THE SINGLE EUROPEAN GKOCEKY MARKE’I

The Single European Grocery Market Prospects for a Channel Crossing KEITH THOMPSON, Silsoe College, Cranfield Institute of Techwlog_y, I/K; SIMON KNOX, Cranfield School of Munagement, UK

This paper explores the r6les of the Single European Market and converging European consumer lifestyles as change agents in grocery retailing.

Porter’s structural analysis is used as a framework to analyse the intensification of competition which Keith Thompson and Simon Knox believe will result from entry into the UK of large, internationally competent rivals from continental Europe.

Their research indicates that UK grocers have no apparent intention of competing in the post-1992 European market and conclude that this is likely to result in them being ‘stuck in the middle’ and almost certainly eclipsed by their European rivals.

They argue that UK retailers cannot avoid the challenge of mainland Europe if they are to remain competitive. Finally they highlight the structural changes which British firms must take into account in order to capitalise upon their competitive advantages.

Introduction .4ccording to the thesis proposed by Levitt, ‘ com- panies which do not adapt to the new global realities will

become the victims of those which do and subsequentI)

prosper‘.’ Whilst Levitt may be overstating the case for

globalization, the enactment of some three hundred

articles to remove all non-tariff trade barriers intended

to create a Single European Market (SEM) by the end of

1992, makes ‘Europcanizdtion’ ;I reality for British industry.

The European market is even bigger in population

than the tkvo leading world commercial powers of the

1’SA and Japan. Ifowever, the economy of Europe has

been held back by the historical fragmentation of the

market into smaller national markets (Figure 1). The

purpose of the SEM will be to encourage firms to take

ad\,antagc of the enlarged market of 32Om people so that

improved economies of scale can drive up producti\,it>,

2nd reduce costs.

As the benefits of the SEM become clearer for

manufacturing industry, the question arises as to whether

the same opportunity exists for service industries such

as food retailing. Van der Ster argues that food choice

is simply too nationalistic in character for the export or

import of store concepts to be successful in the short

term.’ IIc concludes that it may bc the twenty-first

century before wc c:m anticip:ite the emergence of :i

‘Euro-lifestyle’ leading eventually to the development of

panEuropcm store concepts.

Though Van der Ster’s view may seem appealing

and logical to marketing theorists. the reality of the

market is somewhat different.

Many large grocery retailers from France, German\,

and the Benelux countries alread!, have an impressive record of cross-border operations within Europe (Table

1). Thee continental retailers, driven by saturation in

their national market and static (or declining) population

levels, are planning further expansion within the SEM.

The high margins enjoyed by IIK retailers provide ;1

l:I~KOPEAN MANAGEMENT JOIIRN.41, \‘oI 9 No 1 March I991 65

THE SINGLE EUROPEAN GROCERY MAKKET

SEM 325m

Population Gross Domestic Product (millions) (billions of dollars)

Source: OECD’

USA SEM 4818bn

Figure 1 GDP and Population of the World’s Leading Commercial Powers, 1988

tempting prospect for grocery retailers from mainland

Europe.’ Aldi, one of Europe’s largest retailers, has

already set up operations in the IIK. This privately owned

West German discount grocer has managed to undercut

almost every competitor in every country it has entered

in Europe.’

It would seem that none of the top British grocery

retailers have any shops in continental Europe. However,

Marks & Spencer does sell food in some of its overseas

stores. Furthermore, Killen and Lees found that UK food

retailers have little or no intention of expanding into

continental Europe in the foreseeable future.‘

Reluctance to enter the European market was con-

firmed by Tesco’s Chairman, Sir Ian Maclaurin. In

denying rumours of a European takeover bid for French

grocers Genty Cathiard he stated, ‘Our research shows

that there are still enormous opportunities for growth

within the LJnited Kingdom and we intend to continue

our development here with the greatest vigour’.’

