Rewards are to be gained from behavioural analysis at the fixtures, says Siân Harrington
Millions of pounds are spent every year by retailers and manufacturers in attempting to understand consumers’ preferences. Yet the minute these consumers walk in a store this investment can fall by the wayside, for these people are no longer just consumers, but shoppers. And shoppers behave differently from consumers.
Understanding shopper psychology and what converts a shopper from browser to buyer at the fixture is an essential tool for retailers and suppliers. Yet surprisingly little money is invested in that analysis.
As a retailer, do you know if shoppers have been able to find the products they are looking for? Once they find their initial destination purchase, have you been able to retain their attention and encourage them to make additional incremental purchases? Have your displays been successful in involving and engaging shopper?
If your answer to any of these questions is no, you are probably focusing your efforts on the consumer rather than the shopper. As monthly research completed over the past year by Visuality design and research consultancy for The Grocer shows, you need to understand how shoppers behave at the different category fixtures to optimise sales.
The Grocer’s Shoppers’ Eye examines the interaction with products that shoppers have before making a purchase and how many walk out of the store with the desired product, while interviews with shoppers reveal their intentions on arrival and what influences them to purchase, or not.
Analysis of the year’s research shows which categories are the best and worst performers and also that many fixtures are failing to engage shoppers.
The mechanisms that shoppers use to see and select products and brands at the point of purchase are subconscious. They need to quickly find the essential items on their shopping list. Then they are open and receptive to new ideas and inspiration that the category has to offer.
Yet as the tables on the facing page show, intention to buy is not always converted into purchase. Too many shoppers are passing, noting, or interacting with the category - but not buying the product.
The most efficient category, squashes and cordials, has an actualisation rate of 94%, which salad dressings, with 47%, must look at with envy. This is a classic shopping list item. Nearly all the shoppers at the display had entered the store with an intention to purchase from this category. And the display is efficient in the way it directs shoppers to destination lines. Beyond this, however, the interplay between shopper and fixture is non-existent.
There is no evidence of encouragement to shoppers to trade up or to experiment with new brands or flavours. The majority are grab and go shoppers, which restricts the opportunity for incremental and impulse purchases.
Move on to other categories, and the data is more revealing. In bread - the next best performer in terms of numbers making a purchase - there is also a reluctance to experiment. Bread shoppers often buy different breads for different members of the family or occasions, yet involvement with the fixture’s alternative offers is limited. It is the same story with cheese where 89% of shoppers make a purchase from the
category. Again, these are destination purchases even though, on the basis of interviews with shoppers at the cheese counter, it is clear they are open to temptation.
Ready to serve salad dressings is by far the lowest performing category, with only 47% of shoppers at the display making a purchase. This is the only category that scored under 50% over the year. So what is going wrong?
While it has one of the highest levels of footfall, few are attracted to the category. A vicious circle exists. Frequency of shopping is low as a massive 91% of shoppers fail to notice the category. Recognition is further hampered by a lack of signpost brands. Of the 9% who do actively shop salad dressings, fewer than half make a purchase, despite the fact that interviews with shoppers suggest the category is viewed as special and exotic - exactly the sort of products shoppers should be experimenting with.
The frequency of purchase of rice is almost as low as salad dressings. In this category, however, there appear to be stronger signpost brands, perhaps because of the store cupboard factor by which shoppers become familiar with the packaging in their home.
Frozen desserts shares many of these weaknesses but its biggest drawback is location - at the end of the shop. There may be many reasons why shoppers fail to purchase. They may have already bought an ambient or chilled dessert or they may be tired.
There is also a problem with engagement. Only 17% noticed the category. Practical factors, such as cabinet freezers, contribute to making the category invisible, but there are also reasons to think the product mix is not right.
This is a category in serious need of a champion.
While each category’s dynamics differ, all have their strengths and weaknesses.
But some trends stand out. Multiples are good at selling shoppers what they came for.
In all bar one category, well over two-thirds make a satisfactory purchase and in most categories the satisfaction rating is 80% or above.
But much more could be achieved and one key lesson is that retailers and suppliers of brands could learn much from taking a broader view.
“One thing that never fails to amaze us when we are working with clients is how close and involved they are with their own categories, yet they rarely look at, let alone learn from, other categories, be it packaging, displays, merchandising or POP,” says Visuality managing director Nicola Scrafton.
There is also little evidence that supermarkets genuinely engage shoppers and encourage them to experiment or to view the supermarket as a source of new ideas.
The dangers of this are self-evident, especially given the increasing fragmentation of shopping trips. “There is increasing evidence that for some shoppers the big shop has been replaced by a routine of shorter, more frequent needs-based shops,” says Scrafton.
“Retailers must work even harder to engage shoppers on these flying visits if they are to maximise incremental sales.”
n The shoppers’ mission and motivation, plus penetration and purchase frequency, mean that a direct comparison between the categories we examined is impossible. The comparisons have been analysed in order to generate broad lessons.
