Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
0
Effectiveness of Distribution Channels in
B2B Markets
Carlijn Jansen
(S2368439)
University of Groningen
Faculty of Economics and Business
Duisenberg Building, Nettelbosje 2
9747 AE Groningen, The Netherlands
Supervisor: Dr. W.W.M.E. Schoenmakers
Co-assessor: Dr. J.Q. Dong
Date: January 22, 2018
Word count: 19459
1
Effectiveness of Distribution Channels in B2B Markets.
University of Groningen
Faculty of Economics and Business
MSc Business Administration
Track Strategic Innovation Management
Master Thesis
January 2018
First Supervisor: Dr. W.W.M.E. Schoenmakers
Second Supervisor: Dr. J.Q. Dong
Carlijn Susanne Jansen
HW Mesdagstraat 67
9718 HE Groningen
Telephone: +31 (6) 41 66 07 95
Email: [email protected]
Student number: S2368439
Word count: 19459
2
ABSTRACT
With the world economy evolving an increased number of organizations are highlighting the
distribution management as one of their top priorities. And with the internet-developments the
number of distribution channels extended. Most researches in the distribution literature focused on
the business-to-consumer (B2C) market. Although the purchasing decision processes and criteria (e.g.
product quality, delivery, price and service) in the B2C are similar for the B2B. The personal and
organization motivations, drivers and impact of buying decisions substantially differ. This research
investigated the optimal distribution channel strategy for suppliers in business-to-business (B2B)
markets.
In order to identify the optimal distribution strategy a qualitative research with a case study analysis
was conducted. Data was collected during 10 in-depth interviews with suppliers of work clothing and
via 137 valid questionnaires submitted by customers who wear those clothes.
This research identified five distribution channels (sales representative, retail store, web shop,
catalogue and intermediary) of which the retail store and web shop were most frequently used. The
B2B customer preferred the retail store at the time this research was conducted due to the personal
contact, advice and the possibility to try and feel the products in advance. However, the high costs
made this distribution channel less favored by the B2B supplier. The identified advantages of the retail
store did not count for the web shop. Convenience (not restricted by location and time) both for the
B2B supplier and the B2B customer was defined as the major benefit of this distribution channel.
Subsequently, a multi-channel distribution strategy, where the retail store and the web shop are
combined, resulted in the largest customer coverage and satisfied most customers’ requirements and
was therefore the optimal distribution strategy when selling to smaller B2B customers. The findings of
this research are especially useful for B2B suppliers who are planning to innovate their distribution
channel strategy.
Key words: B2B, Distribution Strategy, Distribution Channel, Retail Store, Web Shop, Case Study.
3
TABLE OF CONTENT
1. INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................... 5
2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND ................................................................................................. 8
2.1 Definitions ..................................................................................................................................... 8
2.2 B2B Market .................................................................................................................................... 8
2.3 Distribution Channel Strategy ..................................................................................................... 10
2.3.1 Direct Distribution ................................................................................................................ 11
2.3.2 Indirect Distribution ............................................................................................................. 11
2.3.3 Multi-channel Distribution Strategy .................................................................................... 12
2.4 Distribution Channels .................................................................................................................. 13
2.4.1 Sales Representatives ........................................................................................................... 14
2.4.2 Retail Store ........................................................................................................................... 16
2.4.3 Web Shop ............................................................................................................................. 17
2.4.4 (Online) Catalogues .............................................................................................................. 19
2.4.5 Intermediary ......................................................................................................................... 19
3. METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................. 22
3.1 Case Selection .............................................................................................................................. 22
3.2 Data Collection ............................................................................................................................ 23
3.2.1 Interviews ............................................................................................................................. 23
3.2.2 Questionnaires ..................................................................................................................... 24
3.3 Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 25
3.3.1 Interviews ............................................................................................................................. 25
3.3.2 Questionnaires ..................................................................................................................... 26
4. FINDINGS ............................................................................................................................ 27
4.1 Interview Findings ....................................................................................................................... 27
4.1.1 B2B Customer ....................................................................................................................... 27
4.1.2 Distribution Channels ........................................................................................................... 28
4.1.3 Future Developments ........................................................................................................... 31
4.2 Questionnaire Findings ................................................................................................................ 32
4.2.1 B2B Customer ....................................................................................................................... 32
4.2.2 Distribution Channels ........................................................................................................... 32
4.2.3 Motives for Selecting Distribution Channels ........................................................................ 36
4.2.4 Control Variables .................................................................................................................. 38
4
5. DISCUSSION ........................................................................................................................ 40
5.1 Theoretical Implications .............................................................................................................. 40
5.2 Managerial Implications .............................................................................................................. 44
5.2.1 Managerial Implications HAVEP ........................................................................................... 45
5.3 Limitations and Future Research ................................................................................................. 48
6. CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................... 49
6.1 Acknowledgement ....................................................................................................................... 49
REFERENCE LIST .......................................................................................................................... 50
APPENDIX A: Overview advantages & disadvantages literature ........................................................... 54
APPENDIX B: Opportunities & obstacles associated with B2B websites ............................................... 56
APPENDIX C: Production strategy customized products HAVEP ........................................................... 57
APPENDIX D: Distribution strategy HAVEP ............................................................................................ 57
APPENDIX E: Interview guide ................................................................................................................ 58
APPENDIX F: Questionnaire ................................................................................................................... 60
APPENDIX G: Codebooks ....................................................................................................................... 65
APPENDIX H: Overview advantages & disadvantages interviews ......................................................... 67
APPENDIX I: Overview findings sample group HAVEP ........................................................................... 71
5
1. INTRODUCTION
“Alibaba.com brings you hundreds of millions of products in over 40 different major categories,
including consumer electronics, machinery and apparel” (Alibaba.com, 2017) and “Order before noon,
and get your items by 9 p.m. afternoon” (Amazon.com, 2017). These statements can only be realized
when the organization’s distribution strategy works optimally. For a long time suppliers regarded the
distribution strategy as a “leftover” (Rosenbloom, 2011). But, as the world economy evolved, this has
changed. An increased number of organizations are highlighting the distribution management as one
of their top priorities (Frazier, 1999). According to Rosenbloom (2011) the shift is the result of 3
developments: 1)The rise of Internet-based electronic commerce (E-commerce). With this new
technology, suppliers are able to interact directly with millions of consumers on a purely virtual base
without the help of any intermediary (Walters, 2008). E-commerce revolution is an established
distribution strategy, either alone or a combination of other distribution instruments, and accounts for
hundreds of billions of dollars in sales, with rapid growth ahead (Rosenbloom, 2011). 2) Difficultness
of gaining sustainable competitive advantage. It has become more difficult for suppliers to acquire an
advantage through product, price or promotion strategies (Rosenbloom, 2007). This encouraged the
so-called fourth P of McCarthy’s marketing mix1, place. Place, including distribution strategy, offers
greater potential for obtaining a sustainable competitive advantage (Stone, Hobbs & Khaleeli 2002;
Watson, Worm, Palmatier & Ganesan, 2015). 3) Increased power of distributors. The intermediaries
became dominant players by controlling the access to national and international markets. Today, they
act as buying agents for customers rather than selling agents for supplying companies (Rosenbloom,
2011). This implicated that suppliers have to adjust to the low-margin/low-price format of the
distributors. To deal with this, supplying companies are looking for new effective distribution strategies
(Coelho & Easingwood, 2008; Richard & Purnell, 2017; Rosenbloom, 2011). To conclude, in the current
business environment suppliers need to pay much more attention on distribution strategy and to the
different individual distribution channels they adopt in this strategy.
Historically, suppliers have had their own shop(s) (‘bricks and mortar stores’) or made use of
intermediaries like distributors and wholesalers (Sharma & Mehrotra, 2007) to sell products or
services. However, in the ongoing evolution of the business environment new distribution strategies
developed. Due to the internet, the channels which supplier can use to reach their customers have
grown more numerous (Rosenbloom, 2007). These new distributional opportunities and novel
business models threatened the traditional distribution structures (Walters, 2008). Suppliers had to
deal with extensive and more complicated channel conflicts and experienced decreasing returns as
more channels were utilized (Sharma & Mehrotra, 2007). This ambivalence made it a difficult task for
the supplier to determine the optimal distribution channel strategy.
The last decade, the literature on distribution channels is augmented. However, most of the focus was
on the business-to-consumer context (B2C). In B2C the suppliers’ products or services are purchased
by the end-consumers of those products (Richard & Purnell, 2017). Hardly any empirical research is
known about the distribution possibilities in business-to-business markets (B2B) (Merrilees & Fenech,
2007).
1 E.J. McCarthy developed the concept of the 4 P’s marketing mix: Product, Price, Place and Promotion, to market a good or service.
6
In B2B market suppliers offer their products or services to other companies (Richard & Purnell, 2017),
which are not by definition also the end-consumer of the product. The main objective of B2B customers
is to buy the right product in the correct quantity and quality at the right time and price to support
their business and satisfy the end-consumers. It seems logical that the purchasing decision processes
and criteria (e.g. product quality, delivery, price and service) in the B2C are similar for the B2B, but the
personal and organization motivations, drivers and impact of buying decisions are substantially
different (Richard & Purnell, 2017). As a consequence the findings in the B2C literature are likely not
applicable on the B2B market. In the B2B market long-term and strategic relationship are still highly
valued (Richard & Purnell, 2017) and trust, safety and security are fundamental requirements for
channel selection (Merrilees & Fenech, 2007; Richard & Purnell, 2017), which are mainly delivered by
offline channels (e.g. retail store). While, in the B2C the use of internet as a distribution channel is
rapidly growing. The advantages for internet-based channels could also apply to B2B suppliers by
providing and finding information worldwide on a continuous basis, access new customer segments
and reduce costs (Lu & Lui, 2015; Webb, 2002). Current researches point out that multi-channel
distribution strategies with a combination of offline distribution channels and new online channels are
preferred (Sharma & Mehrotra, 2007). Sharma & Mehrotra (2007) argued that a mix of the different
distribution channels results in the largest customer reach for the supplier (Sharma & Mehrotra, 2007).
But with this new strategy the danger of conflicts also grows (Webb, 2002).
This research expands the existing distribution literature by acquiring empirical data on different
distribution channel strategies. Because in the B2B literature limited research exist on this topic this
research focusses on the distribution channels used in the B2B market. Moreover the current
distribution literature is focused on the position of the customer (Dholakia, Zhao & Dholakia, 2005;
Gehrt & Yan, 2004; Otto & Chung, 2000; Schoenbachler & Gordon, 2002; Richard & Purnell, 2017). To
gain insight information on the decisions of a supplier in selecting their distribution channel strategy
in the B2B market, this research focusses on the advantages and disadvantages of using the different
distribution channels by this actor. The aim of this research is to identify the optimal distribution
strategy for B2B suppliers. To address this issue, the main research question for this research is stated
as follows:
What is the optimal distribution channel strategy within B2B markets?
Three additional sub-questions are elaborated upon. First, in order to draw conclusions on the optimal
distribution channel strategy the different options a B2B supplier has to distribute its products must
be identified. This leads to the first sub-question:
Which distribution channels are used in the B2B market?
When the different distribution channels are identified it is then important to determine an optimal
distribution channel strategy. To be able to make a decision the advantages and disadvantage of each
distribution channel needs to be analyzed. Resulting in the following two sub-questions:
What are the advantages of the different distribution channels used in the B2B market?
What are the disadvantages of the different distribution channels used in the B2B market?
7
The research question is addressed in a single case study, where the distribution strategy of one
relevant and interesting B2B organization is studied. A case study was preferred because the current
distribution channel literature on B2B lacks empirical data. A case study enables the exploration of
phenomena in a new light, to gain in-depth knowledge by asking questions and to search for new
insights on which conclusions can be drawn. The choice for a case study is therefore methodologically
legitimate. The organization selected for this research is HAVEP: a Dutch retail organization, that
supplies work clothing for other (international) companies.
The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. In the next chapter, an overview of the theoretical
background is provided to gain insights in to the various distribution strategies and channels used in
the B2B market, their advantages and disadvantages. In chapter 3, the utilized research methodology
is described. Chapter 4 presents the results of the empirical data gathered during the research.
Subsequently, the findings are discussed and practical implications provided. This paper ends with the
limitations, future research suggestions and a final conclusion.
8
2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
In order to get an understanding the underlying theories of this research are discussed in this chapter.
First, relevant definitions are given. Second, the B2B market is presented and the differences compared
to the B2C market are identified. Third, different distribution channel strategies are examined. Three
strategies are identified: a direct, an indirect and multiple channel distribution strategy. Each strategy
can include one or multiple individual distribution channels, for instance sales representatives, a retail
store, or a web shop. In the last section the distribution channels found in the literature are analyzed
and the advantages and disadvantages are summarized.
2.1 Definitions This research examines distribution strategies used in B2B markets. Before starting some concepts are
defined. B2B distribution can be defined as the distribution of products and services to companies,
organizations and governments, which use it for their own products and services or resell it to other
business customers (Biemans, 2004). In the following paragraph the B2B market is discussed in more
detail.
Several participants in the B2B market are identified: suppliers, intermediaries, customers and end-
users. For this research the following definitions apply. The supplier is defined as the company which
produces the products or services. The customer is a company, and not an individual, that purchases
the products or services. This can be done directly from the supplier or via an intermediary.
Intermediaries interact between the supplier and customer, and maintain separate relationships with
both parties (Chopra, 2003). It would in such a situation be possible that the supplier does not have
any contact with the customers (Corey, Cespedes & Rangan 1989). All information is communicated
by the intermediaries. An intermediary could for example be a distributor (reseller); which purchases
products from the supplier and sell them to customers (Corey et al., 1989; Fill & Fill, 2005). In the B2B
context, the customer will by definition usually not be the end-user (consumer) (Richard & Purnell,
2017). Products are purchased on behalf of a company (Hague , Hague, & Harrison, 2017) and used by
the employees of that company.
2.2 B2B Market The B2B market differs in several ways from the B2C market (see table 1). As stated in the definition
the B2B supplier delivers to companies, whereas B2C to end-users. B2C customers act more
emotionally and focus on the benefits of the products, a B2B purchase on the other hand is based on
logic and return-on-investment is an important factor. B2B purchases are only done when it is
profitable for the whole company (Richard & Purnell, 2017). Consequently more employees tend to be
involved in the decision process (Lake, 2017). These groups consist of individuals with different interest
and motivation (Biemans, 2004). Resulting in a highly complex decision making unit (Hague et al., 2017)
and lower impulse purchases (Schuurmans, 1991; Biemans, 2004). However the purchase of office
supplies will be different and less complex compared to factory machines (Schuurmans, 1991). So the
above mentioned process does not count for all company purchases.
9
Table 1: The main differences between B2B and B2C market
Source: Fill & Fill, 2005
B2B customers are interested in the technical details of the products and require more specific
information (Hague et al., 2017). For example, when purchasing a new car B2B customers focus on
technical details. While on the other hand, individual car buyers are far more interested in the color
and additional equipment (Biemans, 2004; Richard & Purnell, 2017). Subsequently B2B industry has in
general fewer needs-based segments than is the case in B2C context. The B2C market has a larger
group of customers to serve, as a consequence it is practical and economical smart to divide the market
in smaller segments. For the B2B market this is not profitable (Biemans, 2004; Hague et al., 2017). And
within this market the needs vary less (Hague et al., 2017). Table 2 illustrates the most important needs
identified in B2B markets.
Table 2: Most important needs-based segments of B2B market
Needs-based segment Company criteria
Price focused Has a transactional outlook in doing business and does not seek any ‘extras’. Often a small company, working to low margins.
Quality and brand-focused Wants to have the best product possible and is prepared to pay for it. Companies often work to high margins and are medium-sized or large.
Service-focused Has high requirements in terms of product quality, range and in terms of aftersales, delivery etc. Company works in time-critical industries and can be small, medium or large.
Partnership-focused Consist of key accounts, which seek trust and reliability. Often a large company, operating on high margins.
Source: Hague et al., 2017
Generally, long-term and strategic relationship are more important in B2B compared to the B2C market
(Biemans, 2004; Richard & Purnell, 2017). It is not unusual that B2B customers are loyal and committed
for years (Hague et al., 2017) The relationships are maintained by visits from the representatives of
the supplier, which carefully listen to the customers’ requirements (Richard & Purnell, 2017). The long-
term customers are very valuable in B2B, because compared to B2C the customer group, the potential
customer market is much smaller (Biemans, 2004). The benefits of retaining B2B customers are
therefore enormous, and the consequences of losing them of serious concern (Hague et al., 2017).
Characteristics B2C market B2B market
Purchase orientation to satisfy nature of markets
Individual or family needs Organizational needs
Number of decision makers Small Large
Length of decision time Short and simple Long and complex
Size of purchase Small quantities Large in value and volume
Consequence of poor purchase Limited Potentially critical
Nature of product/service Standard range of products Customized packages
Channel configuration Complex and long Simple and short
Promotion focus Psychological benefits Economic/ Utilitarian benefits
Primary promotional tool Advertising Personal selling
Supplier switching costs Limited Large
10
Furthermore, B2B actors (both the supplier and customer) are reluctant to chances and conservative
to innovations (Hague et al., 2017). Convenience is highly valued by the B2B customers (Rosenbloom,
2011) because a reduction in convenience may have a serious impact on the company’s performance
through effort, time, and related business costs. This also counts for the B2B supplier. With introducing
new distribution channels, the risk of errors like delivery failures increases. When such incidents occur
it does not only harm individuals but may also have dramatic consequences for the company as a whole
(Richard & Purnell, 2017).
2.3 Distribution Channel Strategy In the previous paragraph the B2B market is described. This paragraph elaborates on the distribution
channel strategy, which can be distinguished in a direct, indirect or multi-channel distribution strategy.
Before selecting the distribution channel strategy each company has to ask the question: What
business are we in? The next step is to answer three central questions which identify the strategic
position of the company (Biemans, 2004):
1. Which customers do we want to serve?
2. Which values do we provide these customers?
3. How will we realize these values?
After the company has determined its strategic position, it should focus on the distribution channel
strategy. Rosenbloom (2011; p.152) defined distribution channel strategy as: the “broader principles
by which the firm expects to achieve its distribution objectives for its target market(s)”. The company
has to decide about the kind of relationship with its customers. And it has to determine who will take
care of the distribution of their products. Will it execute all the distribution tasks itself or cooperate
with intermediaries (Biemans, 2004).
The interaction between the B2B supplier and the B2B customer, in order to sell products, can be
established along different ways. Important for the B2B supplier is to decide if it wants to have direct
contact with its customer, by establishing its own distribution channel(s), or an indirect relationship
via intermediaries (Biemans, 2004). The question the B2B suppliers ask themselves is: “Should we sell
direct to customers or should we sell to another organization that will in turn market the product to
buyers?” (Fill & Fill, 2005; p.190). This decision depends on two variables; the degree of controllability
and the characteristics of the target group (Biemans, 2004).