Sainshury, the largest IIK grocery retailer, has only one

ovcrsc’as subsidiary and that is in the USA. In a recent

comn7unication, Sainsbury stated, ‘The company chose

the LJSA for overseas expansion rather than extending

its operations into other European countries and has no

plans to alter this policy’.” Thus, the major British

grocery retailers reject the idea of expansion into Europe.

l‘heir prcferrcd choice for overseas expansion remains

the IJSA; ;I difficult market in which IIKUI~ British retailers

have failed to succeed.“’

Grocery retailing in Europe is about to undergo

more dramatic changes than at any time in the last 25

years. At the very least, the balance of power between

grocery buyers and food manufacturers must again be

brought into question, particularly if manufacturers are

quick to take advantage of the SEM to create pan-

Table 1 Selected European Representation of Major EC Grocery Retailers

Benelux France Italy Spain/ West UK Portugal Germany

Benelux

Delhaize

GB-lnno-BM

West Germany

Aldi

Tengelmann

UK

Legend:

National Base. Representation outside national base.

Source: Adapted from Debenham Tewson & Chinnocks.”

EI’ROPEAN MANAGI<hl.I~N’l’ IOIIRNAL. 1’01 ‘1 No 1 March 1991

THE SINGLE EUROPEAN GROCERY MARKET

7.5

O/O Net 7.0

margin 6.5 (3-year average) EL’

5.5

5.0

;5* ‘i k

I I I \

‘I *;i

‘\ !’ \ I/ “,,4 ,I’

‘\.._.__-*’ .’

3

6 8 10 12 14

% Market share

Legend: 1 = Sainsbury; 2 = Tesco; 3 = Gateway; 4 = Argyll; 5 = Asda

*Adjusted for anticipated drop of 25% in profit in half-year report.

Source: Company reports and Retail Business.‘4 J

Figure 2 Structure of UK Grocery Retailing, 1989

European firms. At the same time, UK grocery retailers are likely to be chaflenged on their home ground by their European peers.

The purpose of our paper is to explore the effects :,f changes which stem from the SEM in relation to European food retailing. Our strategic analysis has been focused primarily upon the prospects within the UK for European retailers.

UK Grocery Multiples and Europe Viewed in isolation from Europe, it can be seen (Figure 2) that the major UK grocery multiples currently conform

Table 2 Turnover of the Major European Grocery Retailers, 1987188

Organization Turnover (f OOOm) 1987/88

Country

Tengelmann 10.0 W. Germany

Spar lnternationale 9.0 -

Rewe Buying Group a.4 W. Germany Edeka Buying Group 7.1 W. Germany Leclerc 6.6 France Albrecht (Aldi) 6.4 W. Germany Carrefour 5.7 France Rewe-~iebbrand 5.0 W. Germany Dee Corp. (Gateway) 4.8 UK

Sainsbury 4.8 UK Marks & Spencer 4.6 UK Tesco 4.1 UK lntermarche 3.8 France Promodes 3.5 France Ahold 3.5 Netherlands Casino 3.5 France Argyll 3.2 UK Asko 3.1 W. Germanv

Source: Dawson, J.A. and Burt, ST4

to Porter’s view of market structures, displaying a U- shaped reIatio~lship between net margin and market share, with both the very large companies and the niche firms sustaining higher profits.” However, as part of a much larger European market structure, the lJK’s biggest grocery retailers may become only middle-ranking players since they are considerably smaller in turnover than several of their continental rivals (Table 2). Thus, by confining themselves to only one sixth of the total market, the possibility of 1JK grocers becoming major players in Europe is simply unrealistic. As the new order emerges and the established competitive Structures in the UK disintegrate, UK grocery retailers could become ‘stuck in the middle’ or, at best, niche marketers relying upon a defence of their geog~phi~l segment within the European market to bring the rewards of a focused strategy. However, given the experienced internationai- ism of some of their European rivals and the progressive convergence of lifestyles throughout Europe, perhaps cvcn that defence is a forlorn hope.‘), Is

The SEM will facilitate a greater European retail presence in the UK and will ultimately result in a Europe- wide retail grocery market in which British retailers will have had 11.0 choice but to compete. But when it hap- pens, wiIl the tiK’s major grocers be looking the other way -- across the Atlantic?

In the next section, we atlalyse the changes in market structure which are likely to occur in I!K grocery retailing as a result of the SEM.

