retail experience - solution development
DESCRIPTION
Solution Development for the supermarket involves striking a balance between consumer needs and retailer costs. The Masters of Design students have spent six weeks gathering and analyzing research data, brainstorming on several potential solutions. Those solutions shall be looked into from a broader perspective in an attempt to achieve the necessary balance for an ideal consumer shopping experienceTRANSCRIPT
Module: Design Practical 2
Assignment 1: Solution Development
M.Des 1.1
Name: Harshal Desai
Lecturer: Arabella Pasquette
Date of Submission
18/12/2011
Word Count: 2122
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................... 2
INTRODUCTION: RECAP FROM LAST WEEK .................................................... 3
TARGET CONSUMER ......................................................................................... 4
PRIORITY OF ISSUES ............................................................................................ 5
WHATS OUT THERE? ........................................................................................... 6
CONVERGING IDEAS ........................................................................................ 8
NEXT STEP .......................................................................................................... 10
PERSONAL REFLECTIONS ................................................................................ 11
APPENDIX ......................................................................................................... 13
A1. ISSUE CHART .......................................................................................... 13
A2. FAIRPRICE SUPERMARKET VS HYPERMARKET ..................................... 14
A3. TARGET CONSUMER ............................................................................. 14
A4. CONSUMERS FUTURE 2020 ................................................................... 16
A5. SOLUTION DEVELOPMENT ................................................................... 16
WORKS CITED .................................................................................................. 17
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Solution Development for the supermarket involves striking a balance
between consumer needs and retailer costs. The Masters of Design
students have spent six weeks gathering and analyzing research data,
brainstorming on several potential solutions. Those solutions shall be
looked into from a broader perspective in an attempt to achieve the
necessary balance for an ideal consumer shopping experience.
INTRODUCTION: RECAP FROM LAST WEEK
After several trial and errors in identifying the core issues, another
brainstorming session was held to sort out issues into specific categories.
(Appendix A1)
Figure 1: Issue Chart sorted into Categories
This gave the team a clearer perspective to focus the observational
analysis and process mapping. It was decided to select FairPrice
outlets as our client since they have over 240 sales outlets, holding over
50% market share for retail in Singapore. (Chong, 2011)
A quick population comparison showed that FairPrice Xtra
hypermarkets have a maximum population reach of 900,000 potential
consumers, and thus, was selected as our primary focus.
Issues Before Entry
Carriers
In the Store
Checkout Counter
After
Exit
Figure 2: Population density Comparison. (Department of Statistics, 2011)
The decision is also based on the initial observations at Fairprice
markets. The checkout time in a hypermarket was five times more than
a regular supermarket and people bought approximately twice the
number of items in a hypermarket. (Appendix A2)
TARGET CONSUMER
Based on interviews of a total 30 people at FairPrice Serangoon and
Hougang, the team concluded the target consumer has an age range
of 35-40 years, having a monthly income $3000-$4000, living
approximately five minutes from the hypermarket, shopping once a
week. The consumer primarily walks to the store and takes a cab to go
back home. The team estimated the reason being having to carry
heavy shopping bags. (Appendix A3)
Shreyaa was assigned to create four psychological consumer profiles
that match the following data and classify them as impulse buyers or
planned buyers.
Biniya focused on creating a detailed process map in all three stores
centered on the consumer profile and Alex reread the secondary
research to define the scope of the project.
Issa and Yumi studied the carriers available in the marketplace today.
PRIORITY OF ISSUES
The team interviewed 50 people at FairPrice Serangoon, A.M.K. and
Hougang to determine the priority issues from a consumer’s
perspective. The people were chosen randomly constrained by the
target profile and given a list of issues to rank according to priority.
Figure 3: Priority of Issues Chart
The results were as follows:
Primary Issue: Waiting in long queues at checkout
To increase efficiency of the checkout counter by
improving/eliminating current payment system. 66% consumers
voted this as top priority.
Secondary Issue: Wanting high quality of fresh products
To develop a system that keeps track of product expiry dates
and notifies the staff. 22% consumers voted this as top priority
Tertiary Issue: Carrying Bags after Checkout*
To design a solution that reduces difficulty of carrying products
home after purchase. 16% consumers voted this as top priority.
*Despite the results, the team’s observations conclude that carrying groceries after checkout is a far bigger
problem and as such, is being considered as the secondary issue.
WHATS OUT THERE?
Issa, Yumi and Alex studied several alternative carriers available in the
market, both portable and collapsible types of varying sizes. These
carriers were differentiated according to their strengths, weaknesses,
cost and features along with a Quality Vs Value assessment. Analysis
showed that most carriers were easily portable, lightweight, and cost
ranging from $25-$200 depending on sizes and type of material.
