Friday, January 22, 2010

Keep a Store-Within-A-Store Compatible

Recently, there’s been extra interest in the idea of a retailer leasing out space within their store to another retailer or to a manufacturer for a store within the main store. The set of business models has been around for a long time. Usually the SWAS operator establishes their own rules for merchandising, pricing, staffing, training, and servicing. This is the case with Starbucks and Peet’s operations set up within supermarkets. Often the SWAS sells only one brand. This is the case with Sephora stores within J.C. Penny stores and Jil Sander within some Macy’s.
     Perhaps the extra interest in SWAS now is because of the economic downturn. Maybe you’re finding that with inventory and staff reductions, there is extra space in your store and a need for niche merchandising. In addition, store-based retailers are recognizing the extra excitement and shopper convenience a SWAS can bring.
     An upcoming article in the Journal of Marketing Research by professors at Carnegie Mellon University and University of Pennsylvania proposes some hypotheses about how SWAS concepts work best: Invite in manufacturer partners for product categories where consumers identify strongly with brands and where competition among retailers in selling favored brands is high.
     Also, it’s important to have SWAS tenants who reinforce, or at least won’t disrupt, the personality you want your overall operation to portray:
  • Sincere or witty: In what ways is the retailer honest? Wholesome? Cheerful? Teasing?
  • Exciting or predictable: To what degree is the retailer daring? Spirited? Imaginative? Trendy? Responsible? Dependable? Persistent?
  • Expert or inquisitive: In what ways is the retailer knowledgeable? Successful? Calm? Confident? Secure? Imaginative? Curious?
  • Sophisticated or approachable: To what degree is the retailer formal? Assertive? Ambitious? Casual? Sociable?
  • Rugged or luxurious: In what ways is the retailer gruff? Challenging? Cooperative? Trusting? Considerate? Indulgent?

No comments:

Post a Comment