Figure 1 illustrates various distribution channels strategies, often defined as channel structures: ‘The
group of channel members to which a set of distribution tasks has been allocated’ (Rosenbloom, 2011;
p.21). The structure ranges from business channel type 1 (BC1) where products move directly from
supplier to customer (direct distribution channel) to, all other business channel types (BC2, BC3 and
BC4), a varying number of channel members (indirect distribution channel) (Fill & Fill, 2005).
11
Figure 1: Levels of distribution channels for B2B markets.
Source: Fill & Fill, 2005
2.3.1 Direct Distribution
As described above a supplier can choose between direct, indirect or multi-channel distribution. Each
has its own characteristics. First the direct distribution is discussed. Second the indirect distribution
and finally the multi-channel distribution strategy is analyzed.
Rosenbloom (2011; p.464) defined direct selling as: ‘Direct selling is the sale of a product or service
person-to-person’. The traditional ways to have direct contact with the B2B customer are via sales
representatives, with retail stores or by distributing catalogues (Biemans, 2004; Friedman & Furey,
1999). These are defined as ‘offline’ distribution channels.
A new development in which there is direct contact between the supplier and the customer is the so
called ‘e-commerce’. Known as ‘online’ distribution channel. Nowadays, various suppliers only
distribute their products through their own internet channel. Those companies are defined as ‘pure e-
tailing’ (Min & Wolfinbarger, 2005; Rosenbloom, 2011). Dell, a multinational computer technology
company, is an example of a company that successfully executed this strategy. In the paragraphs 2.4.1
until 2.4.4 all these individual distribution channels are elaborated by discussing their advantages and
disadvantages.
2.3.2 Indirect Distribution
Most B2B suppliers however are not in a favorable position to distribute their products directly to their
B2B customers. Quite often they lack the requisite expertise and the economies of scale (and/or scope)
to perform all of the distribution tasks necessary to distribute their products effectively and efficiently
(Rosenbloom, 2011). When a direct distribution strategy is too time and cost expensive for the B2B
supplier, the supplier will work together with intermediaries. Those intermediaries take responsibilities
for the sales- and marketing activities. The most important intermediaries in the B2B market are
distributors (dealers), wholesalers, agents and value added resellers (VAR’s) (Biemans, 2004; Fill & Fill,
B2B Supplier
BC1 BC2 BC3 BC4
Wholesaler
B2B Customer
Agent
Value added reseller
Distributor
Distributor
12
2005; Friedman & Furey, 1999). In paragraph 2.4.5 the advantages and disadvantages of working with
intermediaries are further elaborated.
2.3.3 Multi-channel Distribution Strategy
The last decade, multi-channel distribution strategy has become more common in the B2B industry. In
fact, multi-channel has rapidly become the rule rather than the exception (Lu & Lui, 2015; Moriarty &
Moran, 1990; Rosenbloom, 2007). Multi-channel distribution strategy simply means that the supplier
has chosen to contact its customers by more than one channel (Lewis et al., 2014). Stone et al. (2002;
p.40) defined the multi-channel distribution strategy as “one that provides numerous customer touch-
points – the points at which products and services are purchased or service – across several distribution
channels”. With the emergence of e-commerce, many suppliers developed multi-channel structures
that include online and offline channels (Rosenbloom, 2011). The goal for all suppliers is equal: to make
it more convenient for customers to do business in whatever way they choose, and thus to increase
growth in market share and revenue (Friedman & Furey, 1999; Vinhas & Anderson, 2005).
Distribution literature examines that suppliers can benefit from multi-channel distribution strategies
in a variety of ways. Increased customer coverage (Coelho & Easingwood, 2008; Sharma & Mehrotra,
2007) and enhanced market share (Webb, 2002) are frequently indicated as the primary motivation
for adopting this rather complex strategy of multiple distribution channels (Webb, 2002). Moreover,
the suppliers can better adapt to changing customer needs and shopping patterns (Stone et al., 2002).
This adaptive capability has proven useful (Webb, 2002). Additional channels enable the supplier to
focus on more precise target markets(Lu & Lui, 2015) and thereby improving overall competitiveness
(Webb, 2002). Finally, suppliers with broad product ranges can benefit because it is unlikely that a
single distribution channel will be optimal for all products (Rosenbloom, 2011; Webb 2002).
Literature on multi-channel strategy suggests that having more channels automatically means that the
company will gain access to more customers. Rosenbloom (2007) argues that by definition this is not
always the case. He indicated that additional channels may not reach the intended customers because
they are hard to find. Or the customers that use the new channels may have simply switched from the
company’s prior older channels to the new channel. Moreover, Rosenbloom (2007) stated that poorly
integrated multiple channels can result in customer dissatisfaction with the supplier and lose their
customers to competitors. Thus, it might be that it is not the number of channels but the coordination
and integration of the channels that determines the benefits of a multi-channel distribution strategy
(Rosenbloom, 2007). Furthermore, by adding more channels the current decision-making process that
is used, may no longer be appropriate. New guidelines are required, which will costs time and money
(Valos, 2008). Finally, with the multi-channel strategy developments a new phenomenon “ the channel
conflict” was created. Channel conflict is defined as a situation in which one channel perceives another
channel to be engaged in behavior that prevents or impedes it from achieving its goals (Webb, 2002).
In B2B context this means that upstream and downstream members attempt to block, or are perceived
to be blocking or impeding another member from achieving their goals (Fill & Fill, 2005; Yoo & Lee,
2010). Suppliers are able to reduce the chance on conflict by being customer centric; establishing
support programs and motivating intermediaries on constant base (Biemans, 2004). Major conflicts
could disrupt and destroy internal relationships, creating inefficiently utility and suboptimalisation of
the distribution channel strategy.
13
This may result in decreased channel system performance and lower value for the B2B customer
(Biemans, 2004; Vinhas & Anderson, 2005; Yan, Guo, Wang & Amrouch, 2011).
2.4 Distribution Channels Direct, indirect and multi-channel distribution strategies are discussed in the previous section. These
strategies can include one or more distribution channels. The paragraphs 2.4.1 to 2.4.5 elaborate on
each distribution channel individually and discuss the advantages and disadvantages for the different
channels found in the literature. A distribution channel concerns the interorganizational management
of the processes and activities involved in moving products from manufacturer to end-user (Fill & Fill,
2005).
The success of the distribution channel strategy is often the result of a tight linkage between channel
selection and the underlying reasons why customers buy (Friedman & Furey, 1999). According to
Friedman & Furey (1999) the key is not ‘which channels should be used?’ but rather ‘which channels
can respond to the customer’s top priorities?’. Friedman and Furey (1999) defined four distribution
channels: sales representative, retail store, web shop and intermediary. They mapped them against 10
common buying criteria of B2B customers. By developing a table (see table 3) they illustrated the ability
of each distribution channel in satisfying these customer buying criteria.
First the distribution channels which have direct contact with the customer are discussed; sales
representative, retail store and web shop. In addition, although not mentioned by Friedman and Furey
(1999) but found in other researches (Biemans, 2004; Richard & Purnell) the catalogues is added as
distribution channel. In the final part, the intermediary is analyzed, a distribution channel that results
in an indirect relationship between the supplier and customer. For these five distribution channels the
advantages and disadvantages found in the literature are discussed. An overview of the different
advantages and disadvantages per distribution channel mentioned in this research can be found in
Appendix A. No other advantages and disadvantages were found in the literature.
Table 3: Alignment of channels with customers’ buying criteria
Channel Buying Criteria
Sales Repre-sentative
Retail Store Web shop Intermediary
Expert Advice Training
√√√ √√√
√√ √√
√ √
√√ √√√
Customization to Specs Delivery Flexibility
√√√ √√
√ √√
√ √√√
√√√ √√√
On-site Installation Fast/Local Support
√√ √√
√√ √√√
√ √
√√√ √√√
Ordering Speed/Ease Self-service
√ √
√√ √√
√√√ √√√
√√ √
Lowest Price 24x7 Support
√ √
√√ √
√√√ √√
Note: ‘√’ meaning: degree of satisfaction *Intermediary includes distributors, wholesalers, agents and valued-add resellers. Source: Friedman & Furey, 1999
14
2.4.1 Sales Representatives
When the B2B supplier wants to maintain a direct and long-lasting relationship with its B2B customers
sales representatives are most common (Biemans, 2004). Therefore this distribution channel is
discussed first. A sales representative is an employee with particularly strong interpersonal and
relationship skills (Friedman & Furey, 1999; Fill & Fill, 2005). For B2B suppliers that sell only to small
customers and individual B2B customers it is not opportune to have their own sales force (Biemans,
2004; Friedman & Furey, 1999). Smaller and geographically widespread customers are usually hard to
reach with a direct sales force and can be served much more profitably with other channels (Friedman,
& Furey, 1999). Where sales representatives are needed – and where they make sense economically –
is in the sale of complex, customized solutions to key accounts2 (Figure 2) (Biemans, 2004). As risk is
perceived high for complex solutions large B2B customers prefer a real, live representative of the B2B
supplier with technical expertise, professional account management and a high degree of selling skills
(Friedman & Furey, 1999; Fill & Fill, 2005). Even with new distribution options, sales representatives
are still the only channel that is able to sell complex products and solutions to key accounts with a high
degree of control over the sales process (Biemans, 2004; Friedman & Furey, 1999).
Figure 2: Sales force coverage in a multiple channel system
Source: Friedman & Furey, 1999
In the past, the sales representatives were seen as a communication instrument, which explained the
offered value to the B2B customer (Biemans, 2004). However the position of the sales representatives
is changing because of the increasing use of multiple channels. Today, sales forces are generally a
smaller, more focused and more specialized group. (Fill & Fill, 2005; Friedman & Furey, 1999). In
practice, sales representatives spend too much time on the existing customers and small transactions.
This leads to a major waste of time for highly-skilled sales representatives (Fill & Fill, 2005; Friedman
& Furey, 1999). As a consequence, many suppliers have developed new procedures that restrict the
activities of their sales representatives (Friedman & Furey, 1999) to complex transactions.
2 Key accounts are customers who, in B2B market, are willing to enter into relational exchanges and who are of
strategic importance to the B2B supplier (Fill & Fill, 2005).
15
These transactions require the high-end capabilities of sales representatives. Less complex
transactions can be dealt with via other channels. This shift created the sales force leverage: it frees
up the time and energy of sales representative to focus on the largest and most important market
opportunities (Friedman & Furey, 1999). Figure 3, illustrates this change in focus.
Figure 3: Traditional versus leveraged sales force model
a. Traditional model b. Leveraged model
Source: Friedman & Furey, 1999
Compared to other distribution channels in B2B mraket, sales representatives are most expensive
(Biemans, 2004; Friedman & Furey, 1999). Shown in figure 4, developed by Friedman & Furey (1999),
although sales representatives (stated as field sales) are the highest value-add per sale the costs per
transaction are also the highest. In addition, nowadays B2B customers are because of the internet
better informed, hence a sales representative is only meaningful when he creates additional value for
the customer. To have added value in the selling process a representative must be more service
oriented (Biemans, 2004). Though, in some cases, intermediaries can perform this role as well.
Especially in local markets, where they might be more trusted and accepted than a supplier’s own sales
representatives (Friedman & Furey, 1999; Shipley, Egan & Edgett, 1991).
For the B2B supplier on the other hand, sales representatives and their direct contact with both
existing and potential B2B customers are an important and highly valuable source of information.
Suppliers used the information to develop new products. For example, through the sales force the B2B
supplier can receive information about the customers’ desired product specifications, expected
lifespan, price range, the competition and market potential. Or they could get firsthand customer
complaints about the current products (Biemans, 2004). Moreover, because of this direct relationships
the B2B suppliers have in-side information about their B2B customers. They know the number of
employees, the products they prefer and the strategic plan and developments the customer is
expecting. All those information strengthens the B2B supplier in determining their product strategy,
expected demand and the most efficient position regarding their competitors (Biemans, 2004).
Key Accounts
General Business
Small B2B Customer
Key Accounts
General Business
Small B2B Customer
Sales force: 30%
of selling time
50%
20%
Sales force: 100%
focussed
Other
channels
16
Figure 4: Transaction costs by channel – industrial products: $2000-$5000 sale (aggregated from
industry data – manufacturing, chemicals, paper, 1996)
Source: Friedman & Furey, 1999
2.4.2 Retail Store
Another distribution channel through which a direct relationship with the customer can be maintained
is via the traditional retail store. A few years ago there was the dramatic expectation about online
shopping changing the entire retail landscape by gaining a massive share of the total retail sales at the
expense of conventional “bricks and mortar” stores. But seen the recent numbers this is not likely to
be realized (yet) (Rosenbloom, 2011).
Bricks and mortar stores, or ‘retail stores’ provide the B2B supplier similar opportunities as a sales
force. In B2B context those stores are defined as showrooms, “a place used to demonstrate their
extensive products, to support their brand and to stimulate sales” (Biemans, 2004; p. 270). With
personnel working in the store the B2B supplier establishes the highly valued direct contact with the
B2B customers. This way the supplier gets information about the B2B customers’ requirements and
complains (Biemans, 2004). On the other hand, personnel is able to provide the customer with the
best advice and offerings resulting in a high service level (Maruca, 1999).
The possibility to ‘touch and try’ is often the main motivation why customers visit the retail store
(Adler, 2014). A feature what other distribution channel are missing. Especially for buying major
purchases retail stores are visited because the customer would like to physically inspect the product
(Dholakia et al., 2005). Consequently, the supplier will have substantially lower returns (Dholakia et al.,
2005). Furthermore, in most retail stores the customer will have the product immediately available
(Gehrt & Yan, 2004). This limits the administrative and transportation costs of the supplier (Otto &
Chung, 2000).
A store has some disadvantages. Compared to a sales representative who visits the B2B customers,
retail stores are at a fixed location with restricted opening hours (Gehrt & Yan, 2004). This requires an
Cost of Sale
Value-
Add of
Sale
Low Low
High
High Cost Per
Transaction
$ 500.-
$ 200.-
$ 300.-
$ 30.-
$ 50.-
$10.- Internet
Telesales
Distributors
Field Sales
17
effort from the customer since they need to drive to the specific location at a limited time, find the
product/ or sales help and have to wait in the checkout line in order to complete the transaction
(Dholakia et al., 2015; Rosenbloom, 2011). This is not only the case for the B2B market but also counts
in the B2C context. In reality it is not always possible to make a clear separation between the two types
of markets. For example, the purchase of office equipment by a one-man business is in definition a
business purchase. However, in reality this purchase will not differ from the situation in which the
business owner buys the equipment for private use (Biemans, 2004). Furthermore, the supplier must
rent or buy and maintain buildings. The more and the larger the buildings, the higher the costs (Otto
& Chung, 2000). Depending on the actually capacity of those buildings, the supplier is limited in the
products he shows and stocks. With a retail store it is necessary for the supplier to have products in
stock (Otto & Chung, 2000). In those situations, the supplier is not always able to meet the needs of
the customers visiting the retail store.
With the developments of new distribution channels, retail stores were forced to reinvest their
shopping experience and now aim to offer customers a whole new lifestyle instead of only providing
customers with products (Maruca, 1999).
2.4.3 Web Shop3
Contrary to sales representatives and retail stores, by using a web shop there is in general no physical
contact between the supplier and the customer. Nevertheless by using this distribution channel direct
relationships with customers can be established. The internet-based developments and the growing
costs of sales representatives stimulated B2B suppliers to search for cheaper distribution channels. E-
commerce was often found (Biemans, 2004). E-commerce is defined as ‘the use of the Internet to make
products and services available so that the target market with access to computers or other enabling
technologies can shop and complete the transaction for purchase via interactive electronic means’
(Rosenbloom, 2011; p.436). For years, the B2B e-commerce market experienced a considerable growth
and it still develops. Among e-commerce channels, web shops are commonly used in B2B markets. The
best known and most copied success story is Dell, already mentioned above. Dell established a website
with a web shop (www.Dell.com) on which B2B customers could ensemble and order computers to
their own wishes (Biemans, 2004). While most other PCs are sold preconfigured and pre-assembled
computers to retailers (Chopra, 2003). Dell developed an online sales platform and thereby established
a direct channel with its customers. Dell was able to offer superior “customer choice in system
configuration” at a deeply discounted price, as a result from the cost-savings of using the online
platform (MaRS, 2011). This way Dell was able to create a sustainable competitive advantage
(Rosenbloom, 2011).
The use of the internet is profitable for suppliers who would like to contact, in a relatively simple way,
a large group of customers (Biemans, 2004). For B2B customers the internet has the advantages of
faster, cheaper and more easily product ordering, knowledge about (new) suppliers and the ability to
compare suppliers based on substantial amount of information (Biemans, 2004; Rosenbloom, 2011).
This increases the shopping efficiency of the customer (Kollmann, Kuchertz & Kayser, 2012). Evans and
King (1999) listed several strengths and weaknesses associated with the web shop in B2B context
3 A web shop cannot exist without developing a website.
18
(Appendix B). It should be noted that some of the negative elements have already been overcome as
technology has progressed since their paper was written.
The web shop has some important effects on the distribution of products for B2B suppliers (Pitt, 1999).
Firstly, the supplier can reach a much broader group of customers (Otto & Chung, 2000). Secondly, the
location of the B2B supplier becomes irrelevant. The supplier now has access to the worldwide B2B
market. Orders will come from locations and countries where the supplier never sold before (Biemans,
2004). A limitation however is that the potential B2B customers must have access to the World Wide
Web (Rosenbloom, 2011). Thirdly, when using web shops suppliers are able to offer a broader scope
of products (Goldsmith & Flynn, 2005). For example, internet suppliers usually have a range of more
than 3 million products. Whereas, a retail store only stocks about 10,000 products (Wang, Song & Yang,
2013). Fourthly, time plays no role any more, a web shop is always open. With a web shop the B2B
supplier can serve its B2B customers without physical presence (Biemans, 2004). The products can be
ordered and sold 24/7 (Lu, Cao, Wang & Yang, 2011). Fifthly, costs can be reduced. B2B suppliers of
for example software and financial services are able to offer their product globally in a very efficient
way without any distribution costs. IBM expects to safe more than €120 million per year because they
will distribute 30% of their teaching materials for internal trainings via internet (Biemans, 2004).
Furthermore, supplier’s costs reduce because of lower labor costs (Otto & Chung, 2000) due to more
efficient use of personnel (Biemans, 2004). The lower costs are a significant argument for B2B suppliers
to establish a web shop. Cost reductions can vary between 2% to nearly 40% (e.g. electronic
components) depending on the industry sector (Biemans, 2004). Sixth, via their websites B2B suppliers
aggregate information about their customers by analyzing the visiting frequency per item, search
patterns, and the time a customer spends on a specific page. By this, the supplier will have in-depth
knowledge about the customers’ behavior, their preferences and buying habits (Biemans, 2004; Otto
& Chung, 2000; Rosenbloom, 2011). With this information the supplier is able to present more
personalized advertisements and products (Walters, 2008).
In order to gain the valuable information suppliers need a workforce that is able to analyze and convert
the collected data into useful information about the customer. This can be a costly task. Moreover,
running a web shop needs both hardware (server and telecommunication) and software (Otto &
Chung, 2000). It is of significant importance that the web shop stays updated and has a professional
design. This will positively influence the supplier’s presence in the B2B market. However, it also raises
costs substantially (Biemans, 2004). No specific information was found on creating a web shop for B2B,
but to get an indication Schoenbachler & Gordon (2002) stated that the costs of creating a web
presence ranges from $1.5 million to $3million. Furthermore, the physical product flow cannot be
conveyed over the internet. Still one of the major limitations of online selling (Rosenbloom, 2011).
Therefore, when operating through web shops B2B suppliers have to pay attention to the tasks of
transportation, storage, order processes and the related costs (Rosenbloom, 2011). Moreover, when
inventory is stocked on a single location (Rosenbloom, 2011) the delivery of products becomes more
complicated (Biemans, 2004). Lastly, similar to the B2C market, it is likely to assume that B2B suppliers
experience higher levels of competition when selling via internet. Not restricted by constrains such as
time and place B2B customers can navigate across multiple web shops with only a few clicks (Dholakia
et al., 2005; Walters, 2008). Schoenbachler & Gordon (2002) argued that because customers now have
access to large databases with detailed information about products, profit margin and competitive
19
offerings low prices rather than loyalty governs the supplier –customer relationships in the B2C
market. If this is also the case for B2B relationships is not yet proven.
2.4.4 (Online) Catalogues
Although the catalogues is not stated by Friedman and Furey (1999) as an independent distribution
channel other researches did (Biemans, 2004; Richard & Purnell, 2017). Therefore, in this research the
catalogues is seen as the fourth and last distribution channel which establishes direct contact with B2B
customers.
Suppliers use different resources in order to communicate with their potential customers and to
enhance the effectiveness of personal selling. It has extensive information about the offered products.
Some companies even use the catalogue as a substitute for the sales representative. Therefore it is
also known as “silent salesperson”. Suppliers with a broad assortment of relatively low-valued
products, like office supplies, often provide a catalogue (Biemans, 2004).
However, the use of catalogues has two major limitations for the B2B supplier. Especially suppliers
with a large assortment have difficulty in keeping their product information up-to-date and when their
B2B customer are geographically spread, it can be very expensive to provide them with new catalogues
on a regular basis (Pitt, 1999). Catalogues sales confirm the reduced use of this distribution channel.
Although it must be noticed that this is only indicated by one research. They found that from 2011 to
2012 the number of print catalogues declined by 56.2% (Richard & Purnell, 2017).
With the emerging of interactive technologies such as the CD-ROM and internet, the value of the digital
catalogue has increased remarkably. Richard & Purnell (2017) found that in 2013 the number of mailed
CD-ROMs with a catalogue increased. Compared to other distribution channels the online catalogues
has some important advantages: the production and distribution costs are lower, it is able to present
the whole product assortment, it contains the most accurate information about the product with all
the adjustments during the year and it also simplified the ordering process for the B2B customer
(Biemans, 2004; Pitt, 1999). Furthermore the digital catalogues provide the opportunity to show and
examine the products three-dimensional (Biemans, 2004). Hence limitations of the paper catalogue do
not count for the online version (Biemans, 2004).
2.4.5 Intermediary
The above mentioned distribution channels have in common that B2B suppliers have direct contact
with their B2B customers. In this paragraph the indirect relationship via intermediaries is examined
and the advantages and disadvantage of working with an intermediary are analyzed.
Most suppliers, either B2B or B2C, quite often lack the expertise and the economies of scale (and/or
scope) to perform all the distribution tasks necessary to sell their products effectively and efficiently
to their customers (Rosenbloom, 2011). An intermediary could reduce this gap. The term intermediary
refers to all those companies that link together suppliers and customers. Their overall role is acting as
a go-between (Fill & Fill, 2005). The most important intermediaries in the B2B market are distributors
(dealers), wholesalers, agents and value added resellers (VAR’s).
20
Distributors (dealers) buy directly from the B2B supplier and then sell the products to the B2B
customers (Biemans, 2004; Fill & Fill, 2005). Wholesalers are nearly the same as distributors. The only
difference is that wholesalers also distribute products to other intermediaries whereas distributors
only sell to B2B customers (Fill & Fill, 2005). Like the supplier’s own sales force, agents represent the
supplier at customers. However agents are independent and work with multiple suppliers through
contracts (Biemans, 2004; Rosenbloom, 2011). Value-added resellers (VARs) are relatively new and
mostly seen at high-tech products. VARs combine products of different suppliers and have the added
value of providing integrated systems (Biemans, 2004; Fill & Fill, 2005).
Even though internet connects hundreds of millions of people and companies it did not necessarily
obviate the need for intermediaries. Rosenbloom (2011) identified specialization/division of labor and
contactual efficiency as the two basic factors why intermediaries are still useful for B2B suppliers. By
breaking down a complex tasks into smaller, less complex ones and allocating them to parties who are
specialists at performing them, much greater efficiency results (Biemans, 2004; Rosenbloom, 2011).
Second, with contactual efficiency is meant the level of negotiation effort between the B2B supplier
and the B2B customers relative to achieving a distribution objective. As previously discussed and
illustrated in figure 5, intermediaries take care of the contact with customers and thereby greatly
reduce the number of direct relationships for the supplier (Fill & Fill, 2005; Rosenbloom, 2011). As a
result the supplier establish more easily a suitable and adequate market coverage (Fill & Fill, 2005).
Figure 5: The impact of intermediaries on channel exchanges.
Note: ‘S’ means supplier. ‘C’ stands for customer.
Source: Fill & Fill, 2005
The role of intermediaries is linked to the tasks they perform in order that the distribution channel
operates efficiently (Biemans, 2004; Fill & Fill, 2005). The intermediary remains in contact with the
customer as well as with the supplier (respectively known as downstream and upstream) (table 4).
Intermediaries enable the supplier to focus on their core activities, production or manufacturing.
While, on average, customers are better able to obtain improved individual support and service levels
from intermediaries (Fill & Fill, 2005). It is proven that it is more effective that expensive sales
operations are performed by intermediaries which have local knowledge and are better equipped to
develop and maintain relationships (Friedman & Furey, 1999). Through these intensive relationships
intermediaries are able to generate quality market information which can be fed back to the B2B
supplier and help them by product/service development or influence their marketing strategy (Fill &
Fill, 2005; Rosenbloom, 2011).
S
S
S
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
S
S
S
Intermediary
y
21
Moreover Friedman and Furey (1999) found that intermediaries costs usually somewhere between
fifteen and forty per cent less than maintaining an own sales force (Friedman and Furey, 1999;
Rosenbloom, 2011). Additionally, working via intermediaries could reduce overhead costs (buildings,
personnel, marketing, research costs, etc.) and can provide the supplier with information about local
circumstances (culture, politics, legislation, etc.) (Biemans, 2004). Another advantage is that
intermediaries can hold stock on behalf of B2B suppliers. For the supplier this means an extension of
their production capacity (Fill & Fill, 2005; Rosenbloom, 2011).
Table 4: Intermediary tasks – upstream and downstream
Source: Fill & Fill, 2005
Although working with intermediaries may be cheaper to maintain than a direct sales force, they are
also considerably more expensive than distributions channels such as (online) catalogue or the internet
(Friedman & Furey, 1999). The B2B supplier loses the margin that intermediaries earn for their part in
the value adding process. As more intermediaries enter, the distribution strategy costs will rise for the
supplier. On the other hand, more intermediaries enables suppliers, indirectly, to reach a wider array
of customers. Suppliers therefore face the trade-off between the number of intermediaries and the
breadth of the customer coverage that is reached (Fill & Fill, 2005). Furthermore, if the intermediary’s
added-value increases, the supplier becomes more dependent on the relationship and the
intermediary will enhance its bargaining power at the expense of the supplier (Trivadi, 1998; Yoo &
Lee, 2010). This is another trade-off B2B suppliers face; how much influence should intermediaries get.
Finally, working with intermediaries always involves some loss of selling control. Intermediaries are
rarely as loyal or committed to the product or the supplier as the supplier’s own sales force. As a result,
products can rather easily be replaced by competitors’ offerings (Friedman & Furey, 1999).
Upstream tasks Activities
Market uncertainty Market coverage Collecting and analyzing market information Making sales contacts Relationship maintenance Transaction uncertainty Holding stock Processing orders Providing customer support
Downstream tasks Activities
Product uncertainty Stock availability and delivery Breaking bulk Product quality and reliability Service and support uncertainty Extended credit Technical support and advice General service Customer relationship development
22
3. METHODOLOGY
In order to answer the research question, a single-case study is conducted. Yin (2003; p. 224) defined
a case study as “an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life
context”. This kind of research is suitable for a variety of reasons. Firstly, a case research is conducted
for exploratory and explanatory purposes. This research aimed to understand the reasoning of B2B
companies for using different distribution channels. Secondly, the limited existing literature
concerning the research objective makes a case study appropriate. The theory development
established by the case study provides new insights into the underlying dynamics (Yin, 2003). Thirdly,
a case study approach enables this research to examine the use of different distribution channels
within the natural B2B context (Maruster & Gijsenberg, 2013). Moreover, the exploratory approach of
a case study provides the opportunity to find other than in the literature stated factors influencing the
selection of distribution strategy in B2B markets. Finally, because multiple types of data is collected
this methodology has rich data. Resulting in minimized observer bias and the generalizability of the
conclusions is improved this way (Yin, 2009).
3.1 Case Selection After determining the research question and gaining an understanding of the different distribution
channels, the next step was to select the case (Eisenhardt, 1989). The focus of this research is on the
retail industry, where in the past decade the internet has been a large influencer on the distribution
strategy of suppliers. The retail industry is interesting since the B2B online retailing has been witnessing
strong growth. Frost & Sullivan (2015) found that the B2B online sales will account for almost 27% of
total manufacturing trade by 2020. Moreover in 2020, it is expected that the B2B online retail market
reaches double the size of the B2C online market, generating revenues of 6.7 trillion USD (Frost &
Sullivan, 2015). While in 2013 the B2B e-commerce sales reached only 5.3 trillion USD (Richard &
Purnell, 2017). However the retail industry is still rather broad. Without a more specific focus, it might
prove to be too difficult to find conclusive data. Therefore, the case selected for this research will be
from the garment industry. More specifically, this research examined the garment company HAVEP, a
producer of work clothing. A organization which is currently investigating strategies to enhance their
(online) market share.
The information about HAVEP in this paragraph is based on 3 main sources of information: personal
interviews with the commercial manager of HAVEP mr. Luttikholt; HAVEP’s catalogue (2017) and the
website www.HAVEP.com. HAVEP is part of the Dutch textile organization ‘Koninklijke Van Puijenbroek
Textiel’, and was founded more than 150 years ago. Its headquarter is based in Goirle (The
Netherlands) and is active on the Dutch, Belgium and German market. For the past years HAVEP
concentrated on the production of specials: “work clothing and safety clothing that is completely tuned
to the customer’s wishes”(Havep, 2017). It produces working clothes for 10 different sectors4, mainly
focusing on industry and construction. Selecting HAVEP for this research was appropriate due to the
following reasons. First of all, HAVEP could be defined as a typical B2B organization. It operates in the
garment industry where it produces work clothing for other companies. Secondly, the company has an
interesting market position.
4 (petro)chemistry, agri & horticulture, care, construction, environment & recycling, industry, hospitality &
catering, metal & machine industry, installation & maintenance, road & waterworks, transport & logistics.
23
It is the market leader in the work clothing industry in the Netherlands and it is aiming for large market
shares in Belgium and Germany. Identified by mr. Luttikholt HAVEP has 2 different production
strategies. On the one hand, they produce customized clothes (Appendix C). On the other hand HAVEP
produces clothes in advance (stock products) which belong to their “standard” collection. The
distribution of those customized and stock products differs. The customized products are generally
bought by larger B2B customers with more than 1000 employees. Whereas the stock products are
bought by smaller companies (Luttikholt, 2017). Due to time restrictions, only the smaller companies
were examined for this research and therefore this research only analyzed the distribution strategy
used for the standard collection. Finally, HAVEP is a particularly interesting case because of its
distribution strategy. HAVEP has the same distribution strategy since it started, which hardly changed
since then (Luttikholt, 2017). The new distribution possibilities that originate with the grow of internet
are not yet incorporated in the organization. Appendix D illustrates the distribution strategy of HAVEP
as it is today. In order to distribute the standard collection, HAVEP has 2 retail stores themselves5 and
for the remaining part of their distribution they depend on intermediaries, which they call “dealers”.
Those dealers maintain the relationships with the B2B customers. Except from the 2 stores, HAVEP
does not have a direct chain to the buyers of their products. In total HAVEP cooperates with more than
500 intermediaries (Luttikholt, 2017). Each intermediary has its own B2B distribution channel strategy.
While some choose to combine more distribution channels (e.g. sales representatives and a retail
store), others solely distribute through one channel (e.g. retail store or web shop). Within the work
clothing industry collaboration with intermediaries is the most common distribution strategy.
According to mr. Luttikholt, this strategy has 2 major disadvantages; because customers buy at the
intermediary, HAVEP does not know who their customers are or what they really want and working
with intermediaries results in a smaller profit for HAVEP. At this point, it is therefore significant to know
if HAVEP should continue with their distribution strategy as it is now or if they should innovate their
strategy along the new opportunities available?
3.2 Data Collection After selecting the case, data was collected. For this, instruments and protocols needed to be designed
to enter the field with (Eisenhardt, 1989). Both primary (interviews and questionnaires) and secondary
data (literature and websites) were used. Moreover, the primary data was collected in 2 steps. First,
data was generated from 12 in-depth, semi-structured interviews. Second, questionnaires developed
additional data to analyze.
3.2.1 Interviews
The semi-structured interviews were used in order to gain more understanding about the benefits and
disadvantages of the particular distribution channels and the reasoning behind combining various
channels. Firstly, 2 times an interview was held with mr. Luttikholt, the commercial manager of HAVEP.
Following, 11 intermediaries which sell work clothes were interviewed. Intermediaries were
interviewed for this research instead of producers because this last group almost exclusively distribute
their products via intermediaries. 10 interviews were used for this research. One interview was
eliminated because of audio recording problems. 7 out of the 10 intermediaries did sell the collection
items of HAVEP. The other 3 companies did sell standard work clothing, though not from HAVEP.
5 One in Goirle (The Netherlands) and one in Meerhout (Belgium).
24
The intermediaries interviewed used different distribution channels (e.g. sales representatives, retail
store, web shop) either exclusively or in combination. The participating companies are summarized in
table 5. The interviewees were representative for the company and were guaranteed that their
answers were used completely anonymous. Therefore fictional names are used [A, B, C, etc.].
The questions asked during the semi-structured interviews can be found in Appendix E. The majority
of the questions were open-ended questions. When necessary probing was applied to gain more in-
depth knowledge (Maruster & Gijsenberg, 2013). The questions result from the literature described in
the previous chapter and the interviews with mr. Luttikholt. The same interview guide was used for all
the interviews. For every interview, the main objective was to gain a comprehensive understanding of
the selected distribution channels and chosen distribution strategy by the interviewed company.
Within 48 hours after conducting the interview, the recorded interviews were transcribed and sent to
the interviewee for verification. By making the research more transparent this way, the reliability and
validity were enhanced (Yin, 2009). The interviews were held in November and December 2017 on
different locations in the northern and western parts of the Netherlands.
Table 5: List of participating companies
Company Type of Company Function Interviewee Number of employees Sells HAVEP
A Wholesaler Sales Manager 24 Yes
B Wholesaler Sales Manager ± 30 Yes C Specialist Director 4 Yes D Specialist Director 2 No
E Wholesaler Controller / Yes F Specialist Director 8 No G Specialist Director 1 Yes
H Specialist Director 1 Yes I Specialist Store Manager 4 Yes J Specialist Director 8 No
3.2.2 Questionnaires
The second step of data collection consisted of questionnaires. The questionnaires were developed in
order to gain more insight information about the B2B customers preferences regarding distribution
channels. By adding this data the validity of the research increased. Described by Yin (2003) validity
can be seen as an indicator of the quality of the research design.
The questionnaire consisted of 3 parts. The first questions dealt with personal details of the
respondent. The second part focused on the distribution channels used and the buying process of work
clothing in general. The questions were based on the information provided by the literature described
in the previous chapter and resulted in 5 point Likert-scale statements. The original questionnaire
contained 30 statements which the respondents had to answer for 2 distribution channels. However
after receiving no responses online and negative feedback from respondents to who the questionnaire
was personally handed over the number of statements were limited to 17. After this the third and final
part contained questions which referred to HAVEP and their work clothing.
Because this research solely examined the distribution of the standard collection work clothing, the
questionnaire was sent to companies which most likely wear this types of clothes;
25
companies active in the previously mentioned sectors. Mr. Luttikholt argued that smaller companies
would be the target here, since large companies with over 1000 employees generally choose for
customized clothing when purchasing new work clothing. For this research it was assumed that the
respondents also have the authority to select the distribution channel(s). The questionnaire (Appendix
F) was written in the Dutch language, because the research was conducted in the Netherlands. The
structured questionnaire was sent by e-mail to the companies, together with an introduction
explaining the purpose of the research and assuring anonymity. Email addresses were collected
through the customer database of HAVEP and companies’ websites.
The research complete dataset contained 182 out of the approximately 7456 companies to which the
questionnaire was sent. Representing an overall response of 24.5%. After the deletion of non-complete
questionnaires, 137 correct questionnaires remained. Following the outliers based on the number of
employees were examined. 10 outliers were found varying between the 2200 and 25 employees.
Extreme outliers (respectively 2200, 1000 and 390 (2x) employees) were eliminated from the sample
because they significantly increased the average number to 35. By maintaining the other 6 outliers the
average only increased from 4 to 6 employees and therefore it was decided to keep these responses.
An overview of the descriptive statistics can be found in table 6. Table 7 illustrates the descriptive
statistics of the sample group that currently wear HAVEP’s work clothing. Worth mentioning, it can be
assumed that this dataset has selection bias since most respondents’ contact details were deduced
from HAVEP’s customer database and hence previously bought work clothing from HAVEP. Therefore
they did not represent a random sample of the population (Zadrozny, 2004).
Table 6: Overview of descriptive statistics
Category Facts
Respondents 133 Percentage Men-Women 78.8% - 21.2% Age From: 24 – 66 Average: 47.5 Average number of employees 6 Median: 2.00 Range number of employees 1 – 106
Table 7: Overview of descriptive statistics work clothing HAVEP
Category Facts
Respondents wear HAVEP 103 Percentage of work clothing is from HAVEP From: 10% - 100% Average: 59.7% Respondents buy at HAVEP/ at intermediary 85 18*
Note: * : 6 respondents buy at wholesalers, 6 respondents by at specialists and 6 in retail stores.
3.3 Data Analysis The collected data were analyzed in 2 different ways. For the interviews the coding method was used.
Statistical tests were selected to examine the questionnaire findings.
3.3.1 Interviews
After each interview, transcripts were made of the recordings. Following, the data analyzing technique
“Pawing” was used to find links within the different transcripts. Subsequently, the “Compare and
Contrast” technique was applied. By this step every transcript was continuously taken into
consideration and analyzed if the transcripts were different or equal to each other (Glaser and Strauss,
6 Not all email addresses to which the email was send, were correct or did exist.
26
1967). Moreover, the transcripts were further analyzed with the help of ATLAS.ti. This is a qualitative
data analysis software package (Stanford University, 2011), which was used to find and combine codes.
For this part the 3 procedures developed by Strauss and Corbin (1998) were applied. Starting with
coding and developing categories of related codes. Subsequently, the various codes were related to
each other. With the use of quotations, the allegations resulting from the transcripts were
strengthened. Finally, a story line was build that connected the categories. In chapter 4 and chapter 5
those relationships are elaborated.
3.3.2 Questionnaires
The questionnaires were examined by using SPSS25, a statistical software application. First, descriptive
analyses were conducted regarding the number of employees and the sectors they are active in.
Second, with frequencies it was examined if work clothing was mostly bought at the producer or via
intermediaries. Furthermore, it determined which distribution channel was mostly selected by the
respondents and if combining different channels was a common fact. This was done for the complete
sample group and specifically for respondents who currently wear HAVEP. Third, based on the scores
of the Likert-scale statements, it was examined which items the respondents found important and
influenced their distribution channel choice and which items were valued less.
3.3.2.1 Validity and Reliability
The Likert-scale ranged from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). In this research the Likert
scale statements were defined as items and stated in the codebook (Appendix G). Respondents which
answered more than 10% of the items with not applicable (NA) were excluded because they
significantly influenced the results. The other selected NA’s were defined as missing values and
transformed in the average rate of the item. This way the reliability is ensured (SPSS Handboek, 2013).
Furthermore, factor analysis was conducted to control validity and Cronbach’s Alphas were computed
to measure internal consistency. Factor analysis is a method to reduce and summarize data from
questionnaires with a large set of variables. As a result it is easier to understand the structure of a set
of variables, measure underlying variables and reducing the data set to a more convenient size (Field,
2009). The analysis was suitable here since the aim was to find the relevant items for each specific
distribution channel. The Cronbach’s alpha measures the reliability by looking at the strengths of the
different items of each model and how closely related these items were as a group (SPSS Handboek,
2013).
3.3.2.2 Control Variables
In this research 2 control variables were taken into account that might have influenced the findings.
As age is a factor that influences the use of computers and internet, with youth use internet more
extensively than older people (Van Deursen, Van Dijk & ten Klooster, 2015; van Deursen & Helsper,
2015) , age was included as a control variable. Furthermore, gender was a factor influencing
distribution channel choice and therefore included as control variable. Woman use computers less
intensive compared to men (Van Deursen, Van Dijk & ten Klooster, 2015; van Deursen & Helsper,
2015).
27
4. FINDINGS
For this research 2 different research methods (respectively interviews and questionnaires) were
conducted. First the findings resulted from the interviews will be discussed. In the second section the
findings from the questionnaires are analyzed. Both research findings deal with the same topics:
descriptive statistics about the B2B customer, the distribution channels used and finally the advantages
and disadvantages of the individual distribution channels. The sequence used in the theoretical
background is also applied here.
4.1 Interview Findings Shown in table 5 ten interviews are examined for this research. The interviewed companies sell work
clothing either exclusively or in combination with other products, such as construction material and
electronics. The number of employees of the interviewed companies varied between the 2 and
appropriately 30 employees. Most companies sell their products locally. In the next paragraph the B2B
customers as defined by the interviewees are discussed in more detail.
4.1.1 B2B Customer
The interviewees identified their B2B customers as very loyal. When the B2B customer is satisfied, they
remain coming back (company I). According to companies A, B and I B2B customers are connected to
the same supplier for 10 to 20 years.
As illustrated in table 8 for 6 out of the 10 interviewed companies their B2B customers are located at
30 to 50 km around their own location. Company C and G also have B2B customers from Belgium,
Germany and France. The B2B customers who buy at the interviewed companies can mainly be
classified as “ZZP’er”7 and small “MKB’er”8. According to the interviewees there is a relationship
between the size of the B2B customer and the distribution channel they prefer. In general ZZP’ers buy
their work clothing in retail stores. Whereas the larger companies are visited by sales representatives
(company B). The interviewed companies sell their work clothing to a large variety of sectors, although,
6 interviewees have a specific focus on one or two sectors as shown in the table below.
7 “Zelfstandigen zonder personeel”. The dutch translation for one-man businesses. 8 “Middel en kleinbedrijf”. The dutch translation for small and medium-sized enterprise, with a workforce ranging from 5 to 50 employees.
28
Table 8: Descriptive statistics of B2B customer
Distribution area Seize B2B customer Sectors
Company A The Netherlands ZZP’ers & companies of 5/6 employees, with maximum of 50/60
Various sectors. Focus on construction and installation
Company B Region Core business is between 5 to 40/50 employees. But also companies of 1200 and ZPP’ers or small MKB’ers
Every sector. From care to construction and installation
Company C Europe ZZP’ers up to companies with 200 employees
Every sector. Only no offshore
Company D The Netherlands ZZP’ers and smaller companies of 10 employees
-
Company E Region ZZP’ers and smaller companies & and a few companies with 150 employees
Focus on agri & horticulture
Company F Region Target group is between 5 and 20/25 employees & many ZZP’ers and MKB’er
-
Company G Europe From small to large companies.
Various sectors. Focus on industry
Company H Region Companies with 25/50 employees and many ZZP’ers
employment agencies
Company I Region Mainly small companies and ZZP’ers
Various sectors
Company J Region Larger companies between 25 and 600 employees
24 sectors. Focus on construction and transport
4.1.2 Distribution Channels
This section analyzes the distribution channels used by the interviewed companies. First, it illustrates
which specific distribution channels are selected. Subsequently it is discussed why companies adopt
multiple channels.
Distribution channels adopted by the interviewed companies can be found in table 9. Not all channels
were equally important for the company’s profit. The results illustrate what percentage of the
company’s profit is generated by each distribution channel. Retail stores and web shops are used most
frequently, separately or in combination. In general the other companies have one store, except
company E, which has 3 retail stores. In addition, companies A, B and E have their own sales
representatives. Furthermore, as the table illustrates it is rather unstructured whether the retail store
or web shop is most valuable. In only one case, company B, the sales force is identified as most
important.
During the interviews the interviewees were asked to grade (on a scale of 1 to 10) the distribution
channels depending on their rate of satisfaction. The grades are stated in table 10.
29
Catalogues were in none of the interviews mentioned as distribution channel. Argued by company A
and H, the interviewed companies do use catalogues however they do not publish them themselves.
As mr. Luttikholt explained they, the producers of the products, put together a catalogue which sales
representatives show to their customers during company visits.
Furthermore, the companies which act between producers of work clothing and B2B customers were
interviewed. That is why intermediaries were not defined as a distribution channel during the
interviews, because the companies themselves are an intermediary.
Table 9: Distribution channels used by the interviewed company (in % of company’s profit).
Channel Company
Sales Represen-
tatives Retail Store Catalogues Web shop Intermediary Other
A 40 40 20
B 70 25 5
C 10 80 10
D 10 90
E 5 83 12
F 50 50
G 100
H 65 35
I 100
J 20 80
Total 115 403 437 10
Table 10: Grades of distribution channels
Channel Company
Sales Represen-
tatives Retail Store Catalogue
Web shop
Inter-mediary Other
A 8 8
B 8 8
C 7 10
D 6 10
E 7 6
F 9 9
G 8
H 8 8
I 8
J 2 8
Average 8 7 8.4
Shown in table 9 most interviewed companies (8 out of 10) use more than one distribution channel.
Although this was not for all companies a deliberate decision. Explained by company B:
Well to be honest it is not a thought-out decision. At first, customers came to the shop and the sales
representatives were added and it resulted in the largest growth we have seen last years as a
distribution channel. We noticed that customers were asking for a more personal approach and
30
expertise. So attention and knowledge plays an important role. A website was added recently because
of the development the last years. In 2017 the customers expected this of us.9
For other interviewed companies it was a well-considered strategy. Multiple channels are needed to
provide the customer a full package (company C). Moreover they believed that the different channels
go hand in hand and depend on each other. Company F clarified:
Our three pillars are in fact the retail store, this is the center and much depends on it. Our sales
representatives are in the field and try to find new customers, but also keep in contact with them. They
can be seen as the oil that keeps the motor running, if something is wrong, even a small thing, they visit
the client and see or they can be of any help. The last pillar is our web shop, which we have two of. One
is visible and on one is invisible, this one is only available for our big clients. These are the three pillars
we have of which the shop is the center.
During the interviews 3 distribution channels were mentioned as most important for the company’s
profit: sales representatives, retail store and web shop. In the following part some of the advantages
and disadvantages for each of the these distribution channels, as mentioned by the interviewees, are
summarized. An extensive overview can be found in Appendix H.
4.1.2.1 Sales Representatives
Personal contact with the customer is seen as a major advantage of working with sales representatives.
A visit of sales representatives results in loyal B2B customers. Companies B,E, H argued that they could
not exist without their sales representatives. They are essential as company B explained:
It is essential for us to acquire big projects. It is of most importance for what we do. It is like a carpenter
and his hammer. The sales representatives are essential for our company.
In general almost no disadvantages were mentioned for the sales representatives although, 3
interviewees (company A, B, D) mentioned the (high) costs as limitation of this distribution channel.
Companies A, B, H did not see any disadvantages for the B2B customer when buying via this
distribution channel. Company F, on the other hand, did not belief that the B2B customer favors this
way of buying:
Nowadays the customer is not waiting anymore for a representative to come by. If you look at the
entrance doors everywhere there is a sign indicating that a representative is only welcome after making
an appointment.
4.1.2.2 Retail Store
6 out the 9 companies that sell their products via retail stores indicated the possibility to touch and try
in advance as the most important advantage of this distribution channel. Company I added that 95%
of the B2B customers purchase something before leaving the store. However this was not generally
felt. For company J the store only generates little profit.
9 All quotes are translated from Dutch into English by the author.
31
Furthermore a contradiction was found regarding the products offered in the retail store. Company D
had only a limited number of products demonstrated in its retail store. Whereas 3 companies (A, B, I)
have their whole assortment available.
One disadvantage was mentioned almost unanimously and concerns the (high) costs of personnel,
(maintaining) the buildings and required inventory.
4.1.2.3 Web Shop
The web shop is the most recent distribution channel the interviewed companies introduced. The web
shops were established between 2004 (company J) and 2013 (company G), and continue to increase
in importance. The convenience both for the customer as for the supplier is seen as a major advantage
of the web shop. Moreover, companies F and J stated that a web shop is unavoidable for this industry
because the B2B customer demands for this distribution channel:
Without questioning the number one: the market is asking for this. (Company J)
On the other hand, no personal contact with the B2B customer and the high return rates which are a
result of not being able to touch and try the products in advance are mentioned by 6 of the 9
interviewees as the biggest disadvantages. Furthermore, also for this distribution channel the
contradiction regarding the products offered was found. Companies C and D stated that the
assortment on their website is more extensive compared to their other distribution channels.
However, companies A and H did only offer a small part of their assortment online.
4.1.3 Future Developments
This first part of the findings is concluded with descriptions regarding the future use of the different
distribution channels as explained by the interviewees. At the time of the interviews, 4 companies
were restructuring their distribution strategy. All 4 had a main focus on their website, since they
experienced a growth in this online channel (company H). Companies D, F, J were rebuilding their
website, often with a (improved) new web shop included. Explained by company F:
We will rebuild our web shop in the near future. We must change the website because the customer is
asking for this: ”I want to have as much information as possible.”. In 2018 our new web shop will be
ready, we estimate in February.
On the other hand, company B argued that in the future they may stop with their web shop since it is
not the distribution channel on which their profit is based. Also company J considers to reduce their
number of distribution channel based on the profit generation:
There is an real possibility that the indication “store” will be replaced by “showroom”. Because we want
to improve constantly.
The other interviewees argued that they are satisfied with their distribution strategy and are not
planning to change anything about it in the near future.
32
4.2 Questionnaire Findings Above, all interview findings are discussed. Next, this section summarizes the findings of the
questionnaires. In total 137 questionnaires were analyzed for this research. The respondents of the
questionnaire were B2B customers. An overview of the descriptive statistics of these respondents can
be found in table 6 and table 7 in the previous chapter. The next paragraph shows the characteristics
of the respondents which submitted the questionnaires. Following, the distribution channels used by
the respondents are illustrated. A comparison is made between the total sample and the group that
currently wear work clothing from HAVEP. Lastly the reasoning behind the respondents’ distribution
channel choice is examined.
4.2.1 B2B Customer
The respondents had their own company (ZZP’er) or were employed by a company. The respondents
operated in different sectors (table 11). The construction and the agri & horticulture industry were
dominant in this sample group with respectively 31.9% and 17.4%. Other sectors not stated in the
questionnaire but mentioned by respondents were: electronics, cleaning, recreation, ICT and retail
(wholesaler) industry.
After the outliers were excluded, the companies of the respondents had on average 6 employees (table
6). In table 12 the average employee numbers are clarified per sector.
Table 11: Different sectors (in %) Table 12: Number of employees per sector
Sector Frequency Percent
(Petro)Chemistry 4 2.9%
Agri & Horticulture 24 17.4%
Construction 44 31.9%
Environment & Recycling
- -
Hospitality & Catering
4 2.9%
Industry 8 5.8%
Installation & Maintenance
14 10.1%
Metal & Machine Industry
10 7.2%
Road & Water Industry
1 0.7%
Transport & Logistics 3 2.2%
Others 22 15.9%
4.2.2 Distribution Channels
In this section processes of selecting the distribution channels by the respondents are analyzed and
compared. Do they buy work clothing directly from the producer or via an intermediary? And if they
buy at the intermediary, which distribution channel do they use? First the results of all respondents
are shown. After that the results of the respondents that currently wear HAVEP work clothing are
elaborated. This way, it can be analyzed if there is a difference between these two groups in their
selection of distribution channels.
Sector Average Std. Deviation
(Petro)Chemistry 1 1
Agri & Horticulture 3 3
Construction 6 17
Environment & Recycling
- -
Hospitality & Catering
7 9
Industry 5 10
Installation & Maintenance
4 4
Metal & Machine Industry
11 12
Road & Water Industry
1 -
Transport & Logistics 3 3
Others 12 17
33
4.2.2.1 Complete Sample Group
When examining all respondents, approximately 60% purchase their work clothing from one supplier;
either the producer or intermediary (table 13).The remaining 40% buy both from the producer as well
and via intermediaries as well. The ratio percentages are shown in graph 6.
Table 13: Buy at producer or via intermediary
Responses Buy at
Frequency Percent
Producer 25 18.2% Intermediary 57 41.6% Producer and Intermediary 55 40.1%
Total 137 100.0%
Graph 6: Respondents that buy via supplier and intermediary
The respondents were asked to select the distribution channels they use in order to buy work clothing.
Of the 137 respondents, 15 respondents answered this question with NA. Those responses are defined
as missing values and therefore not analyzed further for this research. As table 14 shows, of the
remaining respondents approximately 2/3 use only one distribution channel to buy work clothing. 41
respondents use 2 distribution channels and 12 respondents selected 3 or 4 distribution channels.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55
PER
CEN
T
NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS
Intermediary
Supplier
34
Table 14: Number of distribution channels used
Responses # Distribution Channel
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
1 69 50.0% 56.6% 2 41 29.7% 33.6% 3 10 7.2% 8.2% 4 2 1.4% 1.6% NA 15 11.6%
Total 137 100.0% 100.0%
Nearly all respondents that selected one distribution channel buy their work clothing at a retail store.
Illustrated in table 15.
Table 15: Selected distribution channels when only
1 distribution channel is used
Frequency Percent
Retail Store 58 84.1% Sales Representatives 4 5.8% Website 6 8.7% Catalogues 1 1.4% Others NA NA
Total 69 100.0%
Furthermore, the retail store is also most often selected by the respondents that use more than one
distribution channel. More specifically, 33 of the 53 respondents argued that although they use
multiple distribution channels they regarded the retail store as most important (table 16). In total the
53 respondents that use more than one channel selected 121 distribution channels as shown in table
17. None of the respondents mentioned other distribution channels than the 4 stated channels. Graph
7 illustrates how the segmentation of the different channels is for each respondent.
Table 16: Most important channel when more than 1
distribution channel is used
Frequency Percent
Retail store 33 62.3% Sales Representatives 9 17.0%
Website 10 18.9% Catalogues 1 1.9%
Others NA NA
Total 53 100.0%
Table 17: Total number of distribution channels selected
when multiple distribution channels are used
Frequency Percent
Retail Store 45 37.2% Sales Representatives 17 14.0%
Website 43 35.5% Catalogues 16 13.2%
Others NA NA
Total 121 100.0%
35
Graph 7: Respondents that buy via multiple distribution channels
4.2.2.2 Sample Group HAVEP
In this paragraph it is examined if the respondents that currently wear HAVEP buy those work clothing
via the same distribution channels as discussed above. This is done by generating the same statistics,
which can be found in Appendix I. Important and previously mentioned, this dataset is biased because
the respondents were selected from HAVEP’s customer database.
Stated in table 7 in the previous chapter, 103 respondents wear work clothing of HAVEP. 85
respondents buy it directly from HAVEP. The remaining 18 respondents buy the clothes via
intermediaries.
Next, the following findings were found when comparing the respondents that currently wear HAVEP
with the complete sample. Respondents that buy HAVEP work clothing use less distribution channels
with a maximum of 3. They prefer to use one channel (76.7%), which is dominated by the retail store
(91.1%). This is in line with the total sample. Also, when more than one channel is used to buy HAVEP’s
work clothing, the retail store was most frequently used.
Furthermore, 19 respondents did not wear work clothing of HAVEP at the moment this questionnaire
was distributed. 7 respondents bought work clothes from HAVEP in the past. “The collection of HAVEP
is limited”10 was mostly mentioned as the reason why respondents stopped buying the clothes from
HAVEP (57.1%). The other reasons were the quality of the products (28.6%) and one respondent
stopped buying HAVEP’s clothes because the retail store in his neighborhood where the clothes were
sold is closed nowadays.
10 Translated in English from the dutch statement “Ik koop niet meer bij HAVEP omdat HAVEP’s assortiment niet divers is”.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53
PER
CEN
T
RESPONDENTS
Others
Catalogues
Webshop
Sales Representative
Retail store
36
4.2.3 Motives for Selecting Distribution Channels
The previous section identified which channels are most frequently used by the respondents
(respectively: sales representatives, retail store and web shop). In this section for each distribution
channel is illustrated which items are more valued and which are less valued by the respondents, based
on the average rate per item. The respondent was able to rank the items between 1 (completely
disagree) and 5 (completely agree). Moreover with the standard deviation it is shown if the
respondents were unanimous or if respondents rated the item differently. As a result it illustrated the
motives why B2B customers use a specific distribution channel. The distribution channels are discussed
in the same sequence as used in the theoretical background chapter. The distribution channel
‘catalogues’ is not examined in this part because only one respondent uses this distribution channel
solely and only one respondent selected the catalogues as the most used distribution channel when
selected multiple channels.
Before the individual distribution channels are illustrated the conducted factor analysis and the related
Cronbach’s alpha are analyzed. The result of the conducted factor analysis can be found in table 18.
The first 3 models identified in the factor analysis had a Cronbach’s alpha higher than the minimum of
0.7 and were therefore allowed to aggregate (SPSS Handboek, 2013). The other 2 models did not have
a Cronbach’s alpha above 0.7. For model 2 and model 3 the Cronbach’s alpha increased when the item
‘shipping costs’ was deleted. The Cronbrach’s alpha’s are summarized in table 19. Each model fits one
specific distribution channel. Therefore only these items were taken into account when examining the
different distribution channels. As a result, for the ‘web shop’, the items of model 1 were be analyzed.
For the ‘retail store’ the items of model 2 were relevant and the items of model 3 correlated with the
‘sales representatives’. Five items (‘24 hours’, ‘Immediately available’, ‘shipping costs’, ‘experience’
and ‘reliable’) did not correlate to any of the 3 models and should therefore be considered separately
for each distribution channel. Each table below illustrates the average rate and standard deviation of
the relevant items per distribution channel. Appendix I shows the average scores and standard
deviations of the Likert scale answers corresponding to statements about HAVEP(‘s products).
37
Table 18: Results factor analysis
Model Item
1 2 3 4 5
Location 0.803 24/7 0.689 0.418
Choice 0.664 Price 0.661
Information 0.528 0.359 Assortment 0.759
Touch and try 0.739 0.388 Contact 0.626 0.342 0.481 Advice 0.335 0.532 0.464
Discount 0.706 Thinking along 0.695
Offers 0.470 0.569 24 hours 0.871
Immediately available 0.733 Shipping costs -0.307 0.313 0.486
Experience 0.799 Reliable 0.765
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization
Table 19: Results reliability analysis
Cronbach’s alpha
New Cronbach’s alpha
Model 1 0.81 - Model 2 0.62 0.79 Model 3 0.72 0.73
4.2.3.1 Sales Representatives
First, 4 respondents purchase work clothing only via sales representatives and 9 respondents selected
the sales representatives as the most used distribution channel. Of these 13, 3 respondents selected
NA for 10% or more of the items and therefore excluded for the sample. The other NA’s are replaced
by the average of each item, as explained in paragraph 3.3.2.1 . Table 20 presents the relevant items
related to sales representatives with their average scores and standard deviations.
Table 20: Scores sales representatives
Item Average Std. Deviation
Advice 4.8 0.4216 Reliable 4.6 0.6992 Discount 4.5 1.2693 Thinking along 4.5 0.8498 Contact 4.4 0.6992 Experience 4.3 0.7817 Immediately available 4.1 1.1005 Offers 3.0 0.9428 24 hours 3.0 0.4714 Shipping costs 2.1 0.9944
38
4.2.3.2 Retail Store
Second, 58 respondents purchase work clothing only via retail stores and 33 respondents most often
go to the retail store when selected multiple distribution channels. Of the 91, 8 respondents selected
NA for 10% or more of the items and are therefore deleted from this sample. The other NA’s are
replaced by the average of each item. Table 21 presents the relevant items related to retail stores with
their average scores and standard deviations.
Table 21: Scores retail store
Item Average Std. Deviation
Touch and try 4.6 0.6069 Reliable 4.4 0.5864 Advice 4.4 0.6039 Assortment 4.3 0.6794 Experience 4.3 0.7247 Immediately available 4.1 0.8942 Contact 4.1 0.7683 Information 3.9 0.8378 24 hours 3.5 1.0055 Shipping costs 2.8 1.0637
4.2.3.3 Web Shop
Third, 6 respondents purchase work clothing only via web shops and 10 respondents selected the web
shop as the most used distribution channel. One of these respondents selected NA for more than 10%
of the items and is therefore excluded from this sample. One other NA was found, which is replaced
by the average of that item. Table 22 presents the relevant items related to web shops with their
averages scores and standard deviations.
Table 22: Scores web shop
Item Average Std. Deviation
Reliable 4.1 0.9904 Immediately available 4.1 0.9904
Information 4.0 0.6547 Experience 4.0 0.9258
24/7 3.6 1.1832 Choice 3.5 1.0601
Location 3.5 1.2459 Price 3.1 0.8338
24 hours 2.9 0.9612 Shipping costs 2.9 1.0998
4.2.4 Control Variables
The two control variables ‘gender’ and ‘age’ may influence the findings of this research.
4.2.4.1 Gender
Regarding gender, the null hypothesis was stated as follows: ‘There is no correlation between gender
and the use of web shops’. The Mann-Whitney test is conducted because the dependent variable has
a scale level of measurement which is not normally distributed. Because the significant level is not
below the significance level of 0.005 (Asymp.Sig = 0.727) the null hypothesis was not rejected.
Concluding, gender does not influence the selection of web shops.
39
4.2.4.2 Age
The second control variable was age. The age of the respondents range from 24 to 66, with an average
age of 47.5. In order to analyze if age influenced the use of web shops the variable age is converted
into a new variable consisting of 2 group: younger than the age of 47.5 and 47.5 and older. For this
control variable the null hypothesis sated as follows: ‘There is no correlation between age and the use
of web shops’. Again, the Mann-Whitney test was conducted because the dependent variable has a
scale level of measurement which is not normally distributed. Also for this control variable the
significant level was not below the significance level of 0.005 (Asymp.Sig = 0.406) and therefore the
null hypothesis was not rejected. Concluding also age has no influence on the selection of web shops.
Because both control variables are insignificant it was decided to leave them out of this research.
40
5. DISCUSSION
In this chapter, the results of the research are discussed. The first section will be subjected to the
theoretical implications. In the second part, the managerial implications are discussed, with special
attention to HAVEP. Finally, the limitations are stated and a guidance for further research is provided.
5.1 Theoretical Implications The results from the conducted research (the interviews and questionnaires) provided an in-depth
understanding of (1) the different distribution channels used in practice and (2) the advantages and
disadvantages for the different B2B actors. In this section, these results will be compared with the
previously researched literature from chapter 2.
In the literature 3 distribution strategies were mentioned: direct, indirect and multi-channel. The
majority of the (8 out of the 10) interviewed companies used a multi-channel strategy. This is in line
with the researches of Coelho & Easingwood (2008), Sharma & Mehrota (2007) and Webb (2002) who
argued that a multi-channel is most profitable since it results in the largest customer coverage and
highest market share. Among the interviewed companies the combination of an ‘offline’ retail store
and an ‘online’ web shop was most common. Remarkably, not every company had a justification for
this strategy. In contrast, opposingly for purchasing products 2/3 of B2B customers (56.6% of
questionnaire respondents) preferred a single channel distribution strategy.
When comparing the distribution channels identified in the literature (Biemans, 2004; Fill & Fill, 2005;
Friedman & Furey, 1999; Rosenbloom 2011) to those found in this research, one can conclude that the
B2B actors (suppliers and customers) use corresponding distribution channels for distributing and
buying products. The following 5 distribution channels were identified: sales representatives, retail
stores, web shops, catalogues and intermediary. Subsequently, the first sub-question which focused
on the distribution channels used in the B2B market is answered. However, a nuance should be made.
Not all these distribution channels are equally important for the B2B actors. This is explained in the
following paragraphs.
First of all, as was expected based on the research findings of Richard & Purnell (2017), catalogues
were barely mentioned by the interviewees and selected in the questionnaires. None of the
interviewed companies considered the catalogues as a fully-fledged distribution channel, but used it
complementary to their sales representatives. Among the respondents, 16 people used catalogues to
buy products, alongside with other distribution channels. Only one of the respondents used the
catalogue exclusively. To conclude, catalogues can be identified as adding low value to the distribution
strategy.
Second, in the literature was argued that sales representatives are only a profitable distribution
channel when the products are complicated and sold to large key accounts (Biemans, 2004; Friedman
& Furey, 1999). The conducted research confirmed this statement. For this research, smaller B2B
customers (ZZP’ers and MKB’ers) were targeted. The outcome of the questionnaire was that only 9 of
the 137 respondents selected the sales representative as the most frequently used distribution
channel.
41
Moreover, only one interviewed company declared that sales representatives were its most important
distribution channel. Therefore, the conclusion can be drawn that sales representatives are not a
suitable distribution channel for approaching smaller B2B customers.
Three distribution channels remain: retail store, web shop and intermediaries. Regarding the last
distribution channel, the questionnaire results showed that many respondents (112 out of the 137)
bought their products via an intermediary. Furthermore, one interesting confirmation was found in
the fact that the interviewed companies mainly act locally. This is in line with the research of Friedman
& Furey (1999).
Retail stores and web shops were the most frequently used distribution channels, both by the
interviewed companies and respondents. In the literature it was expected that the web shop would
gain massive share of the total retail sales at the expense of the retail store (Rosenbloom, 2011). The
results of this research did not confirm this. The outcome of the questionnaire showed a strong
preference for the retail store. At the moment the questionnaires were send only 18.9% of the
respondents bought their products exclusively via web shops. To compare, 62.3% of the respondents
selected the retail store. However, in line with the literature, the interviewees expect that in the future
the ratio between retail store and web shop will chance in favor of the web shop. This was
strengthened by the fact that multiple suppliers are currently (re)structuring their website.
The second and third sub-question comprised the advantages and disadvantages of the different
distribution channels. Because it was concluded that sales representatives are not an appropriate
distribution channel for smaller B2B customers (the target group of this research), this distribution will
be eliminated. Moreover, the research defined the catalogues and intermediaries as less relevant
distribution channels and are therefore also disregarded. Therefore, this paragraph solely discusses
the advantages and disadvantages of the retail store and the web shop in more detail.
In table 23, the different motives of the interviewees to select their distribution channels (column 3)
are related to the motives found in the literature (column 2). In the last column, for several motives
the respondents’ degree of appreciation (with a maximum of 5) is illustrated. The number of + are
based on the average rates provided in table 20 and table 21 of chapter 4 which only included the
respondents for who the distribution channel was most important.
Table 23a: Motives combined for retail store
Literature Interviews Questionnaires
Advantage Direct/ personal contact Personal contact ++++
Touch and try possibility Touch and try possibility +++++
Immediately available Products direct available
Source of information ++++
Service oriented Proper advice Experience
++++
Lower returns Low return rates
Limited administrative and transportation costs
Additional motives not found in the literature
Customer loyalty Additional sales
Disadvantage Fixed location Need personnel in the store
42
Customer must visit the store
Openings hours
Rent or purchase buildings High costs for (maintain) buildings
Limited amount of products Not all products always in stock
++++*
Additional motives not found in the literature
High costs for personnel and inventory Always stock products needed Decoration stores Waiting times
Table 23b : Motives combined for web shop
Literature Interviews Questionnaires
Advantage Reach broader group of customers
Large customer reach
Not restricted to a location Not restricted to a location ++++
Offer broader scope of products
Not restricted by time Always and everywhere able to offer/ order
++++
Lower costs Cheaper Faster Efficiency No personnel needed
+++
Source of information Lot of information ++++
Additional motives not found in the literature
Convenience (re)order Easy to establish Fysically not heavy Everything digital
Disadvantage Costly to convert information
Time consuming
Costly to keep updated Constant investments required
Physical product flow cannot be conveyed
Not immediately available
Complicated delivery system
Many returns Complicated
More competition No customer loyalty
Additional motives not found in the literature
Technical problems Smaller orders No personal contact Not able to touch or try
Note: *: Opposite to what is argued in the literature
As illustrated in the table many advantages and disadvantages discussed in the literature were also
mentioned by the interviewees and selected by the respondents in this research. Moreover, additional
motives were identified. These are elaborated in the next section.
The interviewees argued that the retail store has the important advantage of additional sales.
Additional sales can be described as products that the customer did not intend to purchase before
their visit.
43
On the other hand, the high costs for operating a retail store (personnel, inventory and stock products)
were defined as a major disadvantage. Those costs were not specifically mentioned in the literature
beforehand.
For the web shop, several additional advantages and disadvantages were found as well. The
interviewees rated the level of convenience to (re)order products as one of the biggest advantages of
this distribution channel. However, the interviewees found it disadvantageous that there is only a low
level of personal contact and that customers are not able to touch or try the products in advance.
In addition, several contradictions between the literature and the conducted research were identified.
First, the literature argued that retail stores only offer a limited amount of products (Otto & Chung,
2000). This is not confirmed in the questionnaires. The results showed that the respondents highly
appreciated the extensive assortments of this distribution channel (average score of 4.3 out of 5).
Second, the research did not find corresponding results concerning customer loyalty. Dholakia et al.,
(2005) and Walters (2008) argued that customers were less committed to the web shop and switch
more easily. However this research did illustrate that satisfied web shop users will be more likely to
continue purchasing from this distribution channel (average score of 4.0 out of 5).
One inconsistency was found. All respondents, whether they used the retail store or the web shop,
highly valued the immediate availability of products (average scores of 4.1 out of 5). However, the
retail store is the only distribution channel which can fulfill this requirement at this moment. No
explanation was found for this.
The following paragraph summarizes and ends this section with a final conclusion. The web shop has
several major advantages for the B2B supplier (broad customer reach, not restricted by time or
location and relatively low costs) (Biemans, 2004; Lu et al., 2011; Otto & Chung, 2000). However, this
research illustrated that (at this moment) it is not advisable to fully rely on this distribution channel.
Due to the fact that web shops also have some important limitations (lack of possibility to touch
products in advance and less personal contact) which probably cause the high return rates and lower
customer loyalty towards the supplier (Dholakia et al., 2005). Thus, by only distributing products via
the web shop the supplier’s performance will be limited. This is strengthened by the fact that in order
to buy products the retail store is still most frequently used by the respondents. Contrary to the web
shop, the retail store is able to provide personal contact, proper advice and a possibility to try the
products. In addition, products are immediately available at retail stores (Adler, 2014; Biemans, 2004;
Gehrt & Yan, 2004; Maruca, 1999). These elements are highly appreciated by the B2B customer. On
the other hand, B2B suppliers indicated the high costs as a major barrier of this distribution channel
(Otto & Chung, 2000).
Concluding, by taking into account the advantages, disadvantages and the preferences of the supplier
and the customer, the research question “What is the optimal distribution channel strategy within B2B
markets?” can be answered as follows: to target smaller B2B customers (ZZP’ers and MKB’ers) a multi-
channel distribution strategy, in which a web shop and a retail store are combined, would be most
profitable. As a result of this combination, the B2B supplier will have the largest customer coverage
and the highest market share. Furthermore, by using both distribution channels the supplier is able to
meet most customers’ requirements. Whereas at this moment, the emphasis is on the retail store, the
expectation is that this will shift toward a more equal ratio and it is plausible that due to technical
developments the web shop will take over the position of the retail store in the future.
44
5.2 Managerial Implications The results of this research provide insights regarding the supplier’s distribution strategy which can be
useful for managers in order to reconsider their distribution channel strategy. Several specific
implications are discussed next.
First, the researched literature, the interviews and the questionnaires showed a striking resemblance
regarding customer loyalty. B2B customers were very loyal towards the distribution channel used
(Hague et al., 2017). A relationship can last for more than 20 years according to the interviewees.
Argued by Biemans (2004) and Hague et al. (2017) the B2B population is relatively small compared to
the B2C market. It is therefore of high importance that the B2B supplier retains its customers. The
managers would have to pay careful attention to the level of customer satisfaction and make sure that
they fulfill the customers’ expectations. For example, the interviewed companies invested effort in
personal contact; remembering the customer’s name and purchase history by heart, extensive product
knowledge and creating a new lifestyle experience. This confirmed the research findings of Maruca
(1999).
Second, the internet-based distribution channels continue to increase in importance (Biemans, 2004).
The interviewees confirmed this but showed that the web shops are still in a developing process.
Several interviewed companies are currently (re)structuring their website by adding a web shop. For
B2B suppliers that do not yet have a web shop, this would be a suitable time to start a web shop and
gain market share on the internet. For B2B suppliers which already have a web shop it is important
that they keep investing in this distribution channel in order to stay ahead of the competition. A B2B
supplier has to put continuous marketing effort in the visibility of his web shop on the internet. For
instance, as explained by the interviewees, the web shop must be found on the first page of Google
and it is advisable to advertise on specific words. Otherwise customers will not be aware of the
existence of your web shop and may select the competitor’s website. This was also found in the
literature (Dholakia et al., 2005; Walters, 2008).
Third, resulting from the questionnaires, immediate availability of products is highly appreciated by
nearly all respondents. Currently, this can only be realized by a retail store. A web shop increases its
position when it is able to implement this aspect. Therefore, it would be advisable for the B2B supplier
to search for possibilities that create a comparable situation. As said in the introduction, internet-
based organizations like Bol.com11 and Amazon.com are currently able to provide ‘same-day delivery
service’, which allowing them to approach immediate availability (Amazon.com, 2017).
Finally, both the literature as the conducted research favored a multi-channel distribution strategy.
The strategy provides the broadest customer reach for the B2B supplier (Coelho & Easingwood, 2008;
Sharma & Mehrotra, 2007; Webb, 2002). However, argued by Sharma & Mehrotra (2007) and Webb
(2002) the multi-channel distribution strategy is rather complex and there is a substantial chance of
conflicts. Therefore, suppliers prefer to distribute via a single distribution channel and would be willing
to alter if the advantages of one channel could be implemented and adopted by the other distribution
channel.
11 Bol.com is the leading web shop in the Netherlands for books, toys and electronics.
45
For this research, the small B2B customer was identified as target group. For this group the retail store
and the web shop were defined as most dominant distribution channels. Indicated by the interviewees,
they expect that the use of the web shop increases in the future. To be able to fully rely on the web
shop as single distribution channel and to overcome the disadvantages of this channel the B2B supplier
would have to implement the advantages of the retail store (personal contact, personal advice and the
opportunity to touch or try the products in advance). Future technologies provide opportunities to
enhance the level of advice and personal contact. For example, an interviewee expects that in the
future a phone application will be developed that is able to make a full body scan and subsequently
selects the clothes which fits the customer’s body best. Moreover, the virtual reality technologies
develop fast. In future, more personal visual contact can be realized by for example conference calls
which are nowadays possible via mobile phones. Or a new application may be developed which makes
it possible to create your personal ‘digital’ account manager. Similar to Siri12 this application could by
voice recognition help the companies ordering the right products. However, the B2B supplier has to
realize when developing these technologies by himself the costs can increase significantly. This
problem was also identified by one of the interviewees. Although they valued their own software
system, they experienced difficulties with the high costs. In addition, several interviewees defined
technological failures as disadvantageous.