The Framework of Analysis Porter’s Structural Framework (shown in Figure 3) offers a suitable vehicle for the analysis of change ;IS the llK becomes part of a unified European market. In carrying out such an analysis, we believe that two structural changes emerge as being particularly important in the grocery market: the threat of new entrants into the UK, and an int~nsifi~ati~~il of rivalry. Consequently, these factors are considered in more detail,

The Threat of New Entrants

Government Policy As this paper is concerned with the consequences of the SEM for what might be termed the IJK segment of the European food retail market, it is government policy (aimed specifically at removing entry barriers across European markets) which is the principal change agent. The SEM will open up UK grocery retailing to experi- enced market entrants from continental Europe. These retailers are large enough not only to overcome the harriers of scale but, because they exhibit a diversity in objectives and style, they also threaten to significantly change the ‘rules of the game’ in the UK.

‘The fact that foreign investment is welcomed by the British government is in marked contrast to the protective attitudes displayed by other European countries such as West Germany. Foreign takeovers would be much easier to orchestrate in the i_JK than in many other EEC countries, rendering UK grocery

ElJROPEAN ,~ANAGEMENT JOURNAL Vol 9 No 1 March 1991

Threat of substitute retail services

Threat from European retailers

UK GROCERY COMPETITORS

0 Rivalry among

existing retailers

r-- _------ 1 i

SUBSTITUTES I

1________1

Source: Adapted from Porter.”

Figure 3 Porter’s Structural Framework

retailas much more rulnerdde than their European counterparts. At the local government ievcl, the attitude to\;l-ads planning controls is much freer in the L’K in crtnq~arison with procedures in many ~~)iititl~tl~~l countries. Ii’

7%~ response by t:K grotcry multiples to rhe tlomcstic European threat h:ts been mainly defeensivc. FirstI!,. they have attempted to occupy the high ground in ~hc UK Lvith the best sites and, secondly. they arc exploring the possibilities of forming buying groups in Europe in order to balance 311 increase in supplier size and t-w-gaining power. This hardly seems ;tn adequate rcsponsc to the prospect of a market which will expand

sixfold in popdation and result in Europctn market shztrcs cffcctiwly one-sixth the lcvcl currently enjoyed in the t!K.

Economies of Scale While acknowledging that cntry barriers for aspiring growry retailers are generally low. IIuke points out that ~:11e barriers are implicit in the nred for new cntr;lnts to attain competitiveness by acquiring a degree of monopsonisttc power similar to that t3ijoyed b>r incumbent rivals.‘- The busing power of major multiples enables them to obtain favour;tbte prices lvhich their small~t- rivals have no chance of matching, This

Bargaining power of r ---- 7 consumers

! BUYERS I I

L_-__A

advantage enables the largrst grocery retailers to increase their customer base by offering lover I>rices leading to :I cycle of ~on~~ntt-~tiorl at the cxperisc of sm:tll-sc;tlc competitors (Figure t).

Therefore, to pin enough bargaining power to be compditive in the I;K. European entrants will need to wpirc ;I large number of scarce, expcnsiw large-store sites. Furthermore, they must achieve it in a short time span, in competition with existing LIK retklers who are already reporting major difficulties in finding suitable sites “’ Possibly, the onlv way for ;I newcomer with ., adequate capital to ;tcquire a sufficicnl number of good sites is by raking over m existing rct;tiler. However.

companies which arc available for acquisition arc often

only available because the)- a-e flawccl. Gateway, which

;tchirvcd third place in the market by 19X6. is a cast in

point. Ilnablc to cfficicntly intcgratc the disparate

;tssorttnent of stores and sites which it had acquired the

cornp:tny’s perfortn2nce rtmainecl so far below par that

eventually Gateway itself was acquired blr Isosceles last

!ctr (see Figure 2 above).