Harshal focused on examining the current experiments done in
RFID(Radio Frequency Identification) and NFC (Near Field
Communications) technology with regards to supermarkets. The goal
was to study the cost of setup, understand privacy issues and potential
flaws, variety of features etc. The results are compared according to
Cost Vs Function to determine the feasibility of this technology being
used in the Singapore market.
Currently Metrogroup AG
runs a Future Store using NFC
technology for the products,
and RFID tags for store
inventory (Future Store
Initiative, 2011)
Customers use their cellphones to capture photographs of barcodes of
the products they wish to purchase. When they are done shopping,
they use the application to create a generic barcode that is later
scanned at a kiosk, and
payment is done either via
cash or credit cards.
RFID technology is used by
the store to keep track of
inventory so it becomes
easier for staff to restock the
supply faster.
Another company named ShelfX
uses a “Smart” shelf system,
combining NFC with RFID to
improve store navigation and
speed up checkout. The product is
currently in trials at a local store in
Colorado, United States.
The process is to use a special NFC
card to tap on the shelf and take
an item. The shelf is weight-
sensitive and can track the
number of items taken by the
consumer. Once all the shopping
is complete, the consumer simply walks to the checkout kiosk, swipes
their card, and completes the payment. A cellphone app is used to
keep track of purchases and to remove any item from the grocery list.
Harshal has been in communication with the Executive Vice President
of ShelfX discussing the cost of setup and features that could be
applied on their technology catered towards the FairPrice Singapore
consumers (ShelfX)
Details of the analyses shall be compiled in the second assignment
focusing on the respective solutions.
CONVERGING IDEAS
After having several individual concepts that solved specific issues
within the supermarket, the next phase was to step back to get a clear
look at the bigger picture. By evaluating which ideas are worth
pursuing, the team can focus on solutions that are beneficial to both
consumer and client.
To look at the bigger picture, Harshal summarized the proposed and
posted them on a wall. Alex and Harshal worked together for the next
two days, setting limits and narrowing the field of solutions within a set
of ideal constraints.
Figure 4: The Solution Wall (Source: Self Shot)
At this point, it was decided to not just focus on the ideal solution for
our primary issue i.e. tedious queues at the checkout counter. Instead,
the focus was to deliver the best consumer experience possible,
keeping the FairPrice Mission, Vision and Values in mind.
According to the Consumer Futures 2020 Scenarios, the solutions were
divided according to the four scenarios predicted in the theory
(Appendix A4) and it was found that RFID and NFC technology provide
the most prosperous results. (Bennie, Crossley, Goodman, Jewell,
Knowles, & Uren, 2011)
The solutions were divided and ranked on a predetermined scale
based on the effectiveness of solving respective issues. (Appendix A5)
Based on the results, three solutions could be proposed.
Solution A: The Ideal Solution
Using RFID technology to eliminate checkout lines altogether, NFC
cellphone app for easy navigation within the stores and an efficient
home delivery system provided by the supermarket. RFID shall also
keep track of the store inventory, notifying the staff in case any
products are past their expiry dates or running low on stock. Consumers
have a choice of using their own portable carriers that are lightweight,
durable, waterproof and cost-friendly. This eliminates the need of
plastic bags and contributes to a better future.
While a delivery system would incur higher costs, they would more than
make up for it in profits created by a larger influx of consumers.
Solution B: Adequate Solution
Using NFC technology for cellphone checkout in combination with an
app for store navigation. The setup cost is considerably less for the
supermarket, and solves the priority issues. The drawbacks however,
include consumer’s dependence on their cellphone to shop. A
supermarket would need to include mobile charging stations for the
consumers. RFID tagging is strictly used for inventory tracking by the
staff. It reduces the setup cost of RFID considerably. The store does not
offer any special delivery services and consumers rely on their portable
carriers to take the groceries home. An alternative is for the
supermarket to lease their carts for a deposit fee that is refunded when
the consumer brings the cart back to the store.
Other Solutions
These concepts are additions to the overall solutions mentioned
above, to improve the consumer experiences.
1. A storage area for the consumer to keep their bags when they
enter the store, to make it easier for them to shop without
burden.
2. An application for smartphones that checks if the supermarket
has the required products
3. Staff training to ensure each customer is greeted politely
4. A counter for consumers to taste bit sized portions of
frozen/ready-to-eat items as an incentive to purchase the
product.
NEXT STEP
The next phase for the design team is to divide into pairs and focus on
specific areas in preparation for the December Graduation Show.
Alyssa and Yumi shall be working on a prototype of the portable
carrier. A basket-sized version was selected since it can be used in all
modes of transport, giving the consumers flexibility to take the transport
of their choice.
Shreyaa and Biniya are creating three boards summarizing the project
and a booklet containing a detailed report.
Alex and Hershey are filming two videos, based on process mapping
observations from Biniya, to show the current time taken for shopping
and how the future solutions will work. Due to time constraints, it was
decided to directly film the process and use special effects for editing
instead of an animation.
