EPOS PILOT
Armando Uriegas
Armando.Uriegas@nielsen.com
RMS and CPS Product Leader Head, Latin America
October 1, 2014
TRADITIONAL TRADE
• Rise of modern trade in developing markets impacted turnover and assortment but not
channels relevance.
Stores in
Developing
Markets
• Traditional Trade channel meets consumers needs for a frequent /convenient point of
purchase.
• Clients increasing investment as a controllable point of contact with end consumers & a
profitable channel.
Channel
+25MM TT
• Domain expertise and investment levels to measure the channel creates a barrier to
entry in half our markets.
Technology is a
potential game
changing disruptor
/opportunity
• Low cost app cash registers and payment solutions emerging in developed markets for
independent retail outlets.
• End to end ecosystems emerging – sales transactions, inventory management
/ordering, sales team management and payment.
• Proliferation of solutions but no clear technology or model established in either developed
Technology
Copyright ©2013 The Nielsen Company. Confidential and proprietary.
• EPOS penetration remains limited in developing markets.
or developing markets.
2
PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
Project Scope
Copyright ©2013 The Nielsen Company. Confidential and proprietary.
•
An expanded pilot with Epos was implemented in
order test performance service capability to
successfully recruit, install, and maintain POS
systems in Traditional Trade stores
•
The Pilot test was conducted in Valley of Mexico,
Mumbai and Johannesburg
•
A sample were recruited in each market , 50% of
both type of stores will be Nielsen and Non
Nielsen stores
•
Stores were representative of the shop types and
size for the area
•
Parallel Audits were conducted for 4 months /
Syndicated sample categories were measured /
Distribution and sales trend data was compared
•
Scope of pilot measured performance capability
to successfully recruit, install, and maintain
cooperation
Project Objectives
•
•
•
•
•
Demonstrate global replicability of Epos model
applied to Nielsen business
Demonstrate ability to activate and shift Nielsen
panel to POS
Demonstrate shopkeepers engagement
Evaluate the recruitment process and data quality
Learn how to optimize quality of data generated by
network
Pilot Test Timeline
Mexico
Mumbai
Johannesburg
Local Pilot
Set Up
Store Recrut &
Frogteck
activation
Parallel Pilot
ongoing
Local Pilot
Closure
Oct 13
Nov 13
Feb 14
Dec 13
Jan 14
Mar 14
Mar 14
Apr 14
Jun 14
May14
Jun 14
Jul 14
3
SUMMARY OF RESULTS TO DATE
Copyright ©2013 The Nielsen Company. Confidential and proprietary.
Key Areas
Mexico
Mumbai
*Johannesburg
Summary
(Incomplete)
1.
General data alignment between
methodologies
3
1
TBD
3
2
2.
Behavior and compliance
2
1
TBD
3
2
3
Item Master Database Alignment
3
**N/A
TBD
3
3
4.
Introduction of Bias from the tool
2
2
2
2
5.
Technology (application)
2
2
TBD
2
2
Scoring
1 Challenge
2
Need Further
Review
3 Good
4
MEXICO: AUDIT EVALUATION
Key Finding
1.
Data
Challenges
•
Data trends generally aligned
in terms of:
• Sales values
• Number of items
FrogTek Total Sales vs. Nielsen Audit Sales
Month
Jan
Feb
Mar
Nielsen Stores
49%
-1%
-7%
New Stores
5%
-19%
-22%
•
The solution is dependent on
store owner commitment to
bind it with their business
process
It is dependent on the ability
of storeowners and their
employees to use the
solution properly and remain
engaged with the process
Copyright ©2013 The Nielsen Company. Confidential and proprietary.
FrogTek Total Items vs. Nielsen Audit Items
2. FrogTek data trends on their
own show general decline
3. In some cases, Nielsen data
shows higher numbers of items
than FrogTek
•
•
Month
Jan
Feb
Mar
Nielsen Stores
7%
-6%
-6%
New Stores
8%
1%
-6%
Snacks and Cookies standout
7% - 34% difference across months
•
•
Engagement drop for
storeowners using the device
Less pronounced in existing
panel stores
• This is not natural for e-data
comparison and could be
driven by tool limitations
• Seasonal drop (after Christmas sales) due to timelines of this pilot
5
USER EXPERIENCE
Store owner´s motivation increased as they better understood the technology
Most store owners willing to participate for a year or longer
Strengths
Technology and reporting capabilities are an incentive for store owners
High satisfaction rate of store owners
Copyright ©2013 The Nielsen Company. Confidential and proprietary.
Lack of motivation of the employees of the stores (need to be
investigated)
Although initial training seems to be sufficient, store owners
need some time to become comfortable with the functionality
Opportunities
Challenges: Damage UPC – Busy store times
Price functionality
6
MAIN CHALLENGES
BarCode
Duplication
Copyright ©2013 The Nielsen Company. Confidential and proprietary.
Box Individual
Mistreated
or unreadable
Generic
Codes
Incorrect
Descriptions
- Analysis performed to apply possible
solution (cost & timing)
- Pre assigned codes
- Shopkeeper training
- Assign codes sales by unit
- Provide generic codes printed on magnet
- Provide generic codes with a plastic cover
- Shopkeepers can print generic codes by
they self
- Training (to identify the correct
information)
- Define procedure
- Incentive to use correct names
7
STORE PROFILE
• Grocery store with >50% barcode products
• Shop with good data coverage or wifi
• Young shopkeeper
Copyright ©2013 The Nielsen Company. Confidential and proprietary.
• Tech savvy, uses notepad or other management system
previously
• Shop is neat/clean/well stocked
8
•
In a controlled environment EPOS can work. Data has potential good quality and
with the right controls it can be used by Nielsen.
Controlled implementation per phases:
Conclusion
Copyright ©2013 The Nielsen Company. Confidential and proprietary.
CONCLUSIONS
Phase I: panel implementation for Advanced Analytics and laboratories
Phase II: start incorporating Stores with EPOS in RMS Operative Sample
9
THANK YOU