An alternative strategy for retailers, in their drive to attain ectmoniies of scale and motiopsonistic power,

is the formation of European buying groups. The founding ctf the European Retail Association in 1980 by

Argyll of the UK, Casino of Frmcc and Ah&i of The

Ncthcrlancfs is ;t good canplc of this. The combincd

THE SINGLE E~IROI’EAN GROCERY MARKE’I

Dispropo~ionately large discounts Lower prices: from manufacturers increased

Growing strength of

/’ - y traffic

majo; distributors

and independents increase in share

Source: McKinsey & Co.”

J Above average profitability to high turnover

Funding of expansion into cost efficient outlets

Figure 4 The Cycle of Retail Concentration

turnover of the three members of this association is even greater than the existing buying groups which are such an important feature of European markets (Table 3).

If the SEM makes it easier for producers co move goods across frontiers, it will also be easier for retailers to buy the goods and then move them across frontiers. Buying groups across Europe may operate within the same pan-European market and still not be in direct competition with one another. In such cases it would be feasible for buying groups to co-operate with similar groups in ‘paralleling’ their sources of supply whereby one buying group buys, not only for its own group members, but also on behalf of a second buying group. Scale economies would not then be confined to the crude use of buying power, but would be big enough to tempt producers into co-operating by offering the prospect of even greater production scale economies as well as entry into new markets.

Access to Distribution Channels Continental retailers looking at the LJK market may be discouraged to see that their rivals have achieved a very high degree of control over the distribution network. Some 70% of the sales volume of the UK’s top seven grocery multiples passes through consolidation ware- houses and distribution services under their direct

rable 3 Comparison of the Turnover of European Grocery Buying Groups vs The European Retail Association

Turnover 187/88

European Retail Association:

Ahold 3.5

Argyll 3.2

Casino 3.5

ERA total

Spar International

Rewe Buying Group

Edeka Buying Group

Source: Dawson, J.A. and Burt, 5.”

control, frequently through the use of captive suh- contractors using vehicles painted in the grocer’s livery. By comparison, the contract fleet’s share in France and Germany is 14% and only 3% in Spain.‘” ffowever. deregulation in transport and the completion of the channel tunnel may render the notion of domestic captive-warehousing obsolete for pan-European retailers and, therefore, no longer a harrier to entry into the IJK market.

Intensity of Rivalry Self-service grocery retailing in the UK is a mature industry with a relatively high degree of concentration. The pecking order of major competitors is well estah- &shed so that even though competition is often intense it is also orderly. This has resulted in a confident and profitable industry by any international standard.

Slow Industry Growth The major UK food retailers have achieved considerable growth in recent years hut, since expenditure on food has been static, this growth has been at the expense of smaller rivals (Table 4). Growth is currently based upon the development of superstores mainly on out-of-totvn sites but industry experts believe that the limit to supcr- store growth will be reached by IW4/96.2~ A more recent survey by Verdict Research concludes that this date may be optimistic as the current downturn in I:K retail spending has accelerated the pace of retailing saturation.” In a static and saturatud food market, the only way for major grocery retailers to grow will he to take market share from each other. IIK supermarket operators will become much more vulnerable, not just because of increasing rivalry in a stagnant market hut also as a result of the entry threat of large. l~rofessiol~~~l, foreign rivals. These new entrants will already bc experienced in operating outside their domestic markets and will be fully conversant with the factors which arc necessary for international operations.

Shifting Rivalry Since continental retailers are accustomed to margins which are only a fraction of those in the IJK (Table 5) they are unlikely to be deterred by the threat to margins ~dcing UK retailers as a result of intensified competition. As mentioned earfier, Aldi has already opened its first five stores in Britain. More may follow very soon. After all, the purpose of opening up European markets is to increase competition and the lJK market appears to offer considerable benefits to French, German, and Benelux retailers. ’ According to research conducted by MORI, nearly half (forty-six percent) of the estate agents in the LJK were negotiating with European retailers for high Street sites.25 L L

Diverse Competitors As Porter points out, ‘Foreign competitors often add a great deal of diversity to industries because of their

EUROPEAN ~fANAGEMENT JOURNAL Vol 9 No I March 1991 69

‘I-HE S1NC;I.E ELJROPEAN GROCERY MARKE’I

Table 4 UK Food Sales by Sector 1980-88 (Unit % value analysis)

