Comments on: A Front-End Approach to SKU Rationalization http://logisticsviewpoints.com/2009/08/26/a-front-end-approach-to-sku-rationalization/ Providing logistics professionals with clear and concise analyses of Logistics Trends, Technologies, and Services Wed, 16 May 2012 10:07:14 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: burnseyjp http://logisticsviewpoints.com/2009/08/26/a-front-end-approach-to-sku-rationalization/comment-page-1/#comment-124 burnseyjp Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:49:25 +0000 http://logisticsviewpoints.com/?p=1625#comment-124 Do you have any resources that would cover replacing an existing product with a new product? Specifically removing the existing from the market as the features on the new product are significantly better. My concerns here are that by making both products available our team does not have the proper focus to make the new product a success. Do you have any resources that would cover replacing an existing product with a new product? Specifically removing the existing from the market as the features on the new product are significantly better. My concerns here are that by making both products available our team does not have the proper focus to make the new product a success.

]]> By: shawndolley1 http://logisticsviewpoints.com/2009/08/26/a-front-end-approach-to-sku-rationalization/comment-page-1/#comment-100 shawndolley1 Sat, 10 Oct 2009 18:46:08 +0000 http://logisticsviewpoints.com/?p=1625#comment-100 Couldn't a brand company review their successes in terms of the past product 'winners' - those product scores at each stage? If they find a pattern (such as their winners always do well in development testing), then they could raise the hurdle rates for future products? If they designed a scoring pattern required across the stages that only the winners would have passed, then future products using those hurdles rates would be more aggressively weeded out. This would reduce your Type I errors, false positives, and many of the products the company thinks are winners are rejected because they won't be winners. Has anyone tried this? From Shawn Dolley at http://previouslyimpossible.wordpress.com/ Couldn’t a brand company review their successes in terms of the past product ‘winners’ – those product scores at each stage? If they find a pattern (such as their winners always do well in development testing), then they could raise the hurdle rates for future products? If they designed a scoring pattern required across the stages that only the winners would have passed, then future products using those hurdles rates would be more aggressively weeded out. This would reduce your Type I errors, false positives, and many of the products the company thinks are winners are rejected because they won’t be winners. Has anyone tried this?
From Shawn Dolley at http://previouslyimpossible.wordpress.com/

]]> By: Jfisher@emcien.com http://logisticsviewpoints.com/2009/08/26/a-front-end-approach-to-sku-rationalization/comment-page-1/#comment-87 Jfisher@emcien.com Thu, 27 Aug 2009 12:09:37 +0000 http://logisticsviewpoints.com/?p=1625#comment-87 Very good article. You are addressing SKU rationalization for NPI, or new products. However, 80% of revenue, the bread and butter is coming from existing products, and there is a lack of product management around them. Companies launch into SKU rationalization projects, groaning - like my son does when he is pushed to clean his room. Most of his stuff ends up under the bed. Similarly, most of the SKU rationalization projects do not produce sustainable results. SKU rationalization should not be viewed as a one-time exercise, as most companies do. It is appalling - but most companies do not have a product management process, which is an ongoing monitoring of SKU profitability, category management and metrics around SKU efficiency. Emcien offers a set of tools and process for sustainable SKU management and metrics around SKU efficiency. The SKU efficiency measures how much distinct attribution the SKU has, and how much demand it captures. http://www.emcien.com/Emcienmix An SKU that is created with just one attribute difference, to capture one more order is very expensive on the enterprise. Also - you can read about the analytics around demand sensing to manage SKUs at http://blog.emcien.com Very good article. You are addressing SKU rationalization for NPI, or new products. However, 80% of revenue, the bread and butter is coming from existing products, and there is a lack of product management around them. Companies launch into SKU rationalization projects, groaning – like my son does when he is pushed to clean his room. Most of his stuff ends up under the bed. Similarly, most of the SKU rationalization projects do not produce sustainable results.
SKU rationalization should not be viewed as a one-time exercise, as most companies do.
It is appalling – but most companies do not have a product management process, which is an ongoing monitoring of SKU profitability, category management and metrics around SKU efficiency.
Emcien offers a set of tools and process for sustainable SKU management and metrics around SKU efficiency. The SKU efficiency measures how much distinct attribution the SKU has, and how much demand it captures.
http://www.emcien.com/Emcienmix
An SKU that is created with just one attribute difference, to capture one more order is very expensive on the enterprise.

Also – you can read about the analytics around demand sensing to manage SKUs at
http://blog.emcien.com

]]>