Marketing data analysis metric

1. 1
Analysis (II) Training for Marketing Tactics
Richard Jo
Feb 2010
*****.

2. 2
Introduction: Usage of ***** analysis
For SBU’s business issues on marketing & sales, ***** analysis can be the
core ingredient throughout the whole business development
Tactic reshaping
Implementation
monitoring
Growth Strategy Set-
up
Business Environment
Audit
Reshaping direction
Actionable items
Implementing
Monitoring by 4P
Core competency
Strategic positioning
Gap analysis
Strategy direction
Strategy alternatives
Implementation plan
Industry mega trend
Industry attractiveness
Competitive position
***** analysis I
for Strategy purpose
-Long term
-Invest/ Divest
-Strategy Positioning
-Competency review
-Yearly/ Half yearly
***** analysis II
for Tactic purpose
-Short term
-Resource reallocation
-Tactical Positioning
-Competency enhancement
-Quarterly/ Bi-monthly/ Monthly
Business
development
process
Main
approaches
Use of
*****
Analysis
*Approaches underlined: What ***** analysis can provide Scope of ***** analysis

3. 3
Business Environment Audit Growth Strategy Set up
Introduction: ***** Analysis I
Industry Mega Trend
Market Size & Growth
Value Chain Structure
Key Change Drivers
(9 Forces)
Industry Attractiveness
Maturity
Competition Intensity
Competitive Positioning
Quantitative criteria
positioning (M/S)
Qualitative criteria
positioning (KSF)
Strategy Positioning
Scenario Analysis
Gap Analysis
Strategy Direction
Implementation Plan
(Competition& Consumer)
Who (Consumer)
What (Brand, Product,
Price)
How
(Place, Promotion)
Define the Problem Structure the Problem Find the Solution
• Is there a opportunity or risk factors?
• If so, where does it lie?
• Why does it exist ?
• What are the root causes?
• What could we do? (Hypotheses)
• What should we do? (Hypothesis-test)
• Resolution set out
Analysis Frequency
Half yearly, Yearly, 3 years

4. 4
Introduction: ***** Analysis II
Marketing& Sales
Measurement
Product
Price
Place
Benchmarking with target
competitor
Product
Price
Identification of root causes
for performance
Product
Price
Reshaping Direction
Brand
Consumer
4P
Short-term expected
outcomes
Financial Performance
Competitive
Positioning
Additional activities
required
Place
Place
Implementation Monitoring Reshaping Tactics
Define the Problem Structure the Problem Find the Solution
• Is there a opportunity or risk factors?
• If so, where does it lie?
• Why does it exist ?
• What are the root causes?
• What could we do? (Hypotheses)
• What should we do? (Hypothesis-test)
• Resolution set out
Analysis Frequency
Monthly, Quarterly

5. 5
Introduction: Performance measurement & Benchmarking index by *****
Power
(Numeric)
Value
(Weighted)
Resource Allocation
Sales unit
Sales value
Growth
Unit Share
Value Share
Numeric Distribution
Weighed Distribution
In-store share
Sales importance
Effective Share
BDI& CDI
Price index
How effectively we go?
How far we go?
How efficiently we go?

6. Agenda
1
Marketing& Sales measurement2
Benchmarking with competitors3
Concept of Marketing measurement

7. 7
Concept of market share
Abso. Unit
ASP Brand
+-
-
+
Mass PremierCost leader
Niche player
How to achieve critical mass?
How to retain the customer?
Just Follower
How to achieve critical mass?
How to penetrate to the laggard?
How to achieve higher profit?
How to maximize customer spend?
How to survive?
How to attract the customer?
Unit/Value share
Customer share
Price index
Wallet share
Unit/Value share
Distribution share
Unit/ Value
Mind share

8. 8
Concept of market share
Definition of
Market Share
Is the company Market Share 40%
or 50% ?
The percentage or proportion of the total available
market or market segment that is being serviced by a
company. (Carlton O'Neal)
100
80 Where the
company play
Where all
companies play
40
Proportion
of a
company
Definition of Market Share
Winning RatioCoverage
40%
80%
20%
Key Factors
for Market
Share
40%100%
Total Available
Win 50%
Cover 80%
Marketing& Sales Competency
Distribution
Advertisement
Sales forces
….
Overall Competency
Product Quality
Design
Price
A/S
…..

