2014: Fazer mais com menos

em 01/01/2014

Feliz 2014!

2014 começa de forma curiosa: de um lado, as expectativas para um ano de Copa do Mundo e eleições e, de outro, a inflação no limite do controle, as taxas de juros subindo e algumas manifestações sociais retomando algumas ruas e, particularmente, shopping centers. Havíamos ficado com uma forte impressão de que estávamos no rumo certo: o Brasil iria finalmente decolar, a Copa do Mundo e as Olímpiadas iriam deixar um legado que impulsionaria ainda mais o País para a frente. Já no ano passado esta impressão começou a ser afetada pelas manifestações e pela deterioração das condições econômicas que culminaram na alta da inflação, dos juros e na reação da mídia internacional, que já não vê o Brasil com os mesmos olhos. Será que continuaremos a ser o país do futuro ou ainda poderemos nos tornar o país do presente?

A resposta para essa pergunta é incerta. O que é certo é que, como empresários, precisamos estar preparados para lidar com esses cenários em constante mutação. Por mais que as empresas desejem administrar essas situações, muitas variáveis estão fora de seu controle e, por isso, a prudência determina, cada vez mais, buscar eficiência e produtividade em suas operações, ou seja, fazer mais com menos. Vamos tentar, ao longo das colunas deste ano, debater e apresentar aspectos, temas e questões relacionadas ao tema.

No último mês de novembro, a TESCO atualizou um relatório que começou a publicar em maio de 2013, denominado “TESCO e a Sociedade: utilizando nosso tamanho para o bem” (disponível em inglês em: <http://tinyurl.com/nnafhko>). Apenas para lembrar, a TESCO é a segunda maior varejista do mundo, com faturamento, em 2012, superior a US$ 101 bilhões, operando mais de 6.700 lojas em 12 países e contando com mais de 530 mil funcionários que atendem cerca de 75 milhões de clientes por semana.

Voltando ao relatório, os números publicados pela TESCO são impressionantes: apenas no primeiro semestre de 2013, cerca de 30 toneladas de alimentos foram descartadas nas operações da empresa, CDs e lojas. Apesar de impressionante, este volume é pequeno se comparado ao total de produtos descartados no Reino Unido, que é de 14,8 milhões de toneladas. A empresa resolveu analisar 25 produtos diferentes e as constatações são assustadoras: de todas as verduras embaladas, 68% nunca são consumidas, 20% das bananas, 24% das uvas, 40% das maçãs, 47% dos produtos produzidos na padaria têm o mesmo destino, ou seja, o lixo!

Enquanto isso, estima-se que 1 bilhão de seres humanos passem fome no mundo. Definitivamente, não são números compatíveis com a necessidade de uma sociedade mais justa, mais consciente e sustentável. Mais do que simplesmente apontar o resultado, o relatório aponta possíveis causas e indica alguns caminhos
.
Uma constatação inicial é de que o grosso do descarte não ocorre por conta das operações no varejo, e sim na produção ou pré-produção e na casa dos consumidores. O curioso é que é o próprio varejo que contribui com os desperdícios nos produtores e consumidores. Nos produtores, ao exigirem um determinado calibre, tamanho e aparência, descartando produtos que estão adequados para consumo, mas que não atendem a padrões estéticos, muitas vezes apenas de exposição. No caso dos consumidores, o varejista influencia por meio da promoção e, muitas vezes, pelo mau acondicionamento do produto.  Saindo do discurso para a ação, a TESCO decidiu tomar algumas medidas:

• deixar de comercializar embalagens múltiplas e família de verduras, diminuindo o volume comprado pelo consumidor e contribuindo para a redução do desperdício nos lares dos consumidores;
• diminuir o linear da padaria;
• investir em sistemas que permitam otimizar os pedidos de compra e produção;
• investir em sistemas de embalagem;
• revisar os padrões mínimos de qualidade para contribuir com a eliminação do descarte por aparência e qualidade na produção;
• investir em informação para os consumidores a respeito da aparência os produtos e para o consumo em quantidades adequadas;
• revisar os processos de promoção de modo a promover ofertas conscientes que minimizem o risco de compra em volumes desnecessários, que poderão redundar em produtos desperdiçados.