1980 1982 1984 1986 1988

Large grocers 40.8 46.5 51.3 55.1 59.0 Small grocers 18.2 16.1 12.6 11.4 10.5 Co-operatives 16.9 14.9 13.9 12.9 11.8

Others 24.1 22.5 22.2 20.6 18.7

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Source: Adapted from Euromonitor*’ and Mintekz2

Table 5 Net Profit as a % of Sales of Selected European Grocery Retailers

7985-86 --- Carrefour France 1.2 Ahold Netherlands 1.1

Casino France 0.9 GB-lnno-BM Belgium 0.8 Delhaize Belgium 0.7 UK Supermarkets 6.3

Source: Adapted from Musannif and George%

1986-87

1.3 1.2 1.1 1.1

0.8 6.6

differing circunlstances and often differing goals’. For instance. Aldi :tnd TeIlgelmann of West Germany and VCI-K~CX International of the Netherlands are privately owned companies not answerable to shareholders. They m;~)-. therefore, be prepared to accrpt a subnormal return on investment to facilitate cut-throat entry strategies. In the diverse compctitivc environment thus created, players may find it difficult to accurately read each others intcritions and so fail to agree a set of 'rules of the game’, thereby leading to uncertainty and sub-optimal perform ancc for all concerned.

Lack of Product Differentiation Ilk: consumers seem to regard retail services as near- commodity, switching loyalties easily if retail offers or service become deficient.?- With rhe increasing frag- mcntation of mass consumer markets as a consequence of consumers adopting more individualistic and experiential attitudes, UK retailers must begin to adapt to the specialist requirements of their consumer groups. We would argue that this product differentiation, which would provide layers of defence against new com- petitors, is simply not there. Despite many claims that UK retailers are pursuing differentiar~(~I~ strategies, there seems very little real difference between the market offerings of the major contenders. The fact is that the single most important criterion in determining the choice of shop is proximity; quite simply, shoppers go to the nearest store.” However, the question remains whether this lack of differentiation is due to an absence of any real differences between consumer groups or whether it is due to the lack of a genuine competitive drive for differentiation. Up until now, it is apparent that the major multiples have been able to build their market share in the LiK at the expense of smaller competitors and that this has cushioned them from the full forces of having

to compete with each other. In an industry that is characterized hy openness, enforced by shareholders’ requirements and with very little protection from patents or tcchnolvgical edge, it has been all too easy to imitate the successful strategies of peer organizations. Therefore, UK multiples have become increasingly similar since the real focus of differentiation has been between them and the smaller shops.

It is our belief that this scenario is changing; the imminent arrival of major competitors in a market reaching saturation point will intensify competition. New entrants from the continent are likely to hasten the process of djfferentiation by injecting their own charac- teristic styles of operation and by seeking out niche markets as a way of gaining a toe-hold in the UK. Con- sequently, multiple grocery retailers may find it prudent to develop more distinctive identities by seriously cndcavouring to relate their market offering to particular customer groups.

Bargaining Power of Suppliers Despite the very large size of food manufacturers operat- ing in the LJK, their relative power has been diminished due to the fact that the six largest grocery retailers accounted for 70% of the market in 1987.” In recent yiLars, the balance of power has rested with the food rctailcrs who have used their power to oblige manu- facturers to cut prices, share promotional costs or to suppl!. own 1abeI products.2” The food manufacturers defence against this has been years of heavy promotional spending to build consumer loyalty through product diff~rcntiation.‘” I3y comparison, retailers’ attempts to establish store loyalty have met with little success.2’

Given the relative ease of moving tangible goods across frontiers compared to the difficulty of moving retailing services (which must be consistently produced and consumed at the point of sale), it is gemX&y agreed that the SEM wift benefit manufactLIrers more than retailers. Fletcher has expressed the concern that, if manuhcturers choose to develop competitive advantage by forming pan-European organizations, the balance of power could be shifted back towards suppliers.30

I!K grocery multiples are showing no real inclina- tion to move into Europe as an offensive measure. However, as a defensive strategy, some are banding together to form buying groups (such as the European Retail Association previously mentioned). This may be sufficient to maintain the status quo since it is apparent that a ~nanufacturer would have to be vast indeed to gain the upper hand over the highly concentrated food retailers of Northern Europe.