9. 9
Concept of market share
Unit Market Share
Value Market Share
Relative Market Share*
Effective Market Share
Mind Share
Customer Share
( Numeric Distribution)
Wallet Share
( Turnover share)
Comparative sales
performance in unit
Comparative sales
performance in Value
Our performance strength against
market leader
Effectiveness of sales performance
considering sales importance
Comparative ratio in consumer
consideration
Comparative ratio of
buyer holding
Comparative ratio of
buyer spending
How strong we are in a numeric
situation
How strong we are in a weighted
situation
How strong we are against market
leader
How effective we are considering
our resource allocation
How much we can improve our sales
from prospective
How much we reach to the actual
customer
How much we earn from actual
customer
Mass players,
Cost leader
Niche players,
Mass premier
All players
All players
All players,
Followers
All Players
All Players
Type of Market Share Definition Implications Whom
The most stable position (at least in FMCG markets) is for the brand leader to have a share double that
of the second brand, and triple that of the third. Brand leaders in this position tend to be very stable—
and profitable
e.g. No.1 50%, No.2 25%. No.3 17%
(Relative Market Share) The Rule of 123

10. 10
Concept of market share
Desire
Interest Awareness
Action
Desire
Interest Awareness
Action
First Buy
Re-Buy
Mind ShareMind Share
Mind Share Wallet
Share
Customer
Share
대상시장내에서
고객 확보 비율
대상시장내에서 고객
구매금액 비율
고객의 마음 점유율
(인지도, 연상율 등)
구매단계

11. 11
Concept of market share
Winning Ratio
AVG. Numeric
Distribution of Brand
(in related Segments)
AVG. In-store share of
Brand
(in related Segments)
Brand
Sum of segment Brand
selling/ ***** Total
***** audit
***** Coverage
Sum of segment Brand
selling/ ***** Total
***** Coverage
Wallet
Share
Customer
Share
Coverage
50% 30%
80%
30%
20%
20%
50%
20%
80%
30%
30%
20%
Customer
Share
Wallet
Share
대상시장내에서
고객 확보 비율
대상시장내에서 고객
구매금액 비율
80% 62.5% 60%X X = 30%
80% 62.5% 40%X X = 20%
Customer& Customer
wallet을 소매점으로
가정시,

12. 12
Concept of market share
Product Competitiveness
Price Acceptance
Channel Effectiveness
Market
Share
Unit or dollar sales
User base (since piracy and brand switching effect)
Market definition (scope of
definitions)
Product definition (brand, product
line, or strategic business unit)
Scope of denominator (which
other brands included)
Time frame length

13. Agenda
1
Marketing& Sales measurement2
Benchmarking with competitors3
Concept of Marketing measurement

14. 14
Identify emerging market
Implication: 시장점유율, Weighted Dist., In-store Share를
교차 분석하여 오판을 배제한 Emerging segment 파악.
54%
51%
44%
43% 44%
78%
73%
70%
65%
59%
08-May 08-Jun 08-Jul 08-Aug 08-Sep
Slide Shell SWL Block TAB
Weighted Distribution(%)
24%
25%
26%
24%
29%
25%
24%23%
26%
27%
26%
24%
22%
21%22%
08-May 08-Jun 08-Jul 08-Aug 08-Sep
Slide Shell SWL Block TAB
Market Share(%)
• Slide & TAB is growing segments.
37%
31%
32%
36%
34%
57%
55%
52%52%
50%
33%
33%
31%32%
38%
08-May 08-Jun 08-Jul 08-Aug 08-Sep
Slide Shell SWL Block TAB
In-store Share(%)
• In fact, SWL is getting consumers’
acceptance.
Marketing& Sales measurement: Overall Effectiveness

15. 15
Seasonal Index
Calculation (S.I.) Jan. = ( (sales Jan.T-2, Jan.T-1, Jan.T)) / AVG monthly sales (36 months)
Implication:
1) 전체 시장의 월별 계절적 판매 지수는?
2) 자사 영업이 전체 시장의 계절적 수요에 적절히 대응하는지?
3) 만약, 그렇지 않다면 대응 전략은?
0.91
0.87
0.81
0.99
0.91 0.92
0.96
0.9
0.84
1.01
0.93 0.95
0.86
1.08
1.03
1.3
1.06
1.26
0.86
0.98
1.11
1.19
1.04
1.23
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. July Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.
Total Market Hankook
계절적 (Seasonality) 수요에 적절히 대응하지 못해 판매기회 상실.
Marketing& Sales measurement: Performance with seasonality

16. 16
Marketing& Sales measurement: Product - Segment Portfolio Effectiveness
Purpose:
자사의 제품군에 대한 자원 집중도와 시장내 성과가 적합한지에 대한 측정
측정을 바탕으로 Portfolio 재구성 방향 설정
높은 상대적 자원 집중도
높은 상대적 점유율
 ROI 측정에 따른 향후 방향
설정
낮은 상대적 자원 집중도
높은 상대적 점유율
 단기간 자원 집중 필요
높은 상대적 자원 집중도
낮은 상대적 점유율
 전략제품이 아닌 경우
Harvest필요
낮은 상대적 자원 집중도
낮은 상대적 점유율
 시장추이에 따른 유지전략
내부요인 높음
예측가능
외부요인 높음
 예측불가능
Relative
Sales
Importance
Share
Relative Market Share (by
Product Segment)
Relative Sales Importance share (%) = Corporate Sales Importance/ Sales importance of Largest competitor
Relative Market Share (%) = Corporate Market Share/ Share of Largest competitor
Over 100%
Less 100%
100% 0%

17. 17
Marketing& Sales measurement: Product - Model Portfolio Effectiveness
Purpose:
자사의 주력제품에 대한 자원 집중도와 시장내 성과가 적합한지에 대한 측정
측정을 바탕으로 Portfolio 재구성 방향 설정
높은 상대적 자원 집중도
높은 상대적 점유율
 ROI 측정에 따른 향후 방향
설정
낮은 상대적 자원 집중도
높은 상대적 점유율
 단기간 자원 집중 필요
높은 상대적 자원 집중도
낮은 상대적 점유율
 전략제품이 아닌 경우
Harvest필요
낮은 상대적 자원 집중도
낮은 상대적 점유율
 시장추이에 따른 유지전략
내부요인 높음
예측가능
외부요인 높음
 예측불가능
Relative
Sales
Importance
Share
Relative Market Share (by
Model)
Relative Sales Importance share (%) = Model’X’ Sales Importance/ Sales importance of No.1 Model
Relative Market Share (%) = Model’X’ Market Share/ Share of No.1 Model
Over 100%
Less 100%
100% 0%

18. 18
Marketing& Sales measurement: Place - Effectiveness
Purpose:
자사의 전략 Segment의 유통이 효율적인가를 측정
Customer Traffic 을 Segment (세부시장)수준까지 반영하여 비교함으로서 Segment별/ 경쟁사간 유통 효율성 측정
 (SDPI) Segment distribution Performance Index
= Segment weighted distribution/ Total weighted distribution
 Segment weighted distribution = Segment sales of stores carrying X/ Segment sales of all stores
 Total weighted distribution = Sales of stores carrying X/ Sales of all stores
Total weighted distribution
Segment
weighted
distribution
a
b
a. 특정 Segment의 유통의 효율이 상대적으로 우수함
b. 특정 Segment의 유통 효율이 상대적으로 열악함
기울기=1
개별 Segment

19. 19
Marketing& Sales measurement: Price - Pricing effectiveness
Purpose:
자사의 유통가격 정책이 효율적인가를 측정
판매가 이루어진 유통의 범위과 높은 판매빈도의 가격대를 비교하여 유통가격 효율성 측정
 (DAI) Distributors Price Acceptability Index
= Price Distributed/ Weighted average price
 Price Distributed = {(Channel 1 ASP*Numeric Distribution)…+… (Channel n ASP*Numeric Distribution)}/Sum of Numeric distribution
 Weighted average price = ASP with weight adjusted (AVG Price in GSE)
Weighted average price
Price
Distributed
a
b
a. 특정 Segment의 유통침투 가격인상의 거부가 강하지 않을 수 있음
b. 특정 Segment의 유통침투 가격 인하 (마진율 조정)가 필요할 수 있음
기울기=1
개별 Segment

20. Agenda
1
Marketing& Sales measurement2
Benchmarking with competitors3
Concept of Marketing measurement

21. 21
7
10
12
10
15
18
12
15
2
21
15
26
8
12
4 4 4
5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
< 100 <150 <200 <250 <300 <350 <400 <500 >=500
% of models
Market Share
In 1,000 KRW
기회
Benchmarking Competitors: Product – Opportunity (or Threat) Area
Issue
1) What is the price structure of the category?
2) Does the price structure differ across shop types?
3) What is the trend of the price structure across time?
4) What is the consumer demand per price segment?
5) How many competitors are present per price segment?
6) Is there a gap in a retailer assortment?

22. 22
8.8
9.1 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.5 9.5 9.4 9.5 9.5
8.68.5
8.1
8.58.2
8.88.88.58.58.88.88.9
8.5
9.59.79.69.6 9.5
1.6
2.12.5
2
2.52.32.122.11.82
2.3
2.9
2.5
0
5
10
15
Jan. 08 Feb.
08
Mar.
08
Apr. 08 May.
08
Jun. 08 Jul. 08 Aug.
08
Sep.
08
Oct. 08 Nov.
08
Dec.
08
Jan. 09 Feb.
09
LG
Samsung
Motorola
Average No. of model carried
Calculation Numeric Dist. (Model A + Model B + Model C -----.) / Numeric Dist. Of Brand Total
Implication: 각 제조사별 취급 점포 당 취급하는 모델 수를
측정 및 비교하여 제품 취급상의 질을 관리함.
취급 모델수 8 초반으로 하락
Benchmarking Competitors: Product – Quality of portfolio mgt.

23. 23
Model Development Review
Calculation Market Share and Growth rate
Implication:
1) 어떤 모델들이 현 시장에서 winner 인지 또는 loser 인지 파악?
2) 전략적으로 집중해 야할 모델은(Low share but big growth)?
3) Drop 또는 자원 배분을 줄여야 할 ‘problem child’는?
-8
-4
0
4
8
12
0 5 10 15 20
Growth Rate(%)
Model A
Model B
Model C
Model D
Model E
Share(volume, Value)
Benchmarking Competitors: Product – Portfolio performance

24. 24
Per Model In-store Share
Calculation In-store Share/ No. of Models
Implication: 해당 브랜드의 모델수와 점포내 점유율을 활용하여
모델단위당 판매효율성 및 집중도를 파악.
4.5%
4.0% 4.0%
4.2% 4.2%
3.9%
3.0%
3.2%
2.8%
2.6% 2.6% 2.6%
2.8% 2.8%
0
4
8
12
16
Jan.
08
Feb.
08
Mar.
08
Apr.
08
May.
08
Jun.
08
Jul. 08 Aug.
08
Sep.
08
Oct.
08
Nov.
08
Dec.
08
Jan.
09
Feb.
09
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
No. of Model Per Model Instore Share
투입 모델의 수는 증가 vs. In-store Share 감소. 판매간섭 발생  자기잠식율 Check
Benchmarking Competitors: Product - Cannibalization

25. 25
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
J
K
L I
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Numeric Distribution
Weighted Distribution
Focused on
Big Shops
Small Shops only
Many Shops but,
a lot of small shops
Almost all Shops
carry these brands
Numeric Dist. Vs. Weighted Dist.
Implication: 모델별로 단순한 취급율의 비교 뿐 아니라,
모집단내 제품이 분포된 특성을 파악하여 취급율 향상의 방향 결정.
Benchmarking Competitors: Place - Distribution Status

26. 26
100806040200
28
26
24
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28
In-store Share
Weighted Distribution
Model B, First Encounter: Aug-2008
Model A, First Encounter: May-2008
경쟁관계의 경쟁사 모델B와 상대비교.
출시 3개월 이후 전개과정 차이를 보임.
In-store 정체  Take action
Benchmarking Competitors: Place - New Launching monitor
2.4
4.4
4.9
5.8
6.1
1.1
1.7
1.9
2.9
4.6
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Jan. 03 Fab. 03 Mar. 03 Apr. 03 May 03
Share in handlers
Market Share
Issue
1) Early indicator for success or failure of a newly launched product
2) Is the level of supply adequate related to the sales to the consumers?
3) Should we take action to prevent out of stocks?
4) Should we adjust the consumer price?

