August 22, 2006

The In-Store Agency

Wal-Mart has appointed Saatchi & Saatchi X (conveniently headquartered in Springdale, Arkansas) as their first agency of record for in-store marketing.

It may be that other retailers have named agencies of record for in-store but, because they weren’t Wal-Mart, it escaped my notice. In any case, Wal-Mart’s embrace of the concept indicates (again) the growing importance of the store as a medium.

I have been arguing for years that the store is the most-important advertising medium, an idea that has gained further traction with the fragmentation and decline of what used to be “mass” media – especially TV and newspaper.

While Saatchi has long been working with Wal-Mart on store design projects and promos, it will be interesting to see what being agency of record truly means. In-store communications in most retailers (and my experience with Wal-Mart indicates that they are no different) consists of a wide variety of vehicles (signage, kiosks, endcaps, in-store broadcast, etc), some produced in-house, the rest from various suppliers, offered up in no coherent manner, and presenting competing and often contradictory messages.

Is Wal-Mart, through Saatchi, going to try to impose some sort of discipline?

It won’t be an easy job (to put it mildly), but it will be interesting to watch. And manufacturers, who are trying to get their messages through the in-store confusion, need to watch carefully and adapt their trade promotion programs accordingly.

Program Differentiation by Product

In a recent conversation with an industry professional, he quoted a top Wal-Mart exec as saying that manufacturers often don’t realize that they have the upper hand when they have innovative products, and the retailers only have control with commodities.

An excellent point, which raises the idea of differentiating trade promotion approaches by product (and more specifically by product life-cycle). It’s not a new concept, by any means – I recall Levi Strauss withdrawing co-op advertising support from their 501 jeans about thirty years ago, trying to encourage retailers to promote other products, and I don’t imagine they were the first.

While I like the idea, a problem I see is the increasingly-rapid pace of commoditization. I was struck recently, while wandering through Best Buy, at how quickly MP3 players have moved from a totally new idea to near-commodity status (though Apple seems to be able to continue to demand a pricing premium, for the moment). And Best Buy is reported to be about to introduce private-label plasma TVs.

But that’s a problem with execution, not with the concept. It simply means that trade program managers will need to remain alert to the rapid changes in their product’s position in the life-cycle and be nimble enough to make rapid changes to the program in response. Differing marketing goals at different stages (e.g., awareness and acceptance in the introductory period, gaining distribution and grabbing market share in the growth stage, etc) will require managers to alter the program on the fly.

Add into this the need to differentiate your program by channel, and to maintain specific programs for key customers, and it demonstrates the growing complexity of trade promotion.

For more news and comment, visit our blog, TPMtoday. Among recent topics: