- Free Essays, Term Papers, Research Papers and Book Reports

Store24 - New England’s Largest Convenience Store Chain

By:   •  April 16, 2018  •  Course Note  •  536 Words (3 Pages)  •  181 Views

Page 1 of 3
  • Store 24, one of New England’s largest convenience store chains, implemented a new customer intimacy strategy referred to as “Ban Boredom.”
  • CEO believed that providing an entertaining shopping atmosphere, including frequent themes and promotions, would differentiate the shopping experience at the chain from its competitors.
  • Hoped to create loyalty to Store 24 among its targeted customer base of young, urban adults between the ages of fourteen and twenty-nine
  • Actively promoted Ban Boredom strategy on billboards, buses, and trolleys.
  • Its retail outlets placed a large display case at the head of the center aisle to feature high margin promotional items for the current theme, such as life-sized cutouts of movie stars and discounted videos for an “old movie” theme.
  • Store managers given significant autonomy and flexibility in implementing Ban Boredom themes => Manager and crew skill may be key to success of strategy.

Ban Boredom strategy meant to complement core strategy “Cause you just can’t wait” (CYJCW).

  • After several years of Ban Boredom, CEO became concerned that strategy was not working.
  • The question: Is Ban Boredom working?  If not, is it a bad strategy or is it just being poorly implemented?
  • How can Store 24 use their strategy map and measures from their balanced scorecard to address these questions?
  • To address this issue, recall that the strategy map posits cause and effect relationships:

        Learning & growth => internal processes => customers => financial outcomes

  • Store 24 strategy hypothesized that: Ban Boredom => Customers => Profits
  • In their balanced scorecard Store 24 includes a Ban Boredom execution quality measure.  
  • To test for causality,  examine the statistical relation between stores’ Ban Boredom execution quality measures and their future store profits.
  • The relation is slightly negative!
  • They also found that customer satisfaction was positively influenced by the quality of the Ban Boredom implementation.
  • Thus, customers noticed differences in the quality of the strategy implementation, but measured customer satisfaction did not translate into higher profits.
  • Suggests the strategy itself might be flawed!
  • Stores with high crew skills that implemented Ban Boredom effectively had higher profits than stores with high skilled crews that were less effective in implementing the strategy.
  • Stores with low- or average-skilled crews that faithfully implemented Ban Boredom were less profitable than stores with low- and average-skilled crews that focused on operating efficiency (CYJCW) and did not implement the Ban Boredom strategy.
  • Success of the strategy critically dependent on skills of the employees in the store.
  • Inexperienced personnel who followed Ban Boredom rules did not serve customers well and introduced inefficiencies in operations, and that led to lower store profits.
  • Experienced crews, in contrast, maintained operating efficiency and customer satisfaction while creating the differentiating buying experience of the Ban Boredom strategy.
  • Drop Ban Boredom
  • Keep Ban Boredom, but increase expenditures on increasing the skills of store crews.
  • Keep Ban Boredom – but implement it only in stores with properly skilled crews.
  • Firm dropped Ban Boredom strategy
  • Performance Measurement system updated to reflect efficiency (CYJCW) strategy only
  • Is there something wrong with the strategy or is it poor execution?  Can we
  • cite examples of facing this dilemma in your organization?

[pic 1]


Download:  txt (3.5 Kb)   pdf (89.4 Kb)   docx (544 Kb)  
Continue for 2 more pages »