27. 27
BDI and CDI
Calculation
Implication: 세분 시장별 카테고리 및 브랜드의 시장 개발 정도를 지수화.
자원 배분의 기초 참조 요소로 활용.
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Brand Development Index
Category Development Index
Pusan
Chungnam/
Taejeon
Technomart
Taegu
Jeonbuk
Kyungbuk
Yongsan
Kangbuk
Kangwon
Jeonnam/Kwangju
Chungbuk
Kyunggi/Inchon
CDI =
Market Importance of demographic
Market Importance of Category
 100 BDI =
Market importance of category
Market importance of Brand
 100
Benchmarking Competitors: Place – BDI/CDI

28. 28
Adjusted Avg. Sales per store
Calculation Sales/(Numeric Dist.*No. of Store)*(Numeric Dist./Weighted Dist.)
Implication: 점포의 규모를 감안하여 각 제조사별 실제 취급
점포당 월평균 판매량을 나타냄.
Samsung LG Motorola SKY
Weighted Distribution 69 42 65 27
Numeric Distribution 41 15 28 11
Monthly Sales Unit 37,113 22,602 11,301 9,850
Avg. Sales per store 163 271 72 161
No. of Store 557 557 557 557
Adjusted Avg. Sales per store 97 97 31 65
* LG 의 경우 Weighted 가 높은 매장에서 주로 판매가 되므로 Avg. Sales per Store가 가장 높음.
1. 단순 Avg. Sales per Store로는 판매력 과대 혹은 과소 오판의 여지가 있음.
2. 판매매장의 수와 규모를 감안하면 LG 와 Samsung 의 판매력은 동일.
3. LG 의 경우 Distribution 확산 시 판매기회 확대의 여지가 큼.
LG는 경쟁사 대비 판매력이 동일하므로 Distribution 확산을 통해 판매기회 확보 가능.
Benchmarking Competitors: Place - Channel Direction

29. 29
Turnover potential
Calculation Sales per point of weighted distribution * Additional distribution
Implication: 추가 취급율 확대를 통한 판매 증가 예측.
자원 분배 및 목표 설정에 활용.
Model A Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4
Weighted Distribution 56 69 25 27
Numeric Distribution 48 51 13 11
Monthly Sales Value (KRW '000,000) 1,865 2,375 97 1,010
Sales per point weighted Dist. 33 34 4 37
Sales per point Numeric Dist. 39 47 7 92
Targetted weighted distribution 65 75 50 50
Additional distribution if hit target 9 6 25 23
Additional Sales value (KRW Mil.) 300 207 97 860
Distribution index 로 보면 Region4의 Potential이 2.8배 높음
Benchmarking Competitors: Place – Turnover Potential
Implication
1. What will be the additional turnover if I increase the distribution of my product?
2. Is it worthwhile to increase my distribution, taken into account my additional cost?

30. 30
Average Product Life Cycle
Calculation
Implication: 대표 모델의 Product Life Cycle 을 분석하여 전개 단계별
점유율 변화와 체류기간 분석. 응용  Average Distribution Life Cycle
Market Share with Synchronized Period vs. Average Selling Price Erosion
APLC Price Erosion
3%
9%
12% 12% 12%
13%
14%
12%
11%
9%
8%
2%
1%
2%
8%
10%
13%
14% 14% 14%
9%
2%
1%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
D D+1 D+2 D+3 D+4 D+5 D+6 D+7 D+8 D+9 D+10 D+11 D+12
SS Best 3
LG Best 3
100
102
97
96
94
88
87
86
85
84
80 80
72
100
97
94
93
92
91
86 86 86 86 86
82
80
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
105
D D+1 D+2 D+3 D+4 D+5 D+6 D+7 D+8 D+9 D+10 D+11 D+12
LG Best 모델은 평균 출시 6개월 이후에 Decay를 직면.
하지만 Decay 기울기가 상대적으로 큼.
후속 모델 조기 안착에 효과적인 모형.
조기/신속 Replacement? 다(多) 모델 전략 ?
Samsung Best 모델은 Decay에 진입한
D+7~D+10 시기에 판가인하 조치로
Decay 가속화에 마찰력 부여.
후속 Replacement 부재?
Benchmarking Competitors: Price - Life Cycle with Price erosion

31. The End of Document