cigarettes & Tobacco 17 16 - 18
Snack Foods 16 16 - 18
Newspaper & Magazines 10 8-10
7’C*>’+7WC$C$C ***7’C7W*
ANOTHER LOOK AT CUSTOMER I MAGE STUDI ES
by
Theodore W. Leed
Professor of Food Marketing
University of Massachusetts
Amherst, Massachusetts
It has been about 15 years since
Ricker first used the mail survey rating
system to develop customer images of
competing supermarkets in market areas.
Since that time the technique has been
used by Leed, Marion, Watkins, Skinner
and others as a means of developing
competitive strategy recommendations for
food retailing firms. Although some
adaptations have been made, the basic
format of the questionnaireremains
essentially the same with respect to
the attribute ratings. (Exhibit 1)
It would seem appropriate at this
time to review the “state of the art”
in relation to what we have learned
about customer perception or image, how
the knowledge has been used and how we
can improve the technique and its
application to the management decision-
making process. I will use the technique
and results of our latest consumer image
survey in Massachusetts as illustrations.
What We Have Learned
Based upon our rating studies in
Massachusetts as well as those con-
ducted elsewhere, we can formulate some
general conclusions.
1. Relatively high rates of
response, usually greater than 30%.
2, Consumer selectivity in evalua-
tion of quality and prices among major
product categories.
)urnalof Food Distribution Research
February 76/page 113
doc_587517429.pdf