The Threat of Substitute Services Although it is easy to dismiss any idea of substitutes for grocery retailers, no doubt the same level of confidence was also felt by businesses in the coal, railway and mechanical cash register industries a few decades ago. Even now there are straws in the wind, such as the return

in popularity of i~ei~h~~~)urhood shopping~‘” A number of trends are c~)tnbiniil~ throughout Europe which sug-

70 ELJROPEAN MA~A~E~~E~~l’&X!KNAI. Vol ‘) NC> 1 March 1991

THE SINGLE EUROPEAN GROCXRY MARKET

gest that the needs of a sjgni~~nt proportion of con- sumers may be more effectivefy satisfied by alternative retaif methods:

An ageing population is likely to be fess mobile and may show a distinct preferetrce for smaller scale

shopping. ‘Green’ consumers who may reject processed,

packaged ‘supermarket’ products as ecologically

unsound. The trend towards more working women increas- mg demand for extended opening hours and fast, convenient shopping. (This should also lead to more men part~c~~~~ng in shopp~ng!~ A ‘cash rich, time poor’ society may be prepared to pay premium prices for the convenience of teleshopping and speciatogues. Although tete- shopping and other means of direct marketing may not seem the most appropriate medium for fast

shopping, they do account for 15 % of all house-

hold sales of frozen food in West Germany.“’

XSargaining Power of Consumers The entry by continental retailers into the near-saturated

UK grocery market will offer i~d~~~id~a~s more choice and greater variety, effectively shifting the balance of power further towards consumers.

Although Porter suggests that knowledge is power for industrial buyers, by analogy it can be the very lack of knowledge in an increasingly complex world which may cause consumers to exercise their power by withdrawing their custom from a store group in the face of the latest food scare. With some 2 1 million households in the UK, it must be said that retail customers represent a very fragmented force with &tie individual power. E-lowever, it is fack of loyalty to a service which con- sumers have come to regard as t~~r-co~~mod~t~~ com- bined with low switching costs and a ready acceptance of imports which makes simple fickleness a threat to UK retailers?’

It is unlikely that a new market entrant would rely solely upon a low level of loyalty as a basis for growth. It is to be expected that continental competitors will build upon their existing strengths (such as German staff training and service techniques and French skills in decentralizing international store management) to effec- tively segment the UK market. Their task is being made easier by a convergence of cunshlmexs’ requirements t~~~~~~~~t Etlrqe; Dzwstm ~2 ad, base &ready identified broad trends in s~~~~~~g behaviour which thq perceive as common to all European ceuntrhxi2

Concluding Comments Our analysis has shown that UK grocery retailers will experience an intensification in competition as a result of store saturation and the market entry of highly profes- sional European retailers tempted by the prospect of higher trading margins. The shiFt in &he balance of power back towards food manufacturers, facilitated hy rhe completion ofthe SEM in 1992, witl even~aitg resufr in

a convergence of consumer tastes and expectations in ne~gil~~~~~r~i~g EEC countries. The evofution of a pan-

European grocery market wili occur despite the apparent indifference of UK retaiters. fn the main, ZJK grocery

retailers have chosen not to participate in the enlarged European market, relying instead upon growth from the IJS nrarket whilst adopting a defensive posture in the IJK. We argue in this paper that the major UK grocery retailers have developed neither sufficient economies of scale nor distinct differential advantage. Consequently, they are at risk of being ‘stuck in the middle’ as medium-sized piayers in the unfarged European grocery market. Under these conditions, margins in the EJK segment of the

European grocery market are destined to fafl hy perhaps

two thirds as they are brought into line with ~nt~rnatjo~~~ FXfCilXL Furthermore, as medium-sized players fiK

grocery retailers are unlikely to remain amongst the most profitable competitors in this sector of the European market. We believe that the major multiples must urgently reconsider their position in Europe.

