Proctor & Gamble
Case #16
Proctor & Gamble: Selling Through Customer Business Development
Questions for Discussion:
1.Which of the sales force structures discussed in the text best describes P&G’s CBD structure?
In the 80’s, manufacturers began to spend money to better understand consumers, and P&G more than anyone. However, they never really asked, if these needs were the same in retailers. It was the period when P&G decided, to change the sales department into a more strategic department named Customer Business Development. The objective was to indicate that they wanted to work more strategically with retailers than before. If they wanted to make the difference on the point-of-purchase, instead of trying to sell the maximum, they had to work differently with retailers. They wanted to show that Procter wasn’t only the shampoo seller, but could be also be a partner which can help them to optimize sales. They relied on Trade Marketing theories that were popular in the 90’s. Trade Marketing was defined as “a methodical procedure carried out jointly by suppliers and retailers, whose objective is to better serve customers" needs and expectations, increase profitability and competitive position, while taking into account each other’s constraints and specificity” (Crossman,2013).
Therefore, P&G’s sales force can be described as a partner from the retailer’s point of view, because of the shared benefits generated by this collaboration:
“Consumers are on the top and marketers and retailers work together to create the optimal shopper experience and the elusive win-win-win” (Mortimer, 2014).
On one hand, CBD is a customer orientated structure because P&G thinks that the better you serve your customer (retailer), the better you will grow your business. It is therefore necessary to understand each retailer’s specifications, and work in collaboration with them to implement a coherent offer on the point of purchase. The objective is to increase the frequentation and the basket size
Proctor & Gamble: Selling Through Customer Business Development
Questions for Discussion:
1.Which of the sales force structures discussed in the text best describes P&G’s CBD structure?
In the 80’s, manufacturers began to spend money to better understand consumers, and P&G more than anyone. However, they never really asked, if these needs were the same in retailers. It was the period when P&G decided, to change the sales department into a more strategic department named Customer Business Development. The objective was to indicate that they wanted to work more strategically with retailers than before. If they wanted to make the difference on the point-of-purchase, instead of trying to sell the maximum, they had to work differently with retailers. They wanted to show that Procter wasn’t only the shampoo seller, but could be also be a partner which can help them to optimize sales. They relied on Trade Marketing theories that were popular in the 90’s. Trade Marketing was defined as “a methodical procedure carried out jointly by suppliers and retailers, whose objective is to better serve customers" needs and expectations, increase profitability and competitive position, while taking into account each other’s constraints and specificity” (Crossman,2013).
Therefore, P&G’s sales force can be described as a partner from the retailer’s point of view, because of the shared benefits generated by this collaboration:
“Consumers are on the top and marketers and retailers work together to create the optimal shopper experience and the elusive win-win-win” (Mortimer, 2014).
On one hand, CBD is a customer orientated structure because P&G thinks that the better you serve your customer (retailer), the better you will grow your business. It is therefore necessary to understand each retailer’s specifications, and work in collaboration with them to implement a coherent offer on the point of purchase. The objective is to increase the frequentation and the basket size