Todas essas medidas podem ser sintetizadas na discussão e busca de soluções para aprimorar a cadeia de abastecimento do varejo em todas as suas etapas. Isso implica mensurar, investir em processos, tecnologia, educação, mas, sobretudo, repensar o papel do varejo na sociedade de hoje. Ainda que a ênfase tenha sido dada aos produtos perecíveis, raciocínio semelhante pode ser aplicado aos demais produtos.

O exemplo da TESCO é interessante, e é oportuno fazermos um paralelo com a situação no Brasil. Em artigo publicado na edição de janeiro de 2014 na Revista Mundo Logística, intitulado: “A necessidade de uma abordagem ampla e integrada para a Prevenção de Perdas no varejo”, curiosamente, sobre este mesmo estudo, o consultor Eduardo Santos, além de reforçar e detalhar as medidas anteriormente comentadas, aponta que, no Brasil, “nos hiper e supermercados brasileiros, mais de 80% das perdas de inventário dizem respeito a alimentos (aproximadamente 50% em frutas e vegetais e 30% em mercearia”.

Sugerimos que você tente responder às seguintes questões:

1. As informações dos registros de controle de estoques são necessárias?
2. A acuracidade dos inventários é adequada?
3. Tratamos perdas e desperdícios com uma abordagem além da segurança patrimonial (roubo, furto, fraude)?
4. Conseguimos identificar, diferenciar e medir as perdas de forma adequada?
5. Temos alguma definição clara para distinguir perda e desperdício?
6. Temos um sistema mínimo de medição que possibilite identificar de forma clara e precisa desperdícios e perdas?
7. Temos um processo de identificação das causas de desperdícios e perdas?
8. Temos um acompanhamento constante da evolução dos indicadores de perdas e desperdícios que possibilite analisar sua evolução e tomar ações corretivas?
9. Estamos investindo nas discussões com os distribuidores, atacadistas e fornecedores para melhorar a eficiência geral da cadeia de abastecimento?
10. Estamos trabalhando a noção da oferta adequada ao cliente, não apenas no que diz respeito à adequação do produto e preço, mas também à compra do volume adequado?
11. Estamos trabalhando junto aos consumidores para educá-los para o consumo?

Se você respondeu não a qualquer uma das perguntas acima, principalmente às oito primeiras, existem oportunidades a serem exploradas para resolver um problema relevante, aprimorar resultados, fazendo e produzindo mais com menos. Esta é uma iniciativa com enorme potencial de aumento de competitividade que só depende da própria empresa, não estando vinculada à concorrência. Os resultados e o planeta agradecem.


Caso tenha sugestões de temas a serem discutidos ou comentários, por favor utilize o e-mail varejo2020@gmail.com para darmos continuidade ao diálogo aqui iniciado.

Por Silvio Laban
http://supervarejo.com.br/secoes/colunistas/varejo-2020/2014-fazer-mais-com-menos/

Os Clientes é que pagam a conta das perdas de inventário!

By GEORGE CHAMBERLIN, Executive Editor

Tuesday, June 18, 2013

 

Retailers call it shrink, losses realized from shoplifting and employee theft. In addition to significantly affecting the profits of a company, these criminal activities also make it more expensive for consumers to shop.

Retailers are stepping up their efforts to crack down on theft. The annual retail theft survey from Jack L. Hayes International found 23 major retailers apprehended more than 1.1 million shoplifters and dishonest employees in 2012 and recovered $189 million. Apprehensions are up 7.4 percent from a year ago and recovered dollars soared by 22.7 percent.

A 2011 report from the Centre for Retail Research in the U.K. found all versions of theft, including organized crime and administrative errors, totaled $119 billion with dishonest employees accounting for 35 percent of the shrink.