The possibility to try and feel the products in advance can be (partially) realized by introducing an
extensive delivery system. An example of this is done by Wehkamp. This internet-based organization
offers the customer a period of 30 days to (re)consider the purchase. Within this period, the customer
can return the product without costs. Furthermore, the customer does not have to pay for the products
in advance (Wehkamp, 2017). This way the customer has the possibility to try and touch before he has
to pay. Services like this will enhance customers’ appreciation. Notwithstanding, developing and
maintaining this system will lead to higher costs and requests extensive coordination. When failures
evolve, it may be possible that the customer expectations are not met, which may result in lower
customer satisfaction. Additionally, it is questionable if the B2B customer will take the time and effort
to bundle the products that did not meet their expectations and send them back to the supplier.
On the other hand, if in the future the B2B supplier continues distributing via the retail store and he
aims for a broad customer reach and a high convenience level (not restricted time and location)
comparable to that of the web shop, the costs will also increase significantly. Due to the fact that more
stores would be necessary and the opening hours have to extend, more personnel will be required.
Taking into account the increasing costs (more personnel, buildings and inventory) it is unlikely that
the profit of the B2B supplier will increase remarkably.
5.2.1 Managerial Implications HAVEP
This paragraph provides several specific recommendations regarding the distribution strategy of
HAVEP. By having taken into account the internet developments, HAVEP currently considers the
following question: “Would it be profitable for HAVEP to start its own web shop?”. At this moment,
HAVEP is the market leader in the work clothing industry in the Netherlands but it does not have a web
12 Siri is a built-in "intelligent assistant" that enables users of Apple mobile devices to speak natural language voice commands in order to operate applications.
46
shop. At the end of this paragraph the answer is provided. To be able to answer the question, the
different distribution strategies found in the literature are shortly discussed.
In this research, 3 different distribution strategies were identified: direct, indirect and multi-channel
distribution strategy. Taking into account the large number (500) of intermediaries that distribute the
products of HAVEP, the current distribution strategy can be defined as an indirect strategy. This
strategy has 2 major disadvantages. First, because HAVEP cooperates with intermediaries it has no
direct relationship with the B2B customers. Second, HAVEP misses a part of the generated profits.
According to the literature (Biemans, 2004; Friedman & Furey, 1999; Rosenbloom, 2011) in order to
extend HAVEP’s control in the value chain, and to become independent of the intermediaries, HAVEP
would have to change its strategy into a direct distribution strategy. Creating a direct chain has 2
important advantages for HAVEP: direct relationship with their B2B customers and gaining all profits.
Moreover, a direct distribution strategy has also one major benefit for B2B customer, namely lower
prices. Therefore, a direct distribution strategy seems to be the most profitable solution. According to
the literature, a direct distribution strategy can be implemented by using a number of different
distribution channels: catalogues, sales representatives, a retail store and a web shop (Biemans, 2004;
Friedman & Furey, 1999; Rosenbloom, 2011). Now each direct option will be analyzed.
First of all, contrary to what was expected, this research illustrated that only a limited amount of
respondents (both HAVEP and non-HAVEP customers) search for the lowest price when purchasing
products (average score of 3.1 out of 5). Therefore, this criteria should not have priority when selecting
the distribution channel.
Furthermore, mentioned before, catalogues are hardly used nowadays and sales representatives are
only beneficial for larger B2B customers. For this research, the smaller B2B customer was targeted.
They indicated that they would not appreciate it when a sales representative visit their company
(average score of 2.9 out of 5). Concluding, these two distribution channels are neither a suitable
option for HAVEP.
Subsequently, 2 direct distribution channels remain: retail store and web shop. With the current digital
developments, HAVEP is especially interested in the web shop. Therefore, this distribution channel will
be discussed first.
The web shop has several advantages for HAVEP: broad customer reach, not restricted by time or
location resulting in convenience. Moreover, this research showed that most customers of HAVEP
would appreciate it when HAVEP has a web shop (average score of 3.9 out of 5). According to the
interviewees, the use of internet for buying products will increase in the future. They also argued that
the web shops are in a developing process at this moment. For HAVEP, this makes it a favorable time
to start its own web shop. Strengthened by the fact that establishing a web shop is relatively cheap
(Biemans, 2004). This also counts for HAVEP because the new web shop can be implemented in the
(informative) website which already exists.
Although the web shop seems an attractive distribution channel, this research illustrated that when
HAVEP fully relies on its web shop the company’s profit will be limited. Two main reason are defined
for this. First, the web shop has 2 major disadvantages at this moment.
47
There is a lack of personal contact with the B2B customer and the customer is not able to try the
product before buying, which results in lower customer loyalty and high return rates for the B2B
supplier. However, HAVEP could diminish these disadvantages. As explained in the previous paragraph
they would have to invest in new digital developments which enhanced personal contact.
Furthermore, they would have to develop an extensive logistic system. By focusing on these aspects
HAVEP is able to create a competitive advantage. However, the related costs cannot be ignored. The
second reason comes from the fact that the customers of HAVEP, in line with the total sample group,
act very conservative and buy their products mainly via a retail store (72 out of the 79 used the retail
store exclusively). A single distribution strategy executed via a web shop would therefore not be a
suitable option.
An alternative option to adopt a single distribution strategy is, using retail stores. The main motives
for using this distribution channel were: personal contact, proper advice and the ability to try the
products in advance. This research illustrated that HAVEP customers valued a retail store of HAVEP
within a reach of 50 km (average score of 4.3 out of 5). This was (though relatively weak) strengthened
by the fact that respondents who bought HAVEP products in the past, stopped buying because the
local retail store closed. In the current distribution strategy, most retail services are executed and
managed by the intermediaries. HAVEP has only 2 retail stores itself. When they decide to sell only via
this direct distribution strategy, they would have to establish additional stores throughout the
Netherlands13. Considering the tremendous investments needed, it is likely to assume that these costs
will exceed the new generated profits. Exclusively distributing via the retail store is therefore neither
suited.
Said before, a number of customers (which probably grows in the future) appreciate a web shop, but
a sizable group of B2B customers still prefers a retail store. Therefore at this moment, the most
favorable strategy for HAVEP would be a multi-channel distribution strategy in which they combine a
direct distribution strategy with an indirect strategy. In this situation HAVEP will manage the web shop
themselves and for the retail stores they would have to rely on their intermediaries. The intermediaries
will, similar to the current situation, focus on the local market by controlling one or a limited number
of retail stores. However, when changing the strategy into a multi-channel distribution strategy HAVEP
should be aware of the potential conflicts which may arise. Intermediaries could feel competed by
HAVEP’s web shop. As a result, the intermediaries may end the cooperation, which has a negative
impact on HAVEP’s sales opportunities. This finding was confirmed by the interviewees and also
identified in the researches of Sharma & Mehrotra (2017) and Webb (2002). In order to minimize the
chance on conflicts, it is important that HAVEP continuously invests in the relationships with their
intermediaries and involves them in important decision processes. For example regarding the future
price and/or marketing strategy.
To conclude, at this moment for targeting the smaller B2B customer (ZZP’er/ MKB’er) it is not advisable
for HAVEP to fully alter their current indirect distribution strategy into a direct distribution strategy. A
multi-channel distribution strategy is the best alternative. In this strategy HAVEP will be responsible
for the web shop and the intermediaries will manage the retail stores.
13 This research is only able to draw conclusions for the Netherlands because only the Dutch nationality is researched.
48
By this, both HAVEP and its B2B customers will profit most. Moreover, the research showed that web
shops are currently in a developing process and it is expected that their market share will increase.
Subsequently, HAVEP’s question can be answered: HAVEP would have to start implementing a web
shop in order to be prepared for future developments. But the cooperation with the intermediaries
would have to be continued as well. This means that HAVEP is not able to completely take over the
position of the intermediary and expand in the value chain.
5.3 Limitations and Future Research Next to the theoretical and managerial implications, several limitations must be mentioned. This
paragraph summarizes the limitations and provides a guidance for further research.
This research has 3 major limitations. Firstly, companies that act as intermediaries were interviewed
for this research. Therefore, for this distribution channel the research is not able to agree on any of
the advantages or disadvantages that were found in the literature. Moreover, the number of
companies interviewed is rather limited. In order to increase the generalizability. Further research
would have to examine more cases from different types of industries and companies with different
sizes.
The second limitation relates to the questionnaire. The findings of the questionnaire do not represent
the total population since the sample of this research was biased. The questionnaire was send to B2B
customers selected from HAVEP’s customer database. Moreover, the sample consisted only B2B
customers with the Dutch nationality. A limitation because the products of HAVEP are sold in other
countries as well and the possibility exists that different nationalities prefer different distribution
channels. Besides, this research only examined the ZZP’er/ MKB’er and disregarded the larger B2B
customer. Found in the literature it could be possible that the size of the B2B customer influences the
selection of distribution channels. Summarizing, further research would have to enlarge the sample
size by taking into account B2B customers from different countries, different sizes and also non HAVEP
customers. By extending the research this way the reliability of the results enhance. Furthermore, the
questionnaire provides limited information. Initially, the questionnaire was sent with an extensive list
of questions. The respondents’ reactions however were very negative (too long and too detailed) and
almost no questionnaire was returned. Alternatively, the number of questions were reduced. This way,
the respondent rate increased. But the results became less extensive. And regrettably, the
questionnaire did not examined why respondents bought from the intermediaries instead of
producers. For further research it may be more profitable to conduct interviews.
Finally, this research did not provide any financial numbers. The exact incomes rates generated by each
distribution channel and the costs of operating with the distribution channel were not part of this
research. Further research should conduct an quantitative research by collecting and analyzing the
corresponding financial figures. By adding financial information the generalizability of the research will
be enhanced.
49
6. CONCLUSION
With the world economy evolving, an increased number of organizations are highlighting the
distribution management as one of their top priorities. And with the internet-developments the
number of distribution channels extended. The main purpose of this research was to identify the
optimal distribution channel strategy for the B2B supplier to approach smaller B2B customer (ZZP’er/
MKB’er). A qualitative research with a case study analysis was conducted.
The distribution channels identified in the conducted research correspond to the distribution channels
found in the literature. Five distribution channels were distinguished: sales representatives, retail
store, web shop, catalogues and intermediary. For buying products B2B customers prefer the retail
store. Besides the retail store, the web shop was most important for the B2B supplier to generate
profit. The web shop is in a developing process and most suppliers are currently redesigning it since
they assume that the use of this distribution channel will increase. By using both the retail store and
the web shop, the B2B supplier adopts a multi-channel distribution strategy.
The major advantages of the retail store were; personal contact, advice, the possibility to touch and
try the products in advance and immediate availability of products. For the B2B supplier this results in
very loyal customers and low return rates. However, the high costs are a major barrier of the retail
store. Moreover, this distribution channel is restricted to fixed locations and opening hours. On the
other hand, the last mentioned characteristics of the retail store are the major benefits of the web
shop. This distribution channel is not restricted by location and time, which results in convenience for
both the B2B customer and the B2B supplier. Moreover, the web shop can be developed rather easily.
Major disadvantages of the web shop were: less personal contact, resulting in lower customer loyalty
and lack of possibility to try the products in advance which results in higher returns for the B2B
supplier. With new technological developments, these disadvantages may be minimized in the future.
Concluding, by taking into account the advantages, disadvantages and preferences of the supplier and
the customer a multi-channel distribution strategy, where a retail store and a web shop are combined,
would be most profitable to target smaller B2B customers. As a result of this combination, the B2B
supplier will have the largest customer coverage and highest market share. Moreover, the supplier is
able to meet most customers’ requirements.
6.1 Acknowledgement I would like to thank all people who helped me finalizing this master thesis. First of all, I would like to
thank my supervisor dr. Wilfred Schoenmakers for his time, feedback, support, patience and valuable
input throughout the whole project. This thesis would not have been the same without all his help.
Furthermore I would like to thank HAVEP, a special thanks for mrs. Puijenbroek, mr. Luttikholt and mr.
Lanting for giving me the opportunity to do this research at their company. They were always willing
to answer my questions, provided me with valuable information and contact details. Moreover, I want
to thank my family and friends, for supporting and motivating me throughout the hardships I
encountered during this project. Especially I would like to thank by father for helping me and driving
me to different appointments throughout The Netherlands.
50
REFERENCE LIST
Adler, E. 2014. Bricks-and-mortar retailers have one big advantage over e-commerce companies. Retrieved October 23, 2017. From http://www.businessinsider.com/bricks-and-mortar-retailers-have-one-big-advantage-over-e-commerce-companies-2014-7?international=true&r=US&IR=T. Alibaba. 2017. About Alibaba.com. Retrieved December 16, 2017. From http://activities.alibaba.com /alibaba/following-about-alibaba.php?tracelog=footer_alibaba Alptekinoglu, A., & Tang, C.S. 2005. A model for analyzing multi-channel distribution systems.
European Journal of Operational Research, 163(3): 802-824.
Amazon.com. 2017 Free Same-Day and One-Day. Retrieved 6 November, 2017. From https:
//www.amazon.com/Prime-FREE-Same-Day-Delivery/b?node=8729023011
Biemans, W.G. 2004. Business Marketing Management: Strategie, planning en implementatie.
Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff.
Chopra, S. 2003. Designing the distribution network in a supply chain. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 39(2): 123-140. Coelho, F., & Easingwood, C. 2008. A model of the antecedents of multiple channel usage. Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Service, 15(1): 32-41.
Corey, E.R., Cespedes, F.V., & Rangan, V.K. 1989. Going to market: Distribution systems for industrial products. Boston, Mass. : Harvard Business School Press. Dholakia, R.R., Zhao, M., & Dholakia, N. 2005. Multichannel retailing: A case study of early experiences. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 19(2): 63-74. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 532-550. Field, A. 2009. Discovering SPSS using statistics. Sage Publications, London; Thousand Oaks; New Delhi Fill, C., & Fill, K. E. 2005. Business to Business Marketing: Relationships, systems and communications. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. Frazier, G.L. 1999. Organizing and managing channels of distribution. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 27(2): 226-240.
Friedman, L., & Furey, T.R. 1999. The channel advantage. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Frost & Sullivan. 2015. The global B2B E-commerce market will reach 6.7 trillion USD by 2020, Finds Frost & Sullivan. Retrieved 30 October 2017. From https://ww2.frost.com/news/press-releases/global-b2b-e-commerce-market-will-reach-67-trillion-usd-2020-finds-frost-sullivan/.
51
Glaser, B., Strauss, A., 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Aldine Publishing Company;
Hawthorne, NY.
Gehrt, K.C., & Yan, R. 2004. Situational, consumer, and retailer factors affecting Internet, catalog, and store shopping. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 32(1): 5-18. Goldsmith, R.E., & Flynn, L.R. 2005. Bricks, clicks, and pix: Apparel buyers’ use of stores, internet, and catalogs compared. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 33(4): 271-283. Hague, P., Hague, N., & Harrison, M. 2017. B2B marketing: What makes it special? Retrieved October 22, 2017. From https://www.b2binternational.com/publications/b2b-marketing/.
HAVEP. 2017. About HAVEP. Retrieved November 6, 2017. From https://www.havep.com/nl-
en/about-havep
Kollmann, T., Kuchertz, A., Kayser, I. 2012. Cannibalization or synergy? Consumers’ channel selection in online-offline multichannel systems. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 19: 186-194. Lake, L. 2017. Understanding the difference between B2B and B2C marketing. Retrieved October 20, 2017. From https://www.thebalance.com/b2b-vs-b2c-marketing-2295828. Lewis, J., Whysall, P., & Foster, C. 2014. Drivers and technology-related obstacles in moving to
multichannel retailing. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 18(4): 43-68.
Lu, Y., Cao, Y., Wang, B., & Yang, S. 2011. A study on factors that affect users’ behavioral intention to transfer usage from offline to online channel. Computers in Human Behavior, 27: 355-364. Lu, Q., & Liu, N. 2015. Effects of e-commerce channel entry in a two-echelon supply chain: A
comparative analysis of single- and dual-channel distribution systems. International Journal of
Production Economics, 165: 100-111.
Luttikholt, K. 2017. Distribution strategy HAVEP. Personal Interview. Held at 7 November 2017.
Goirle
MaRS. 2011. Case study: Dell-distribution and supply chain innovation. Retrieved October 20, 2017. From https://www.marsdd.com/mars-library/case-study-dell-distribution-and-supply-chain-innovation/. Maruster, L., & Gijsenberg, M.L. 2013. Qualitative research methods. London: SAGE Publications. Maruca, R.F. 1999. Retailing: Confronting the challenges that face bricks-and-mortar stores. Harvard Business Review MBASkool. 2017. Direct Channel. Retrieved January 2, 2018. From https://www.mbaskool.com/ business-concepts/marketing-and-strategy-terms/11794-direct-channel.html. Merrilees, B., & Fenech, T. 2007. From catalog to Web: B2B multi-channel marketing strategy. Industrial marketing management, 36: 44-49.
52
Min, S., & Wolfinbarger, M. 2005. Market share, profit margin, and marketing efficiency of early movers, bricks and clicks, and specialists in e-commerce. Journal of Business Research, 58(8): 1030-1039. Moriarty, R.T., & Moran, U. 1990. Managing hybrid marketing systems. Harvard Business Review. Otto, J.R., & Chung, Q.B. 2000. A framework for cyber-enhanced retailing: Integrating e-commerce retailing with brick-and-mortar retailing. Electronic Markets, 10(3): 185-191. Pitt, L.., Berthon, P., & Berthon, J.P. 1999. Changing Channels: The Impact of the Internet of Distribution Strategy. Business Horizons, 42(2): 19-28. Richard, J. E., & Purnell, F. 2017. Rethinking catalogue and online B2 buyer channel preferences in the education supplies market. Journal of Interactive marketing, 37: 1-15.
Rosenbloom, B. 2011. Marketing channels: A management view. Ohio: Thomson South-Western.
Rosenbloom, B. 2007. Multi-channel strategy in business-to-business markets: Prospects and
problems. Industrial Marketing Management, 36: 4-9.
Schoenbachler, D.D., & Gordon, G.L. 2002. Multi‐channel shopping: understanding what drives channel choice. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 19(1): 42-53. Schuurmans, A.J. 1991. Marktgerichte distributie: begrippen, concepten en toepassingen. Schoonhoven: Academic Service economie en bedrijfskunde. Sharma,A., & Mehrotra, A. 2007. Choosing an optimal channel mix in multichannel environment. Industrial Marketing Management, 36: 21-28. Shipley, D., Egan, C., & Edgett, S. 1991. Meeting source selection criteria: Direct versus distributor channels. Industrial marketing management. 20: 297-303. SPSS Handboek. 2013. Cronbach's Alpha. Retrieved 28 December 2017. From, SPSS Handboek: http://www.spsshandboek.nl/cronbachs_alpha.html Stanford University. 2011. Using ATLAS.ti for Qualitative Data Analysis. Retrieved December 13, 2017. From https://web.stanford.edu/group/ssds/cgi-bin/drupal/files/Guides/1112_UsingATLASti.pdf Stone, M., Hobbs, M., & Khaleeli, M. 2002. Multichannel customer management: The benefits and
challenges. Journal of Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management, 10(1): 39-52.
Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. 1998. Basics of qualitative research, Second edition. Thousand Oakes, CA:
Sage Publications.
Trivedi, M. 1998. Distribution channels: An extension of exclusive retailership. Management Science,
896-909.
Valos, M.J. 2008. A qualitative study of multi-channel marketing performance measurement issues. Journal of Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management, 15(4): 239-248.
53
Van Deursen, A.J.A.M., & Helsper, E.J. 2015. A nuanced understanding of Internet use and non-use among the elderly. European Journal of Communication, 30(2): 171-187. Van Deursen A.J.A.M., Van Dijk, J.A.G.M., & ten Klooster, P.M. 2015. Increasing inequalities in what we do online: A longitudinal cross sectional analysis of Internet activities among the Dutch population (2010 to 2013) over gender, age, education, and income. Telematics and Informatics, 32: 259–272. Vinhas, A.S., & Anderson, E. 2005. How potential conflict channel structure: Concurrent (Direct and Indirect) channels. Journal of Marketing Research, 42(4): 507-515. Walters, P. G. P. 2008. Adding value in global B2B supply chains: Strategic directions and the role of the Internet as a driver of competitive advantage. Industrial marketing management, 37: 59-68. Wang, Q., Song, P., & Yang, X. 2013. Understanding the substitution effect between online and traditional channels: evidence from product attributes perspective. Electronic Markets, 23: 227-239. Watson, G.F., Worm, S., Palmatier, R.W., Ganesan, S. 2015 The evolution of marketing channels:
Trends and research directions. Journal of Retailing, 91(4): 546-568.
Webb, K.L. 2002. Managing channels of distribution in the age of electronic commerce. Industrial Marketing Management, 31: 95-102. Wehkamp. 2017. Bezorgen. Retrieved December 16, 2017. From https://www.wehkamp.nl /specials/bezorgen/ Yan, R., Guo, P., Wang, J., & Amrouche, N. 2011. Product distribution and coordination strategies in a multi-channel context. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 18(1): 19-26.
Yin, R.K. 2003; 2009. Case Study Research Design and Methods: third and fifth edition. Applied Social Research Methods Series. Sage Publications. Yoo, W.S., & Lee, E. 2010. Internet channel entry: A strategic analysis of mixed channel structures.
Marketing Science, 30(1): 29-41.
Zadrozny, B., 2004. Learning and evaluating classifiers under sample selection bias. Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 903–910.
54
APPENDIX A: Overview advantages & disadvantages literature
Table 1: Sales representatives
Sales Representatives
Motive Explanation Author
Advantage Direct/ Personal contact
Via the direct relationships the B2B suppliers have in-side information about their B2B customers.
Biemans, 2004
Long-term relationship
Contact via sales representatives results in long-lasting relationship with the B2B customers.
Biemans, 2004
High degree of control
Sales representatives maintain a high degree of control over the sales process while selling complex products.
Biemans, 2004; Friedman & Furey, 1999
Source of information Sales representatives collect important and highly valuable information about the B2B customers’ requirements and complains.
Biemans, 2004
Service oriented By being service oriented sales representatives have added-value.
Biemans, 2004
Disadvantage Hard to get in contact with customers
Smaller and geographically widespread customers are usually hard to reach sales representatives.
Friedman & Furey, 1999
Hard to coordinate sales representatives waste major time by spending too much time on the existing customers and small transactions.
Friedman & Furey, 1999
Expensive Sales representatives are the most expensive distribution channel
Biemans, 2004; Friedman & Furey, 1999
Less trusted by customers
B2B customers trust and accept the unknown sales representatives less.
Friedman & Furey, 1999
Table 2: Retail store
Motive Explanation Author
Advantage Direct/ Personal contact
The personnel working in the store has direct contact with the B2B customers.
Biemans, 2004
Source of information The store personnel collects important and highly valuable information about the B2B customers’ requirements and complains.
Biemans, 2004
Service oriented The store personnel provides the best advice and offerings to B2B customers resulting in a high service level.
Maruca, 1999
Lower returns Retail stores have substantially lower returns.
Dholakia et al., 2005
Limited administrative and transportation costs
Retail stores have limited administrative and transportation costs because the products are immediately available.
Gehrt & Yan, 2004; Otto & Chung, 2000
Disadvantage Fixed location Retail stores are at fixed locations. This requires an effort from the B2B customer.
Dholakia et al., 2005; Gehrt & Yan, 2004; Rosenbloom, 2011
Opening hours Retail stores are restricted in their opening hours. This requires an effort from the B2B customer.
Dholakia et al., 2005; Gehrt & Yan, 2004; Rosenbloom, 2011
55
Rent or purchase buildings
For retail stores buildings need to be rented or bought and maintained. The more and the larger the buildings, the higher the cost.
Otto & Chung, 2000
Limited amount of products
Depending on the capacity of the stores, the retail stores are limited in the products they show and stock.
Otto & Chung, 2000
Table 3: Web shop
Motive Explanation Author
Advantage Reach broader group of customers
Web shops can contact, in a relatively simple way, a large group of B2B customers.
Biemans, 2004; Otto & Chung, 2000
Not restricted to locations
Web shops have access to the worldwide B2B market. Orders will come from locations and countries all over the world.
Biemans, 2004
Broader scope of products
Web shops are able to offer many product with a range of more than 3 million products on average.
Goldsmith & Flynn, 2005; Wang et al., 2013
Not restricted by time
Web shops are always open. No physical presence is needed. B2B customers can order products 24/7.
Biemans, 2004; Lu et al., 2011
Lower costs Web shops have lower labor costs (Otto & Chung, 2000) due to less and more efficient use of personnel (Biemans, 2004).
Biemans, 2004; Otto & Chung, 2000
Source of information
Web shops aggregate information about the B2B customers’ behavior, their preferences and buying habits.
Biemans, 2004; Otto & Chung, 2000; Rosenbloom, 2011
Disadvantage Costly to convert information
It is costly to convert and analyze the via web shops collected information about the customers.
Otto & Chung, 2000
Costly to keep updated
In order to keep the web shops updated, costs raise.
Biemans, 2004
Physical product flow cannot be conveyed
Web shops are not able to convey physical products.
Rosenbloom, 2011
Complicated delivery system
When web shops stock inventory on one location the tasks complicate of transportation, storage and order processes.
Rosenbloom, 2011
More competition Web shops experience more competition because B2B customers can navigate unrestricted across multiple web shops with only a few clicks.
Dholakia et al., 2005
Table 4: (Web) Catalogues
Motive Explanation Author
Advantages Reference work Catalogues are used as reference work for the B2B customer.
Biemans, 2004
Substitute for sales representatives
Catalogues are used as substitute for the sales representative.
Biemans, 2004
Disadvantages* Difficult to keep updated
Catalogues have difficulty in keeping the product information up-to-date.
Pitt, 1999
56
Expensive to spread When the B2B customers are geographically spread, it is expensive to provide them the catalogue on a regular base.
Pitt, 1999
*Disadvantages do not count for online catalogues
APPENDIX B: Opportunities & obstacles associated with B2B websites
Opportunities Obstacles
Numerous tools to assist managing the marketing mix
Transmission speeds (now of declining relevance)
Access to commercial research Site and ISP congestion (too many visitors at some individual sites) Competitive intelligence Web culture (sites should be designed not to appear too promotional) Customer service Lack of internet organization (may mean wasted time for some users Just-in-time inventory planning Lack of security (some lack of policing but security improving) Sales channel Sub-optimal information control (users decide on site visits and the
way they physically set their computer settings) Channel partner support Unwieldy URLs (can be long and difficult to memorize) Image enhancement HTML programming limitations (declining relevance) Global reach Global differences (e.g. can make pricing on the web impractical Hardware/software neutrality Skeptical buyers (some buyers in the middle and later stages of the
adoption process) 24/7 availability Resistance to payment of web services (of declining importance) Ability to target narrowly Measurement challenges (becoming more sophisticated) Cost effectiveness Up-to-date information Linkages to sites Interactive and multimedia capability
Source: Fill & Fill, 2005
57
APPENDIX C: Production strategy customized products HAVEP
Source: HAVEP, 2017
APPENDIX D: Distribution strategy HAVEP
Source: Luttikholt, 2017
Consument Zelfstand zonder personeel Midden- en Kleinbedrijf
Wasserijen PBM Web shop Retail
HAVEP
Groot Zakelijke Markt
Customized
Products
Standard collection
58
APPENDIX E: Interview guide
Interviews held with distributors of work clothing.
Introduction
This study examines the distribution strategies within the B2B market. Thereby focusing on the retail of work
wear. The research is conduct in the context of a master thesis (MSc Strategic Innovation Management). The
main objective of this research is to identify the different distribution channels used in the B2B and to analyze
the advantages and disadvantages these channels provide. Following, it analyzes if it is most profitable for a
B2B supplier to combine different channels (defined as a multi-channel strategy).
The main research question is:
What is the optimal distribution channel strategy within B2B markets?
Literature discusses the advantages and disadvantages of various distribution channels, however it focused on
the B2C context. The results of this research will shed light on the benefits and barriers of the different
channels for the B2B market. It goes into more detail about the individual channels and investigates the added
value of combining distribution channels.
To ensure guidance and structure within this interview, the interview is divided into three parts. The first set of
questions focus on the distribution channel(s) used by the distributor. The second and third part of the
interview concern the individual channel(s) selected and their advantages and disadvantages for the
distributor.
With your permission I would like to record this interviews. By doing so, I am able to transcribe the interview.
The written format will be sent for your verification within 48 hours after our interview. After this transcription
and verification, the audio recording will be deleted. Furthermore, your (company)name or position will never
be disclosed in such manner that the answers would not be traceable.
I hope everything is clear. If there are ambiguities now or later during the interview, please to not hesitate so I
can clarify the question.
Interview starts.
Interview questions
Deel 1
1. Maakt u naast het verkoopkanaal …….. nog gebruik van andere distributiekanalen/ U verkoopt via verschillende distributiekanalen waaronder een ….. en …… (afhankelijk van het geïnterviewde bedrijf) Maakt u gebruik van nog meer kanalen, zo ja welke
2. Waarom heeft u ervoor gekozen om via één kanaal te verkopen/ Waarom heeft u ervoor gekozen om meerdere kanalen te gebruiken
Wanneer geïnterviewde bedrijf meerdere distributiekanalen gebruikt:
3. Als u 100 punten mag verdelen, hoe zou u deze dan op basis van belangrijkheid over uw verschillende distributiekanalen verspreiden (meeste punten voor het kanaal dat financieel gezien het meeste opbrengt (= inkomsten -kosten))
59
In verband met de tijd toespitsen op 2 belangrijkste distributiekanaal genoemd door het geïnterviewde bedrijf in de vorige vraag Deel 2 Toespitsen op het belangrijkste distributiekanaal genoemd bij vraag 3:
4. Op een schaal van 1 tot 10 hoe tevreden bent u over het verkopen via …. (afhankelijk van vraag 3) en kunt u beredeneren waarom u dit cijfer geeft
5. Welke B2B klanten kopen via uw …. (afhankelijk van vraag 3)
6. Wat zijn de 3 belangrijkste beweegredenen/ voordelen voor u om via ….. (afhankelijk van vraag 3) te verkopen
• Hoe zou u over deze 3 voordelen de 100 punten verdelen
7. Wat zijn voor uw de 3 grootste beperkingen/ nadelen aan het werken met ….. (afhankelijk van vraag 3)
• Hoe zou u over deze 3 nadelen de 100 punten verdelen
8. Welke services kunt u uw B2B klanten aanbieden omdat u via …. (afhankelijk van vraag 3) verkoopt (bijv. persoonlijk advies/ aanbiedingen, personaliseren producten, producten direct beschikbaar/binnen 24uur geleverd, grootste keuze, laagste prijs)
9. Welke services kunt u uw B2B klanten niet aanbieden omdat u via ….. (afhankelijk van vraag 3) verkoopt
Deel 3 Toespitsen op het een na belangrijkste distributiekanaal genoemd bij vraag 3:
10. Op een schaal van 1 tot 10 hoe tevreden bent u over het verkopen via …. (afhankelijk van vraag 3) en kunt u beredeneren waarom u dit cijfer geeft.
11. Welke B2B klanten kopen via uw …. (afhankelijk van vraag 3)
12. Wat zijn de 3 belangrijkste beweegredenen/ voordelen voor u om via ….. (afhankelijk van vraag 3) te verkopen
• Hoe zou u over deze 3 voordelen de 100 punten verdelen
13. Wat zijn voor uw de 3 grootste beperkingen/ nadelen aan het werken met ….. (afhankelijk van vraag 3)
• Hoe zou u over deze 3 nadelen de 100 punten verdelen
14. Welke services kunt u uw B2B klanten aanbieden omdat u via …. (afhankelijk van vraag 3) verkoopt (bijv. persoonlijk advies/ aanbiedingen, personaliseren producten, producten direct beschikbaar/binnen 24uur geleverd, grootste keuze, laagste prijs)
15. Welke services kunt u uw B2B klanten niet aanbieden omdat u via ….. (afhankelijk van vraag 3) verkoopt.
Tot slot.
16. Kunt u kort beredeneren waarom u minder waarde hecht aan de distributiekana(a)l(en) ……, …… (afhankelijk van vraag 3)
Indien het geïnterviewde bedrijf geen gebruik maakt van bricks-and-mortar winkels/ web shop/ vertegenwoordigers
17. Wat zijn uw beweegredenen waarom u geen gebruik maakt van …….., …….. (afhankelijk van vraag 1)
60
APPENDIX F: Questionnaire
Enquête Beschermende Bedrijfskleding
Bedankt dat u deze enquête wilt invullen!
Het invullen van deze vragenlijst zal ongeveer 10 minuten van uw tijd in beslag nemen.
De gegevens zullen enkel geanonimiseerd verwerkt worden in de masterscriptie (MSc Strategic Innovation
Management) te Groningen. Dit onderzoek probeert de verschillende distributiekanalen die binnen de
Business-to-Business (B2B) markt gebruikt worden in kaart te brengen en daarbij de voor-en nadelen van deze
kanalen te definiëren.
Deze enquête gaat uitsluitend over het aanschaffen van bedrijfskleding (te weten: broeken, t-shirts, sweaters,
jassen, overalls). De enquête is als volgt opgebouwd: eerst (deel 1, 2 en 3) zullen er een aantal algemene
vragen gesteld worden betreffende het aanschaffen van bedrijfskleding. Vervolgens (deel 4) worden er een
aantal vragen gesteld specifiek gericht op de bedrijfskleding fabrikant ‘HAVEP’.
Maak uw antwoord duidelijk door middel van het juiste rondje in te kleuren.
Succes!
DEEL 1
Vraag 1: U bent een
0 Man
0 Vrouw
Vraag 2: Wat is uw leeftijd
………………… jaar
Vraag 3: Welke functie heeft u binnen uw bedrijf
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Vraag 4: In welke sector is uw bedrijf werkzaam
(één antwoord mogelijk)
0 Bouw 0 Metaal- en Machine industrie
0 Horeca en Catering 0 Milieu- en Recycling
0 Industrie 0 Petrochemie
0 Installatie en Maintenance 0 Transport- en Logistiek
0 Land- en Tuinbouw 0 Weg- en Waterbouw
0 Zorg 0 Anders, namelijk……
Vraag 5: Hoeveel werknemers zijn er werkzaam in uw bedrijf
61
………………….. werknemers
Vraag 6: Wat is het gemiddelde budget binnen uw bedrijf dat wordt uitgegeven aan bedrijfskleding voor een
werknemer per jaar?
€ ……………………………………
DEEL 2
De volgende vragen zullen gaan over de verschillende distributiekanalen/ verkoopkanalen waar u gebruik van
maakt voor het aanschaffen van bedrijfskleding.
Vraag 7: Van een totaal van 100%. Kunt u aangeven welk percentage van de bedrijfskleding u bij de
tussenhandelaar (bijv. groothandel) koopt en welke rechtstreeks bij de fabrikant
…………% De fabrikant
…………% De tussenhandelaar
Vraag 8: Indien u via de tussenhandelaar bedrijfskleding aanschaft, van welke verkoopkana(a)l(en) maakt u
dan gebruik
(meerdere antwoorden mogelijk)
0 Winkel 0 Website
0 Vertegenwoordiger 0 Catalogus
0 Niet Van Toepassing 0 Anders, namelijk…….
Vraag 9: In vraag 8 heeft u aangegeven op welke wijze u bedrijfskleding aanschaft. Op een schaal van 100%,
kunt u aangeven welk percentage van de bedrijfskleding u via welk verkoopkanaal koopt
(Hoogste percentage voor het verkoopkanaal waarvan u het vaakst gebruik maakt om bedrijfskleding aan te
schaffen)
………..% Winkel ………..% Website
………..% Vertegenwoordiger ...……..% Catalogus
……….. % Anders, namelijk………
Het verkoopkanaal wat u bij deze vraag de hoogste percentage heeft gegeven zal verder gebruikt worden voor
het beantwoorden van vraag 10
DEEL 3
In dit deel van de enquête worden u een aantal stellingen voorgelegd. U wordt gevraagd om aan te geven in
welke mate de stelling voor u van toepassing is. Er zijn telkens 6 mogelijkheden. Voor een juist onderzoek is het
van belang dat u iedere stelling voorziet van één antwoord. Maak uw antwoord duidelijk door middel van het
juiste rondje in te kleuren.
Vraag 10: De volgende stellingen hebben betrekking op het verkoopkanaal dat het hoogste percentage heeft
ontvangen bij vraag 9. Indien meerdere verkoopkanalen gelijke score hebben, noteer dan hier het gekozen
verkoopkanaal: ..…………………………………………………..
Het is de bedoeling dat u bij iedere stelling, voor dit verkoopkanaal, aangeeft in welke mate u het eens of
oneens bent met de stelling of dat de stelling niet van toepassing (nvt) voor u is.