‘1‘flE SIN<;l>E El’ROPEAN GROCERY MARKE’I

.Ifarketi?zg Director_~~. Euromonitor Publications Ltd., London, p. 5. Key Note (1988) ll’caj Trmds in Retailing. Kc) Note Publications Ltd., London, pp. 4-H. .Ilavketirzg (I WC)) Special Report ‘Consumer Marketing in Europe’. 4 May. Euromoniior (1987) Rctuil Trade I:k’ 1 W’/XX. Euro- monitor Publications Ltd., London. p -i7. Mintcl (1989) Rctuil Intrlligrtice. vol. -f ‘Superstores and Hypcrmarkets’, Economist Intelligcncc Ilnit, London. pp. -t.29-4.34. Killcn. V. and Lees, R. (1988) The Future ot Grocer) Retailing in the UK part I. Retuil ai~d Ilistrih~tiotz

Marqyernrnt, July/August, l)p X- 12. Verdict Rcscarch (1990) The S/xx-c, Report, Verdict Research, London. MORI (1989) The Retail Property), .Ifurket, (a study corn missioned by Argos Distributors Ltd). MORI, London, p. LO. hlusannif. Y. 2nd Gcorgc F (1989) ‘Focus on Europcan Rctailcrs‘, Hank Paribas Capital Markets Ltd , London. in

2’.

28

KEITH THOMPSON, Cranfield Institute of Technology, Silsoe College, Silsoe, Bedford, MK45 4DT

Keith Thompson is a lecturer in marketing in the Department of Marketing and Business Management at Silsoe College, Cranfield Institute of

Technology, where be teaches consumer and organizational buying bebaviour. He became a teacher after working for IBM and Spillers Ltd. His research interests are in globalization aspects oj’ international marketing and buyer- seller relationships in the retail food sector. He has recent consultancy experience in a wide range of industries and markets.

‘Kcsponding to 1992: Key fxtors for retailers‘, ‘l‘rcadgold, A in Retail Trends in Continental Europe’, Oxford Institute of Retail Management, Templeton Collcgc. Oxford, p. -t 1 E2rrowzor~itor (1987) ‘Grocery Distribution in W’estcrn Europe‘, Euromonitor I’ublications Ltd., London, pp. It-31. dc Chcrnatony. L. ( 1986) ‘Consumer Perceptions of the Compctitivc Tiers Available Within Spccificd Product Fields‘, in A14anagi~zg ,2larketing. (eds. Cowcll. L1. and Collins, J.), Proceedings of MEG, Plymouth U’hitakcr, J. (1983) l‘o Spend or not to Spcncl?. .L’id.wrr Kewarc-her, 2, pp. I - 1 4. Flctchcr, J. (1989) IRK Rctailcrs Will bc Hound for Europe, The Grocer. I5 April, pp. 52-54. E~4rommitor ( 1W7) ‘Grocery Distribution in Wcstcrn liuropc’, Euromonitor Publicatiotis Ltd., London, p. 25. I);~wson, J.A., Shaw. S.A. and Rana. J. (1988) Future ‘l‘rcnds in Food Retailing: Results of a Sul-\.ey of Rct:iilcrs. Brutish I~‘OOd ,/ol/rtrcd. vol. 90.2, I’[’ 5 I-57

SIMON KNOX, Crunfield School of Management, Crunfield, Bedford, MK43 OAL, UK.

Simon is a senior lecturer in marketing at the Cranfield School of Management. Upon graduation, he joined Unilever plc as a management trainee

in marketing during 1975. After an initial spell in detergents marketing Cdt Lever Bros, Simon moved to Batcbelors Foods to work on their international brands, initially as the new product development manager. Acting as tbe lead country manager, Simon launched Cup-A- Soup Special in the UK bused upon a beverage positioning. This strategy was later adopted by other European country managers and a successful pan-European brand has subsequently developed.

Since joining Craafield in 1983, Simon has regularly contributed papers at international marketing conferences and publishes in the areas of consumer bebaviour and organizational buyer-seller relationships. He has recently been appointed to the Graduate Research Committee within the School.

‘2 EIJROPEAN MANAGE~IBN’I JOIIRNAL \‘()I ‘1 No I March 1901