obvious – those dealing with customers know what they want, after all –  but the company’s approach goes beyond consultation, attendees are expected to play an active role. That’s where the ping-pong bats come in. Painted red on one side and green on the other, participants from across RAG’s brand portfolio are asked a simple question when shown a piece of prospective product – will it sell? If less than 80 per cent of the ping pong bats in the room display green, then the item in question doesn’t make it to stores. The result is a level of democratisation that RAG’s new chairman Andrew Reitzer says is helping the company navigate rough seas in the Australian fashion sector, which has been marred by promotional fatigue in recent months after retailers across the sector found themselves heavy on stock leading into Christmas. “Most other fashion retailers that I’m aware of have prima donnas,” he told IRW. “Either the founder, owner or designer are prima donnas – they imagine they know exactly what the customer wants and very often sit in ivory towers or go to fashion shows and all that stuff, then get it very wrong.” “Go look at the markdowns.” ­­­­Buyers versus planners While RAG has settled on a model it believes has been vindicated in the current retail climate, the wider industry is still looking for the golden ticket, and, with the stakes higher than ever, negotiations are becoming more difficult. Designworks managing director, Brendan Santamaria says there has been a marked change in attitudes towards buying negotiations in the last 24 months, with broader conditions breeding risk-averse buyers and creating communication issues. “A lot of the decision making on spend and design input has been taken off buyers,” he told IRW. “It’s coming from a planning perspective now. I’d actually like to see buyers have a lot more say and control over the buying process.” Santamaria touches on a dichotomy that many retailers have grappled with in recent years: buyers, a more traditional retail role that’s generally driven the creative direction of brands in the past; and planners, a role that’s grown in popularity in the last decade as the availability of customer data has exploded. The philosophies underpinning each approach are distinct, driving comparisons between a naughty child attending fashion shows and a tempered parental figure with their nose in the numbers. But with the rise of online shopping and in-store analytics, planning has emerged with an edge. According to planning expert Susan Martin, the practice provides retailers with functionality that can’t be found elsewhere, namely the ability to align business strategies and KPIs with macro indicators, assisting with healthy cashflow. “It’s about having a really strategic understanding of what you are trying to do, who your customer is and what the point of difference is,” she said. “Starting from that position enables analysis of post-seasonal purchasing habits and option plans.” As online shopping and in-store technology have become more prevalent­­­­, so have data capture methods. Where buyers in the past trained themselves in setting trends and approximating at consumer demand, planners are now able to assess performance on a per SKU per store level and model expected purchasing patterns. Despite ongoing stereotypes of ‘prima donna’ buyers, Martin says that the buying philosophy of the future has room for both buyers and planners, signalling a shift towards a collaborative approach. “Different business models play to different things. If you’ve got a designer label, then the buying label is buying-led, but there are still planning frameworks that support making informed decisions,” Martin explained. “Planning and buying work really well together when neither is trying to control the other,” she continued. “Planners aren’t the fun police and buyers aren’t the naughty child.” Data does have its drawbacks, particularly when the amount of available information leads to decision makers being too focused on single factors or absolute in their approach to trends. “Data is really good, but timing itself is also important. Oeople who are holding the baby to something they committed to six to eight months ago get into trouble because while the decision might have been based on the right information at the time, it’s just not valid anymore,” Martin said. “Being nimble and making decisions close to the point of sale is important.” Right shelf, right time Data-driven planning has become front of mind in the last six months for The Reject Shop chief executive Ross Sudano. After the ASX-listed discount chain parted with its buyer late last year, the company was left with a surplus of committed stock that it was forced to discount, eating into its gross margins. Reporting a 4.4 per cent decline in NPAT to shareholders for 1H17 last week, Sudano said that the company has finished the period “heavy” on inventory, with the company holding double the amount of stock it had in HY15. The issues were underpinned by what he dubbed a “sales miss”, noting that there have been missed opportunities in terms of ensuring the availability of everyday range items. In response, The Reject Shop has turned to data-driven automation, trialling a demand forecasting system to co-ordinate everyday range fulfilment. “[The system] enables us to monitor and forecast SKU sales by store,” Sudano told IRW. “Previously we haven’t had the capacity to do that by individual SKUs by individual stores. We’ve been relying on people to do it.” The Reject Shop plans to continue rolling out the system in the second half, with a small plan of planners supporting the platform. Access exclusive analysis, locked news and reports with Inside Retail Weekly. Subscribe today and get our premium print publication delivered to your door every week.