“Although there are commentators who view retail crime as a harmless or intriguing social phenomenon or simply a cost of doing business, this ignores the impact of criminal gangs, growing levels of violence against employees and customers, and the links between retail crime and drugs, fraud and extortion,” said Joshua Bamfield of the Centre.

The study found the average family in the United States sees their shopping bill go up $435 a year as a result of retail crime.

The National Retail Federation is working to raise the awareness of organized crime and the impact it has on the retail sector. A survey of 125 large retailers this year found 93.5 percent said their company had been the victim of organized crime, down from 96 percent in the previous year.

“Though retailers continue to make great strides in their fight against organized retail crime, savvy, unconscionable criminals are selling stolen merchandise for a profit that doesn’t belong to them,” said Rich Mellor, Vice President of Loss Prevention at the NRF.

The most common type of fraud involves stolen merchandise and gift cards. According to the Federation, a “booster” returns stolen merchandise without a receipt with the intent to receive a store credit in the form of a gift card. They then turn around and sell the gift card for cash through secondary markets, including pawn shops.

“In conversations with retailers and law enforcement, we’ve learned that there are already defrauding process being put in place, but retailers continue to lose millions of dollars to this enterprising scheme,” said Mellor.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation earlier this month busted a group of boosters who had targeted retail stores and pharmacies in Texas from 2008 to 2012, stealing an estimated $10 million in products each year.

“To make matters worse, many of the goods — some possibly compromised by being stored and shipped under improper conditions and some sold past their expiration dates — eventually ended up in the hands of an unsuspecting public,” according to the FBI report.

http://www.sddt.com/news/article.cfm?SourceCode=20130618tbd

 

6 Trends in Loss Prevention and Store Operations Control

Jul 22, 2013

 

The following trends come from 3 primary sources. (1) The 2012 National Supermarket Shrink Survey, (2) Supermarket Executive Interviews by The Retail Control Group, and (3) 36 Store-level “Causes & Cures” Profit Audits conducted in 2010-2011.

Trend #1 – Theft. Theft is always a topic of concern when it comes to shrink, with 29% of all shrink coming from theft (amateur, pro & ORC). With companies reporting that 33% of shrink from theft as being preventable, companies are turning attentions to shrink from operations where 57% of shrink is believed to be preventable. Two primary areas of shrink loss occurred from theft were shoplifting of Meat ($21,485) and at the check-out by dishonest cashiers in companies not utilizing a pro-active, disruptive cashier performance monitoring system. This trends are causing a broadening the scope of engagement loss prevention and deeper integration and collaboration between Loss Operations. Prevention and Store Operations.

Trend #2 – Operations. With 64% of all store shrink occurring as a result of the absence of, or breakdowns in, store operations control best practices, still 74% of surveyed companies have not materially changed their key operating disciplines, standards or practices in the past 5 years. These companies report total store shrink of 2.47-2.85% (Av. 2.70%). 26% have developed new disciplines, standards and practice and thereby changed their expectations for shrink control and profit growth. These companies report total store shrink of 2.18-2.33%. Within these trends, there were 9 specific areas of operational control wherein the 64% of shrink loss occurred. With full implementation of assimilated best practices, up to 57% of shrink from operations was reported as controllable yielding (on average) over $187,000 per year profit opportunity per store with $425,000 in weekly sales.

Trend #3 – Perishables. With 65% of all store shrink occurring in perishable depts, we see only best-in-class (top 25%) companies employing new emphasis on implementing industry proven Best Practices. These companies are demonstrating an average 22% less perishable dept shrink than the remaining 75% of companies. As part of best-in-class important as shrink loss control is the inseparable connection between shrink loss and customer satisfaction, and therefore sales.

