©2010 Rock-Tenn Shared Services, LLC, Norcross, GA. All rights reserved.

in-store behavior monitoring system

New Insight Tools – Understand the in-store environment – Understand shopper behavior – Optimize impact/ROI

SHOPPER MARKETING NEXT

The Insights Baseline §  What works/what doesn’t §  Category/brand implications

Complexity of Generating “Real” Insights – The risks of sampled data

BARRIERS TO SUCCESS

The “Blindside” Factors §  Shrink §  Out-of-Stocks §  Faulty Assumptions & Folklore

“REAL INSIGHT” COMPLEXITY

I Don’t Know if it Worked 57%

I Can’t Seem to Get Answers 69%

48% My Concepts Didn’t Make it to Retail

SHOPPER BEHAVIOR?

SHOPPER BEHAVIOR?

REAL SHOPPER BEHAVIOR

REAL SHOPPER BEHAVIOR

REAL SHOPPER BEHAVIOR

#1 High

Traffic Location

REAL SHOPPER BEHAVIOR

REAL SHOPPER BEHAVIOR

Collect Data in Natural, Unbiased Environment

– On Large Scale –  In Real Time

NEW BEST PRACTICES

Continuous Monitoring

Flexible / Instantaneous Testing of Variables

Is the Offer Working?

REAL SHOPPER INSIGHT

Are Shoppers Engaged?

Off-Shelf vs On-Shelf?

Does Location Drive ROI?

Which Message Sells Best?

HOW IT WORKS VideoCams Record Shopper Traffic

VideoCams Record Engagement HOW IT WORKS

On-Shelf Sensors Record SKU Movement HOW IT WORKS

Point of Sale

In-Store Media

Promo Calendar RFID Staff ID

Weather Service

Seamless integration with store and external systems HOW IT WORKS

Real-time data for desktop analysis & action

TRAFFIC DAYPART DWELL TIME CONVERSION STORE vs STORE TRENDS

HOW IT WORKS

Daily Traffic, Dwell & Conversion

From store-level patterns… 360º VISIBILITY

Category Engagement & Conversion

to category engagement … 360º VISIBILITY

to individual shelf SKUs … 360º VISIBILITY

… to chain-wide reporting 360º VISIBILITY

NOW ACTIVE IN 100s OF STORES 5 Major Chains §  Grocery §  C-Store (2) §  Drug §  Department

20+ Specialty Chains Pilot Lab Store

Brands need to improve Customer business

§  Brand listings at risk §  Customer believes shrink is an issue

Retailer Volume is Unacceptable

GROCERY PROJECT

Methodology §  Measure and understand Shrink •  Propose Shrink-reduction strategies

§  Measure and understand Volume •  Propose Volume-enhancement strategies

Shipping     Unpacking     Stocking     Store  Shelf      

Understanding Shrink §  It is a shelf issue, not a back room issue

GROCERY PROJECT

Understanding Shrink §  It is a shelf issue, not a back room issue

GROCERY PROJECT

Understanding Out-of Stock –  It is an even bigger issue than Shrink.

SKU Avg Inv.

OOS Events

Avg OOS Duration

28ct .82 1 14 hr 8 mins

42ct .5 1 12 hr 3 mins

Pegged 11.0 0 0 hr 0 mins Gastrointestinal Tablet Brand 24 hour-day Dec 13,2009

•  Brand often not on the shelf most of the day! –  100% of OOS, there is inventory available in the back room

•  $1MM+ Retailer opportunity for this one product!