Millions of pounds are spent every year by retailers and manufacturers in attempting to understand consumers’ preferences. Yet the minute these consumers walk in a store this investment can fall by the wayside, for these people are no longer just consumers, but shoppers. And shoppers behave differently from consumers.
Understanding shopper psychology and what converts a shopper from browser to buyer at the fixture is an essential tool for retailers and suppliers. Yet surprisingly little money is invested in that analysis.
As a retailer, do you know if shoppers have been able to find the products they are looking for? Once they find their initial destination purchase, have you been able to retain their attention and encourage them to make additional incremental purchases? Have your displays been successful in involving and engaging shopper?
If your answer to any of these questions is no, you are probably focusing your efforts on the consumer rather than the shopper. As monthly research completed over the past year by Visuality design and research consultancy for The Grocer shows, you need to understand how shoppers behave at the different category fixtures to optimise sales.
The Grocer’s Shoppers’ Eye examines the interaction with products that shoppers have before making a purchase and how many walk out of the store with the desired product, while interviews with shoppers reveal their intentions on arrival and what influences them to purchase, or not.
Analysis of the year’s research shows which categories are the best and worst performers and also that many fixtures are failing to engage shoppers.
The mechanisms that shoppers use to see and select products and brands at the point of purchase are subconscious. They need to quickly find the essential items on their shopping list. Then they are open and receptive to new ideas and inspiration that the category has to offer.
Yet as the tables on the facing page show, intention to buy is not always converted into purchase. Too many shoppers are passing, noting, or interacting with the category - but not buying the product.
The most efficient category, squashes and cordials, has an actualisation rate of 94%, which salad dressings, with 47%, must look at with envy. This is a classic shopping list item. Nearly all the shoppers at the display had entered the store with an intention to purchase from this category. And the display is efficient in the way it directs shoppers to destination lines. Beyond this, however, the interplay between shopper and fixture is non-existent.
There is no evidence of encouragement to shoppers to trade up or to experiment with new brands or flavours. The majority are grab and go shoppers, which restricts the opportunity for incremental and impulse purchases.
Move on to other categories, and the data is more revealing. In bread - the next best performer in terms of numbers making a purchase - there is also a reluctance to experiment. Bread shoppers often buy different breads for different members of the family or occasions, yet involvement with the fixture’s alternative offers is limited. It is the same story with cheese where 89% of shoppers make a purchase from the
category. Again, these are destination purchases even though, on the basis of interviews with shoppers at the cheese counter, it is clear they are open to temptation.
Ready to serve salad dressings is by far the lowest performing category, with only 47% of shoppers at the display making a purchase. This is the only category that scored under 50% over the year. So what is going wrong?
While it has one of the highest levels of footfall, few are attracted to the category. A vicious circle exists. Frequency of shopping is low as a massive 91% of shoppers fail to notice the category. Recognition is further hampered by a lack of signpost brands. Of the 9% who do actively shop salad dressings, fewer than half make a purchase, despite the fact that interviews with shoppers suggest the category is viewed as special and exotic - exactly the sort of products shoppers should be experimenting with.
The frequency of purchase of rice is almost as low as salad dressings. In this category, however, there appear to be stronger signpost brands, perhaps because of the store cupboard factor by which shoppers become familiar with the packaging in their home.
Frozen desserts shares many of these weaknesses but its biggest drawback is location - at the end of the shop. There may be many reasons why shoppers fail to purchase. They may have already bought an ambient or chilled dessert or they may be tired.
There is also a problem with engagement. Only 17% noticed the category. Practical factors, such as cabinet freezers, contribute to making the category invisible, but there are also reasons to think the product mix is not right.
This is a category in serious need of a champion.
While each category’s dynamics differ, all have their strengths and weaknesses.
But some trends stand out. Multiples are good at selling shoppers what they came for.
In all bar one category, well over two-thirds make a satisfactory purchase and in most categories the satisfaction rating is 80% or above.
But much more could be achieved and one key lesson is that retailers and suppliers of brands could learn much from taking a broader view.
“One thing that never fails to amaze us when we are working with clients is how close and involved they are with their own categories, yet they rarely look at, let alone learn from, other categories, be it packaging, displays, merchandising or POP,” says Visuality managing director Nicola Scrafton.
There is also little evidence that supermarkets genuinely engage shoppers and encourage them to experiment or to view the supermarket as a source of new ideas.
The dangers of this are self-evident, especially given the increasing fragmentation of shopping trips. “There is increasing evidence that for some shoppers the big shop has been replaced by a routine of shorter, more frequent needs-based shops,” says Scrafton.
“Retailers must work even harder to engage shoppers on these flying visits if they are to maximise incremental sales.”
No comments yet