62
Helemaal mee
oneens
Mee oneens
Neutraal Mee eens
Helemaal mee eens
NVT
1. Ik koop bedrijfskleding via dit verkoop-kanaal omdat ik goede ervaringen hiermee heb uit het verleden
O O O O O O
2. Ik beschouw dit verkoopkanaal als betrouwbaar
O O O O O O
3. Ik koop bedrijfskleding via dit verkoop-kanaal omdat ik de producten graag vooraf wil zien/passen
O O O O O O
4. Ik vind persoonlijk contact belangrijk O O O O O O
5. Ik vind goed advies belangrijk O O O O O O
6. Ik vind het fijn als er met mij of mijn bedrijf wordt meegedacht
O O O O O O
7. Ik wil graag persoonlijke aanbiedingen ontvangen
O O O O O O
8. Uitgebreide informatie over de producten vind ik belangrijk
O O O O O O
9. Ik vind een ruim assortiment in bedrijfs- kleding belangrijk (kleur/maat)
O O O O O O
10. Ik wil kunnen kiezen tussen verschillende aanbieders van bedrijfskleding
O O O O O O
11. Ik vind het belangrijk dat ik 24/7 producten kan aanschaffen
O O O O O O
12. Direct leverbaar vind ik belangrijk O O O O O O
13. Ik vind het belangrijk dat als ik bedrijfskleding bestel, ik deze binnen 24uur in huis heb
O O O O O O
14. Ik wil niet geografisch aan een locatie gebonden zijn voor het kopen van bedrijfs-kleding
O O O O O O
15. Ik zoek altijd naar de laagste prijs O O O O O O
16. Ik vind het niet erg als ik verzendkosten moet betalen
O O O O O O
17. Ik vind het belangrijk dat ik bij een grote bestelling korting op de eindprijs krijg
O O O O O O
DEEL 4
De volgende vragen zijn specifiek gericht op de bedrijfskleding fabrikant ‘HAVEP’. Houdt daarom bij het
beantwoorden van deze vragen (de bedrijfskleding van) HAVEP in uw achterhoofd.
Vraag 11: Wordt er op dit moment in uw bedrijf de bedrijfskleding van HAVEP gedragen?
0 Ja
Indien uw antwoord ja is, ga door naar vraag 12
0 Nee
Indien uw antwoord nee is, ga door naar vraag 16
63
Vraag 12: Hoeveel procent van uw bedrijfskleding bestaat uit producten van HAVEP?
…………..%
Vraag 13: Voor het aanschaffen van de bedrijfskleding van HAVEP, gaat u voornamelijk naar:
(Eén antwoord mogelijk)
0 HAVEP zelf
0 De tussenhandelaar: een technische groothandel
0 De tussenhandelaar: een PBM specialist
0 Retail winkel (bijv. Praxis)
Vraag 14: Indien u via de tussenhandelaar de bedrijfskleding van HAVEP aanschaft, kunt u aangeven op
een totaal van 100% welk percentage van de bedrijfskleding van HAVEP u via welk verkoopkanaal
(Hoogste percentage voor het kanaal waarvan u het vaakst gebruik maakt om bedrijfskleding aan te schaffen)
………..% Winkel ………..% Website
………..% Vertegenwoordiger ...……..% Catalogus
0 Niet Van Toepassing ………..% Anders, namelijk………
Vraag 15: Deze vraag bestaat uit een aantal stellingen die betrekking hebben op (de aanschaf van
bedrijfskleding van) HAVEP. Het is de bedoeling dat u bij ieder stelling aangeeft in welke mate u het eens of
oneens bent met de stelling of dat de stelling voor u niet van toepassing (nvt) is. Er zijn telkens 6
mogelijkheden. Maak uw antwoord duidelijk door middel van het juiste rondje in te kleuren.
Helemaal mee
oneens
Mee oneens
Neutraal Mee eens
Helemaal mee eens
NVT
De kwaliteit van de bedrijfskleding geproduceerd door HAVEP is goed
O O O O O O
De prijzen van de producten van HAVEP zijn hoog
O O O O O O
Ik vind de prijs/kwaliteit voor de producten van HAVEP goed
O O O O O O
De werknemers van HAVEP beschikken over voldoende productkennis en product-deskundigheid
O O O O O O
Indien ik een probleem met de kledingstuk(ken) heb, levert HAVEP altijd goede service
O O O O O O
Het assortiment van HAVEP is uitgebreid O O O O O O
Ik wil 24/7 de producten van HAVEP kunnen bestellen
O O O O O O
Ik vind het belangrijk dat HAVEP de bestellingen binnen 24 uur levert
O O O O O O
HAVEP levert altijd de juiste producten die ik heb besteld
O O O O O O
Ik zou het prettig vinden als een vertegenwoordiger van HAVEP minimaal 2 keer per jaar bij mij langs komt
O O O O O O
Ik zou het prettig vinden als er een winkel van HAVEP binnen een straal van 50 km bij mij vandaan zit
O O O O O O
64
Ik zou het prettig vinden als HAVEP een web shop heeft
O O O O O O
U bent nu aan het einde gekomen van deze enquête.
Hartelijk bedankt voor u medewerking!
Vraag 16: Bent u wel bekend met het bedrijfskleding merk HAVEP?
0 Ja
Indien uw antwoord ja is, ga door naar vraag 17
0 Nee
Indien uw antwoord nee is, dan bent u aan het einde gekomen van deze enquête.
Hartelijk bedankt voor u medewerking!
Vraag 17: Heeft u in het verleden bedrijfskleding van HAVEP gekocht?
0 Ja
Indien uw antwoord ja is, ga door naar vraag 18
0 Nee
Indien uw antwoord nee is, dan bent u aan het einde gekomen van deze enquête.
Hartelijk bedankt voor u medewerking!
Vraag 18: Waarom maakt u op dit moment geen gebruik van de bedrijfskleding van HAVEP?
0 De kwaliteit van de producten van HAVEP is niet goed genoeg
0 HAVEP’s assortiment in bedrijfskleding is niet divers genoeg
0 HAVEP hanteert te hoge prijzen voor de producten
0 HAVEP houdt zich niet aan de beloofde leveringsprocedure
0 Anders, namelijk…….
U bent nu aan het einde gekomen van deze enquête.
Hartelijk bedankt voor u medewerking!
65
APPENDIX G: Codebooks
Table 1: Codebook general
Item Original Statement English Statement
Experience Ik koop bedrijfskleding via dit verkoopkanaal omdat ik goede ervaringen hiermee heb uit het verleden
I buy my work clothing via this distribution channel because I have good experiences from the past
Reliable Ik beschouw dit verkoopkanaal als betrouwbaar
I consider this distribution channel as reliable
Touch and try Ik koop bedrijfskleding via dit verkoopkanaal omdat ik de producten graag vooraf wil zien/passen
I buy my work clothing via this distribution channel because I want to see and try before I buy
Contact Ik vind persoonlijk contact belangrijk I value personal contact
Advice Ik vind goed advies belangrijk I value proper advice
Thinking along Ik vind het fijn als er met mij of mijn bedrijf wordt meegedacht
I appreciate it if someone thing along with me or my compnay
Offers Ik wil graag persoonlijke aanbiedingen ontvangen
I would like to receive personal offers
Information Uitgebreide informatie over de producten vind ik belangrijk
I value extensive product information
Assortment Ik vind een ruim assortiment in bedrijfs- kleding belangrijk (kleur/maat)
I value an extensive range of work clothing (color/size)
Choice Ik wil kunnen kiezen tussen verschillende aanbieders van bedrijfskleding
I would like to have the option to choice between different suppliers of work clothing
24/7 Ik vind het belangrijk dat ik 24/7 producten kan aanschaffen
It is important to me that I am able to buy products 24/7
Immediately available
Direct leverbaar vind ik belangrijk It is important to me that the product is immediately available
24 hours Ik vind het belangrijk dat als ik bedrijfskleding bestel, ik deze binnen 24uur in huis heb
When I order work clothing I found it important that the products are delivered within 24 hours
Location Ik wil niet geografisch aan een locatie gebonden zijn voor het kopen van bedrijfskleding
When I buy work clothing I do not want to be restricted to one geographical location
Price Ik zoek altijd naar de laagste prijs I always search for the lowest price
Shipping costs Ik vind het niet erg als ik verzendkosten moet betalen
I do not mind paying shipping costs
Discount Ik vind het belangrijk dat ik bij een grote bestelling korting op de eindprijs krijg
I value a discount when I place a large order
Table 2: Codebook HAVEP
Item Original Statement English Statement
Quality De kwaliteit van de bedrijfskleding geproduceerd door HAVEP is goed
The work clothing produced by HAVEP is of good quality
Prices De prijzen van de producten van HAVEP zijn hoog
The prices of the products of HAVEP are high
Quality/Price Ik vind de prijs/kwaliteit voor de producten van HAVEP goed
The price/quality ratio of HAVEP’s products is sufficient
Employees HAVEP De werknemers van HAVEP beschikken over voldoende productkennis en product-deskundigheid
The employees of HAVEP have appropriate knowledge and expertise about their products
66
Problem solving Indien ik een probleem met de kledingstuk(ken) heb, levert HAVEP altijd goede service
HAVEP provides always a high level of service when I have a problem with one or more products
Assortment Het assortiment van HAVEP is uitgebreid HAVEP has an extended assortment of products
24 hours Ik vind het belangrijk dat HAVEP de bestellingen binnen 24 uur levert
For me it is important that HAVEP delivers my order within 24 hours
Delivery HAVEP levert altijd de juiste producten die ik heb besteld
HAVEP always delivers the right products I ordered
Sales representatives HAEP
Ik zou het prettig vinden als een vertegenwoordiger van HAVEP minimaal 2 keer per jaar bij mij langs komt
I would appreciate it if a sales representative of HAVEP visits me twice a year
Retail store HAVEP Ik zou het prettig vinden als er een winkel van HAVEP binnen een straal van 50 km bij mij vandaan zit
I would appreciate a HAVEP store within a range of 50 km from my company
Web shop HAVEP Ik zou het prettig vinden als HAVEP een web shop heeft
I would appreciate it if HAVEP had it own web shop
67
APPENDIX H: Overview advantages & disadvantages interviews
Table 1: Sales representatives
Motive Sample Relevant for
Mentioned by company
Advantage Direct/ personal contact
“De klant heeft rechtstreeks contact met onze vertegenwoordiger en kan zijn wensen kenbaar maken” (Company A) “Je hebt natuurlijk veel contact met hun”(Company J)
Customer & Supplier
A, B, F, H, J
Close to the market
Customer & Supplier
B
Customer loyalty
“De klanten waar ook kleding voor bedrukt wordt, heb ik dan de logo’s van liggen. Dat is ook een stukje klantenbinding” (Company H)
Supplier B, E, H
Knowledge about the company
“De buitendienst komt bij de mensen op de vloer en ze hebben meteen in de gaten wat er speelt” (Company A)
Supplier A, E
Ability to adopt to change
“Dus je kan heel snel schakelen met de klant” (Company H)
Customer & Supplier
B, H
Proper advice Customer B, H
Knowledge transfer
“Informeren en adviseren. Dat is heel belangrijk” (Company B)
Customer B, J
Company visits
“Wij komen naar de klant toe, en de klant hoeft dus niet naar ons toe te komen. Dus ja eigenlijk bedienen we hem op zijn wenken” (Company A) “Of ik verzamel wat ze nodig hebben en dan ga ik naar de klanten toe” (Company H)
Customer A, B, F, H, J
Financial deals “Er zal sneller korting verleend worden” (Company B)
Customer A, B, F
Approach new customers
“We hebben 2 vertegenwoordigers om de markten te bewerken. Dus iedereen die nog geen klant van ons is, die moet wel met ons kennis maken” (Company F)
Supplier F,H, J
Disadvantage Not able to visit all customers
“Heeft niet de mogelijkheid om vertegenwoordigers bij al die kleine bedrijfjes langs te sturen” (Company A)
Supplier A
Time consuming
“Onderhouden van contacten kost veel tijd” (Company H)
Supplier H, J
High costs “Nouja dat is dan wel een stukje kosten overweging. Buitendienst rijdt auto, verbruikt benzine, verdient ook wat in de maand” (Company B)
Supplier A, B, D
Limited products offered
“Die heeft altijd maar een beperkt gedeelte bij zich” (Company A)
Customer A
Terms of payment
“Niet iedereen houdt zich aan de betalingstermijnen van 30 dagen, dus moet je weer nabellen”(Company H)
Supplier
H
68
Table 2: Retail store
Motive Sample Relevant for
Mentioned by company
Advantage Direct/ personal contact
“Je hebt persoonlijk contact met de klanten” (Company I)
Customer & Supplier
A, C, D, F, H, I
Proper advice “Want we denken daar, met onze expertise iets in kunnen bijdragen” (Company F)
Customer C, E, F
Customer loyalty “Klantenbinding, met name voor de PBM” (Company E)
Supplier E
Touch and try possibility
“De klant kan bij ons gewoon passen en voelen en zien” (Company A)
Customer A, C, E, F, H, I
Experience
“Proberen we ze hier zo goed mogelijk te ontvangen in de winkel een kopje koffie erbij, iemand die ze te woord staat, iemand die ze helpt” (Company A) “Dat hebben we ook in de winkel gestopt denk ik, beleving” (Company F)
Customer A, D, F, J
Products direct available
“En het direct hebben he. Ze hebben het, betalen het en kunnen het mee naar huis nemen” (Company I)
Customer H, I
Low return rates “Daardoor hebben we weinig retouren” (Company F)
Supplier F, H
Additional sales “Dus bijverkoop is belangrijk” (Company E)
Supplier E
Disadvantage Need personnel in the store
“Wat een nadeel is bijvoorbeeld voor mezelf, hier moet eigenlijk altijd iemand staan” (Company H)
Supplier D, H
Customer must visit the store
“Dus gaan ze na een week of iets langer moeten terugkomen om hun bestelling op te halen” (Company I)
Customer A, I
High costs: 1. Time 2. Personnel 3. Building(s) 4. Maintenance 5. Inventory
“Het kost meer tijd” (Company C) “Het is kostelijk. Om de ruimte te huren of aan te kopen. Het personeel dat erop staat dat je moet betalen” (Company I) “Nou je moet het wel onderhouden. En ook daar gaat veel geld inzitten” (Company J)
Supplier C, D A, E, F, I H, I A, I, J B, E, H
Always stock products needed
“Je moet veel voorraad hierin hebben hangen” (Company F)
Supplier D, E, F
Not all products always in stock
“Je kan niet alles op voorraad hebben, dat gaat niet” (Company H)
Customer
C, E, F, H, I
Decoration stores “De presentatie van een showroom is altijd lastig” (Company E)
Supplier E
Waiting times “De wachttijd. Het kan hier af en toe heel druk zijn” (Company E)
Supplier E
69
Table 3: Web shop
Motive Sample Relevant for
Mentioned by company
Advantage Efficiency “Dat je in beperkte tijd je werk kan doen eigenlijk” (Company D) “De handeling. Je hebt veel minder handeling want je laat de klant het werk doen” (Company E)
Supplier D, F, J
Convenience (re)order
“Nee voor ons is het vooral erg gemakkelijk. Dus we worden niet meer gebeld. Er wordt gewoon besteld” (Company F) ”Van hun ervaar ik is dat het gewoon makkelijk is en voor mij is het makkelijk te sturen” (Company C)
Customer & Supplier
A, C, D, E, F, G, H, J
Large customer reach
“Klantenbereik is ook veel groter”(Company H)
Supplier C, G, H
Faster “Dus eigenlijk is de web shop gewoon sneller” (Company C)
Customer & Supplier
C, G
Cheaper “Wij bieden A merken tegen B prijzen” (Company G)
Customer D, G
Easy to establish “Ja uiteraard, als je maar iemand hebt die de web shop voor je bouwt dan is het vrij goed te doen” (Company D)
Supplier G, D
Fysically not heavy
Supplier C, G
Lot of information
“Je ziet gelijk wat er mogelijk is. Alles staat erin omschreven. De kwalificaties van de kleding staan er vaak bij” (Company G)
Customer G
Not restricted to a location
“In feite kunnen wij ons werk overal vandaan doen” (Company D)
Customer & Supplier
D
Always and everywhere able to offer/ order
“Voordeel van internet is dat natuurlijk wel 24 uur per dag, 7 dagen in de week bereikbaar bent” (Company D)
Customer A, C, D
No personnel needed
“Je kan het allemaal zelf doen. Je hebt er geen extra mensen bij nodig” (Company G)
Supplier G
Everything digital
“Ik heb geen opslag, ik heb geen kosten, ik hoef niet om te kijken. Ik hoef niet te balanceren. Niks te tellen. Wat ik in mijn scherm heb dat heb ik en zodra het uit voorraad raakt krijg ik een seintje” (Company G)
Supplier G, J
Disadvantage Constant investments required
“ Die moet onderhouden worden met plaatjes en de juiste informatie. Dat kost geld” (Company B) “Maar een website moet je echt actief achteraan gaan want men verwacht dat je web shop up to date is” (Company A)
Supplier D, I, J
Technical problems
“Stabiliteit is een nadeel. Als een koppeling uitvalt tussen het uploaden naar de web shop dan heb je geen prijzen meer, je hebt geen klanten meer” (Company E) “Nou een fout is echt zomaar gemaakt” (Company J)
Supplier B, E, F, J
70
Time consuming
“De administratieve handeling is toch wel heel groot, als je het er nog is bij moet doen” (Company I)
Supplier F, A, I
Complicated “Dus alles wat besteld wordt moeten wij eerst bestellen bij de leverancier, bij de fabrikant en dan duurt het 2 of 3 dagen voordat die hier is” (Company D)
Customer D, H, J
No customer loyalty
“Ik heb geen binding met je, Nu koop je bij mij en de volgende keer ga je google en dan zie je bij Pietje is die 5 euro goedkoper” (Company H)
Supplier E, H
Smaller orders “Ze bestellen ook kleinere bedragen. Ja ik denk dat ze gemiddelde orderwaarde is tussen de 120-150 euro zon’n beetje” (Company H)
Supplier H
No personal contact
“ Vaak weet ik niet wie de spullen kopen. Dat gaat allemaal digitaal” (Company G)
Supplier C, D, F, G, H, J
Not able to touch or try
“En bij de web shop, ja je kunt niet van tevoren passen” (Company C)
Customer A, C, D, G
Many returns “Je hebt veel te maken met retour natuurlijk” (Company D)
Customer & Supplier
C, D, E, F, H, J
71
APPENDIX I: Overview findings sample group HAVEP
Table 1: Number of channels used
Responses # Distribution Channel
Frequency Percent
1 79 76.7% 2 19 18.4% 3 5 4.9%
Total 103 100.0%
Table 2: Selected distribution channels when one
distribution channel used
Responses Distribution Channel
Frequency Percent
Retail Store 72 91.1% Sales Representatives 4 5.1% Website 2 2.5% Catalogues 1 1.3% Others - -
Total 79 100.0%
Table 3: Selected distribution channels when multiple
distribution channels used
Responses Distribution Channel
Frequency Percent
Retail Store 95 72.5% Sales Representatives 15 11.5% Website 13 9.9% Catalogues 8 6.15 Others - -
Total 131 100.0%
Table 4: Results Motive (N=103)
Item Average Std. Deviation
Quality 4.2 0.825 Prices 3.1 0.848 Price/quality 4.0 0.772 Employees HAVEP 4.0 0.874 Problem solving 4.2 1.198 Assortment 4.0 0.838 24 hours 3.6 1.297 Delivery 4.4 1.012 Sales representatives HAVEP 2.9 1.823 Retail store HAVEP 4.3 1.069 Web shop HAVEP 3.9 1.198
![Which Media Channels do Smart B2B Marketers Use to Drive Leads? [INFOGRAPHIC]](https://img.pdfslide.us/doc/110x75/58a287a01a28ab891a8b74cd/which-media-channels-do-smart-b2b-marketers-use-to-drive-leads-infographic.jpg)