GROCERY PROJECT

Understanding Out-of Stock – Can be traced to day parts – Most egregious: 3-7pm (43%)

GROCERY PROJECT

Understanding Out-of Stock

GROCERY PROJECT

Understanding Volume –  It is a Dwell Time issue –  Shelf sets not optimized for stoppage or engagement

Traffic Dwells Avg

Dwell Time

Item Picks

Unit Sales

$ Sales

Avg $ Sale

989 7 8 s 3 2 $49 24.62

892 10 12 s 7 6 $91 15.22

Skin Care Example Dec 20/27, 2009

GROCERY PROJECT

Shrink, Volume: Skin Care Example GROCERY PROJECT

Shrink, Volume: Skin Care Example

All-new merchandising approach – Vertical blocking –  Light fixture – Messaging – Floor graphics

Theft deterrents

§  PVM - brand content, face motion-activated §  Audio alert – chime on sweep events

GROCERY PROJECT

GROCERY PROJECT

Traditional Aisle Set – Little/No

Messaging

CASE STUDY: CEREAL Drive Traffic Into the Aisle

Store  traffic    =  46,390    

Cereal  Aisle  Traffic  =  9,756  

Brand  Buyers  =  650  

Brand  Shoppers  =  1,397  

21% go to the cereal aisle

14  %  engage  with  the  brand  

For  an  average  of  23  

seconds  

47  %  purchase  brand  

CASE STUDY: CEREAL Drive Traffic Into the Aisle

CASE STUDY: CEREAL

Solution: §  Leverage GM

Umbrella Positioning:

Drive Traffic Into the Aisle

CASE STUDY: CEREAL

§  Group into an 8’ “set”

Solution: §  Leverage GM

Umbrella Positioning:

Drive Traffic Into the Aisle

§  Group into an 8’ “set” §  Create a “Cereal Showcase”

Solution: – Leverage GM

Umbrella Positioning:

Shopper Benefit: §  “Whole Grain Goodness”

A healthy choice

CASE STUDY: CEREAL

Overhead Cam

Face Cam

Drive Traffic Into the Aisle

Methodology: – Analyze impact of

the showcase on: •  Aisle Traffic •  Engagement / Dwell •  Conversion to Sales •  SKU level

conversion •  Sales by Shopper/

household

– Base vs Test Period

CASE STUDY: CEREAL Drive Traffic Into the Aisle

CASE STUDY: CEREAL “engagement”

Brand Conversion Increased 8%

Shoppers stopping

increased 180%

# of shoppers engaging with

the Brand increased 200%

Aisle traffic as % of store traffic increased 15%

Higher increase than any previous promotion

Results

STOPPAGE POWER % of aisle traffic that stop and

engage with the product

AISLE TRAFFIC # Customers that walk

through the aisle

CONVERSION % of shoppers walking by that purchase the product

DWELL TIME Amount time shoppers spent with the product

Dwell Time

Decreased 23%

SALES Sales for

the product

Brand Sales Increased 17%

Brand sales as % of Category

sales increased 20.2%

11.2% of Brand buyers had been buying other brands

CASE STUDY: CEREAL

Measure Impact of Display CASE STUDY: CANDY

Proximity  to  Promo*onal  Waters  department  

Rear Entrance outbound traffic, in path to checkout

Main Entrance outbound traffic, in path to checkout

Main  Entrance  inbound  traffic,    adjacent  to  loyalty  kiosk  

Display  1  

Display  2  

Display  3  

Display  4  

CASE STUDY: CANDY Measure Impact of Display

Average customer walked by 1.8 times

Results

CONVERSION % walking by that

purchase the product

# of shoppers

increased 340%

Product Exposure Increased 498%

DWELL TIME Amount time shoppers spent with the product

30% higher at the displays

compared to the shelf

Product Conversion Increased 51%

% of total store customers that purchased increased 665%

SALES Sales for

the product

Brand Sales Increased 804%

Brand Sales as % of Total Candy Increased 2,488%

8.1% had been buying

other candy brands

CASE STUDY: CANDY

VISIBILITY # Customers that

walked by a display

SHOPPERS # Customers that

engaged with the product

SUMMARY  

www. .com

Take Action in Real Time

to Improve Your In-store Performance

©2010 Rock-Tenn Shared Services, LLC, Norcross, GA. All rights reserved.

REAL IN-STORE ANSWERS

www. .com