Return to service

Can there be any two words so casually slung about and yet so carelessly compromised as service and convenience?

For anyone in the business of turning a buck or two these should be givens. Instead, they increasingly appear to have become the products themselves. That's marketing people; selling a can of beans was never going to be a sexy enough aspiration.

Seeking to transform the mundane into the exceptional isn't necessarily such a bad course of action. The fly in the ointment, however, is when expectations fall short of delivery.

Time was we were taught at an early age to distrust grains of sand masquerading as pearls of wisdom. Think logically: how can instant coffee be anything other than a lesser substitute for the real thing? Can meat and two veg heated in the microwave seriously compare with fresh ingredients painstakingly prepared? Service and convenience, no doubt: but on balance second-best.

If you educate consumers into expecting unrealistic service levels, don't be surprised when disappointment heralds complaints. There's an outdoor paint brand that hasn't been afraid to present itself in the plainest terms; has indeed made a point of its relatively humble purpose in life. It knows its place within the supply chain, and deserves to prosper accordingly; an object lesson to any FMCG manufacturer.

Likewise, it's a contradiction to expect packaging to preserve, protect, promote and perform at subsistence levels of remuneration. Little wonder then that plastic bags freely dispensed at checkouts rarely survive the time it takes to get their contents home, and handles tear themselves away from shrink-wrapped multi-packs.

Packaging is ultimately not the main retailing issue, merely the mechanism for higher profile and brand recognition. Letting it become the product might seem to represent a lower-cost, higher potential return strategy than, say, TV advertising, but if it fails in usage then bang goes market share.

You get what you pay for is the one truism the marketing phrasebook has yet to confound. More to the point, it works both ways. Manufacturers have been assiduous in paring costs to the bone. The name of the game is delivering value for money goods in pursuit of increased sales; driven to it either through their own volition or by the multiples. But who gains if the net result is perceived as shoddy goods?