The general results of the survey were reported as follows:Delivery time. The largest suppliers were about equal in terms of delivery per-
formance. However, as a group they were not equal to the performance of
smaller competitors. Carlton’s average times were considered to be acceptable,
but their performance had slipped in terms of reliability. Customers could not
be sure when their orders would arrive. On a local basis, this was a problem
for Carlton’s local delivery despatching. At a national level, it reflected on the
performance of the carriers that Carlton was using.
Inventory availability. Carlton was again comparable in performance to its major
competitors, fulfilling about 80 per cent of orders from stock on hand. Smaller
competitors with their restricted product lines tended to do better. Carlton’s
back-order performance was better than average. Customers recognized that
back-orders from Carlton would always be filled, even if it took a couple of
months. When orders were picked there would be occasional errors, which
meant that items, once shipped, had to be returned. This seemed to lead to
considerable confusion on Carlton’s part.
Sales representation. Carlton had very low turnover among its sales representa-
tives, which was well received in the trade. They knew their products and
market policies in general. Where they fell down was in dealing with distribu-
tion problems, because they had little direct contact with distribution opera-
tions.When there was a distribution problem, it seemed to take a long time to
get an answer, and then it was not always satisfactory. When orders could not
be filled, Carlton did not notify customers, assuming that they understood that
products would be delivered when available. The chain and discount buyers,
however, noted that they were getting precise indications when their orders
would be served and shipped from competitors and found it useful for inven-
tory planning for their own operations.
Orders. Customers expressed considerable annoyance about Carlton’s ordering
system. There were frequent errors in recording and filling orders, and there
was no confirmation when the order was received. Orders were normally
entered from written purchase requests from customers, sales representatives’
order forms or by telephone requests by customers.When they were received,
orders were taken in the sales department and entered in the computer. In the
case of documentation, customers expected confirmation, which some suppli-
ers furnished automatically but others did not.
Advertising and promotion.This was not a strong point with Carlton.They relied
on their retail customers to promote specific products. Most ads for Carlton
were corporate, emphasizing product quality in general, rather than specific
items in the line. This was in direct contrast to the most aggressive competi-
tors, who ran campaigns to push specific products and to support major selling
events.
Packaging.This was an important area but involved conflict. Carlton’s policy had
always been to pack well. Items were always well-labelled. However, some ofThe customer market domain: Managing relationships with buyers 77