Trend #4 – Technology. There continues to be movement toward technology based LP, but with DVRs, DSD, POS and EAS reaching near critical mass, survey companies are reporting significant movement toward LP impacting technology that also has specific operational impact in addition to LP. An example of this would include: Table PC-based CBO systems, Scan-based Trading, Mobile device based store training programs, and intranet-based best practices communications and training (like SharePoint). This movement is notable in that it again highlights a cross-functional merging of business priorities between Operations and Loss Prevention. Caution is growing as retailers to strip-away technologies marketing hype and messages and commentaries and examine systemic results from technology expenditures. Executives are cautious of efforts without clear and consistent results. Technology value and effectiveness is dependent on implementation effectiveness and the average surveyed company reports IE at approx 55% and shrink reduction from technology at 8-9%. But when companies implement the use of LPX technology with Operational values, we see IE at 72% and targeted shrink reduction at 16%. Clearly, technology can help retailers to be more efficient, provide ever more information and control shrink, but technology without excellent implementation effectiveness over time remains a challenge for retailers.

Trend #5 – Implementation is Key. Best in class companies are examining and challenging their Standards of Operation in all store areas to streamline and improve operations while optimizing sales and profit. This movement is not centric to reducing labor expense as much as it is to improve profitable selling. These companies are reviewing their loss prevention organizations and reporting structures, technology effectiveness, store operations practices, store management and supervisor habits and practices and the role of internal audit as key areas for improvement.

Trend #6 – #1 leading BP = Inter-departmental “collaboration” emerging as the #1 best practice for companies working to reduce shrink and grow profit with consistent results, measurable impact and sustainable profit gains and shared/mutual and cross-functional accountability. Best-in-class retailers are evolving to this evolution as it touches day-to-day business practices, technology utilization, all ops standards, and employee and management training and garners consistency, break-out thinking for sales & profit improvement.

http://www.ricksegel.com/blog/bid/85832/Recommended-Article-6-Trends-in-Loss-Prevention-and-Store-Operations-Control-for-2012

Rick Segel & Associates

Lessons from the Leaders of Retail Loss Prevention

Jul 23, 2013

 

Preventing theft, damage, and errors such as food spoilage has long been an unyielding and poorly understood problem for retailers. But a few companies stand out in their ability to limit losses, and if every retailer were as successful as they are, the sector could save billions of dollars annually—as much as $27 billion in the United States alone.

 

Despite growing investment in electronic article surveillance and other loss-prevention approaches, inventory loss in the United States has remained stubbornly high over the past 15 years, fluctuating between 1.54% and 1.95% of sales, according to the University of Florida’s annual National Retail Security Survey, with the average rate in 2006 being 1.59%. Longer supply chains, growing product assortments, and labor cuts have contributed to making loss prevention ever more challenging.

The lesson of five companies we studied—Target, Limited Brands, Best Buy, Gap, and CVS—isn’t that security people should arrest more thieves or spend more on technology, the approaches that have dominated retail loss prevention. While catching criminals may appeal to the former police officers who are so often hired to deal with this problem, success requires a companywide strategy focused on operational excellence. These companies have shown that demonstrating strong leadership, embedding effective procedures, and ensuring compliance can drastically limit situations where shrinkage can occur.

The companies in our study were recommended by a panel of specialists on the basis of their innovative approaches and their success in keeping shrinkage low. The average shrinkage rate of the five was 44% below the U.S. mean, and one company’s rate was 70% below. We determined that these companies tend to rely on nine practices in developing an effective approach to loss prevention.

Three strategic practices must first be in place:

• Establish senior management commitment to making shrinkage a priority, overseeing an action plan, allocating resources, and monitoring results. (Figures on inventory loss are a closely guarded secret at most companies, but one of the five in our study gives shrinkage data to outside financial analysts so that they can better assess the company’s performance.)
• Ensure organizational commitment from managers throughout the company; otherwise, any attempted solution will be short-lived. The loss prevention department’s role is primarily to lead a cross-functional effort to manage the problem continuously.
• Embed loss prevention at all levels. Employees throughout the company must take responsibility for reducing shrinkage. The company should see loss prevention as equal to sales in importance.

 http://www.ricksegel.com/blog/bid/85877/Recommended-Article-Lessons-from-the-Leaders-of-Retail-Loss-Prevention

Rick Segel & Associates