PERSONAL REFLECTIONS
Overall, I have enjoyed working on this project. Despite initial setbacks
and personality clashes, it was a wonderful learning experience.
From a designer’s perspective, understanding how to accurately
gather data by framing the correct questions, figuring out which
observations to focus on and learning to rely on intuition about certain
issues that may not be picked up through surveys turned out to be very
exciting.
Regarding the concept of groups, I still maintain my position that
overall, there would have been a wider variety of solutions had the
class split up in pairs instead of trying to compete. The objective may
have been to mimic a work environment; however, project leaders do
not switch weekly in an actual working scenario, at least not where I
have seen. In addition, getting others motivated can become quite
stressful at times, particularly when everyone has conflicting goals.
While some just wanted a decent grade, others wanted to ensure the
result was something that makes them proud. In a job, the former
would ideally be kicked out of the team, particularly when they don’t
adhere to deadlines, arrive late, or are not present at all. There is a
clear chain of command in a job, whereas being students, there was
just a senseless power struggle over why one should take orders from
someone else.
Thankfully, we were learning psychology of design at this stage too and
I realized one vital method to “motivate” some of my team members.
By clearly stating that each person will be held responsible for their
sections during a major presentation, suddenly there was an
immediate urgency to generate results.
The quality of work that we had been struggling to achieve for two
weeks was suddenly achieved in 2 days. Of course, due to the rush,
there were a few errors along the way, but it was a valuable
observation in leadership, to relieve the burden suddenly and force the
team to actually work as a unit.
Personally however, I still firmly believe that if everyone had worked on
the project individually, we would have seen far better results. Some
folks are just not meant to work in teams; however, that should not be
misinterpreted as not being able to collaborate.
Collaboration is not really teamwork… Like the famous Leonardo
DaVinci, who sought help and advice from several masters whenever
he had doubts, but the result was always a DaVinci exclusive. Every
student had access to the different design departments and allowed
to consult with their top lecturers. It would have certainly been
interesting to find out if anyone actually tapped into these valuable
resources on their own will.
Nonetheless, it was definitely a valuable experience to pull a decent
success within the time constraints. The end-product may not be up to
my personal expectations but it certainly appears far better than what
I was hoping for during the last two weeks. The videos appeared to be
the highlight of the project, acquiring positive feedback during
graduation and through the social networks alike.
I started out loathing this project, ended up completely immersed it
and discovered a passion for observational research, wanting to
understand a problem from a broader perspective instead of just
randomly fixing it with the first thing that pops in my head. I look
forward to applying this wisdom in my future projects.
APPENDIX
A1. ISSUE CHART
A2. FAIRPRICE SUPERMARKET VS HYPERMARKET
A3. TARGET CONSUMER
35.25
min
145
152.1
min
327
Total Checkout Time
(weekday)
Items bought
Supermarket
XTRA
hypermarket
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
1 2 3 4 5 6
Fre
qu
en
cy
Income Range
MONTHLY INCOME
MONTHLY
INCOME
1 = < $2000
2 = $2000-$3000
3 = $3001-$4000
4 = $4001-$5000
5 = $5001-$6000
6 = > $6000
Primary
Secondary
Based on interview of total 30 people
at FairPrice Serangoon and Hougang
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Fre
qu
en
cy
Number of minutes
DISTANCE FROM MARKET
(in terms of minutes)
7
1
5
0
17
7
14
3
0
6
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
1 2 3 4 5
FR
EQ
UEN
CY
TRANSPORTATION
TRANSPORT TO
MARKET
TRANSPORT FROM
MARKET
Time in
Minutes
Majority living within 5 minutes from market
Based on interview of total 30 people
at FairPrice Serangoon and Hougang
1 = Car
2 = Cab(From Store)
3 = Bus
4 = MRT
5 = Walking(To Store)
MODE OF TRANSPORT
Based on interview of total 30 people
at FairPrice Serangoon and Hougang
A4. CONSUMERS FUTURE 2020
A5. SOLUTION DEVELOPMENT
Please see next page.
WORKS CITED
Future Store Initiative. (2011, 11 16). Retrieved 12 15, 2011, from METRO
Group: http://www.future-store.org/fsi-
internet/html/de/375/index.html
Bennie, F., Crossley, D., Goodman, J., Jewell, J., Knowles, H., & Uren, S.
(2011). Consumer Futures 2020 - Scenarios for Future Consumers.
London, United Kingdom: Forum for the Future.
Chong, S. (2011). Case Study: NTUC FairPrice. The Fifth ISO Chairs
Conference. Geneva, Switzerland: International Conference
Center Genever (CICG).
Department of Statistics, S. (2011). Population Trends 2011. Singapore:
Ministry of Trade and Industry.
ShelfX. (n.d.). Retrieved 12 15, 2011, from ShelfX.com:
http://www.shelfx.com/