Directions Magazine
Hello. Login | Register

Articles

All Articles | Post Comment

Freedom through Structure: Optimizing Chain Store Real Estate Processes

Bookmark and Share
Monday, December 10th 2012
Comments
Classified Ads:

Summary:

Does process get in the way of doing business? Do the head honchos in the boardroom rely too much on the analysts, to the point that real estate deals never materialize? Why are the people with the maps getting so much attention with their “pretty pictures”? Author Jim Stone of Chain Store Advisors explains that there can be a happy medium if …

You hear the complaints all the time.

“The field people only react to the deals that the brokers present to them.  They don’t take the market planners seriously when we target certain trade areas.”

“The analysts (aka “geeks” or “deal killers”) think they know everything because they have mapping and statistics programs.  They have no idea how the real world works.”

“I can’t open enough stores because the paperwork takes forever.  It’s easier to get a Ph.D. than get a deal through our approval process.”

Is this just the way it has to be?  Dealmakers versus analysts? People who drive sales and people who prevent sales?  Entrepreneurs versus bureaucrats?

NO, it doesn’t have to be this way.  But it sure isn’t easy to avoid these problems.  It all comes down to finding the right blend of structure and freedom that allows companies to manage their business while getting the most out of their talented and creative people.

The complaints above, and many more like them, are symptoms of an imbalance between structure and freedom in an organization.  Each represents a different way for a real estate group to fail:  either by opening underperforming stores that could have been avoided (too much freedom for dealmakers) or NOT opening enough stores to grow the business (too much freedom for analysts and bureaucrats).

I have gotten to know dozens of chain store organizations over the past 20 years and I’m sorry to say that there are few that seem to have gotten it right (especially over a long period of time).  Most companies tend to follow a pattern that is based on the general economy:  when times are good, the dealmakers get more freedom and when times are bad, the bureaucrats get more freedom.

There are a few industry leading companies that seem to strike a good balance during good times AND bad times.  In good times, they boldly pay top dollar for only the best locations that will perform well even in bad times.  In bad times, they use their strong cash position to grab “B” locations at prices that generate great profits in bad times and do even better when the economy recovers. How do they do it?

There are at least three common elements that I have observed in these companies:

  1. Defined business processes for market selection, market planning and site selection
  2. Ongoing training programs with active learner participation that create alignment from the boardroom to the field
  3. Information systems that provide fast, accurate decision support to all participants in the process, tailored to their roles and skill sets

Let’s take a closer look at these three traits.

  1. Defined business processes simply means taking the time to think through the way decisions will be made and writing it down.  The first draft may be rough, incomplete and in need of a lot of revisions in the early going.  If the authors are empowered by senior management to solicit input from all participants, and they actually get that input, it is much more likely to be useful and used.  I have seen cases where the authors of such documents become “process bullies” and aggravate everyone, creating a painful, cumbersome waste of time that is sometimes worse than no defined process at all!
  2. Training programs are the grease that makes the processes work.  Real estate markets are complex and there is a lot of terminology that people use to describe similar, but not identical, phenomena.  Every organization is a melting pot of people from different backgrounds and companies and the training programs provide a common platform for building and sharing a company’s standardized ways of thinking and talking about important factors and analytical methods.  This is one area where the balance between structure and freedom is particularly important:  standard terms and methods should always be viewed as a common denominator and all participants should be encouraged to correct and improve them as better ideas find their way into the mix.  The key to effective training programs is that they must be well-designed, have significant learner participation, and be ongoing, using a combination of delivery methods including classroom, online, on demand (Web-based), and on-the-job.
  3. Information systems that support chain store real estate decisions have come a long way in the last 10 years.  Once the domain of computer programmers and spreadsheet jocks, it is now possible to deploy affordable, powerful systems to all participants in the process, from executives to dealmakers.  Web-based and mobile applications based on a single enterprise database can deliver maps, demographic reports, aerial imagery and analytics that are tailored to the role and skills of the user.  However, this is the LAST step in the process.  Many companies rush out and buy a technology platform before they have even defined their business processes and designed their training programs.  This is putting the cart before the horse and will ALWAYS lead to pain and remorse, and can sometimes be career-threatening.  On the other hand, it is very difficult to take advantage of best practices (or at least “good practices”) without these tools.  Just remember that if you try to automate business processes that haven’t been defined, you will end up with (guess what?) automated chaos.

I would love to get some comments from people who have seen both good and bad examples of efforts to optimize structure and freedom in chain store real estate planning and site selection!


Did you enjoy this topic? Check out these Channels:
Location Intelligence and Business Geographics

Bookmark and Share


Stay Connected

Twitter RSS Facebook LinkedIn Delicious Apple Devices Android Blackberry






Recent Comments

Journal News Removes Interactive Gun Permit Map

The Lower Hudson Journal News has been under fire for publishing a map of gun permit holders in two counties in New York State  before Christma. (APB coverage 1, 2, podcast). On Friday January 18 the paper removed the interactive map. Why? Publisher Janet Hasson gave answers in a media statement and in a letter to readers.

In a statement in response to The Poynter Institute (a journalism school) she argued:

With the passage this week of the NYSAFE gun law, which allows permit holders to request their names and addresses be removed from the public record, we decided to remove the gun permit data from lohud.com at 5 pm today. While the new law does not require us to remove the data, we believe that doing so complies with its spirit. For the past four weeks, there has been vigorous debate over our publication of the permit data, which has been viewed nearly 1.2 million times by readers. One of our core missions as a newspaper is to empower our readers with as much information as possible on the critical issues they face, and guns have certainly become a top issue since the massacre in nearby Newtown, Conn. Sharing as much public information as possible provides our readers with the ability to contribute to the discussion, in any way they wish, on how to make their communities safer. We remain committed to our mission of providing the critical public service of championing free speech and open records.

In a letter to readers published on Friday she wrote:

So intense was the opposition to our publication of the names and addresses that legislation passed earlier this week in Albany included a provision allowing permit holders to request confidentiality and imposing a 120-day moratorium on the release of permit holder data.

She goes on to say that during the 27 days the map was online any one interested would have seen it and that the data would eventually be out of date. She also noted that the paper does not endorse the way the state chose to limit availability of the data.

The original map/article still includes a graphic - but it's a snapshot, a raster image, with no interactivity. Says Hasson in the letter to readers:

 And we will keep a snapshot of our map — with all its red dots — on our website to remind the community that guns are a fact of life we should never forget.

I continue to applaud the paper for requesting the data via a Freedom on Informat request, mapping it, keeping the map up despite threats and criticism and now responding to state law. I think the paper did a service to the state, to citizens and to journalism.

- via reader Jim and Poynter

30-Second Pitch: Valarm
What’s new with JavaScript and geospatial - wrapup from the js.geo event
Privacy 2013 Style: Exploring New LBS Devices and Services
Attention Shoppers! aisle411’s Indoor Location App is a Hit with Top Retailers
US Topo - A New National Map Series, 2012 Update
Recent Developments in Remote Sensing for Human Disaster Management and Mitigation - Spotlight on Africa: An Overview
Drones: War machine today, helpful tool tomorrow - NPR Marketplace
Everything You Need to Know about Landsat 8

DirectionsMag.com

About Us | Advertise | Contact Us | Web Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy
© 2013 Directions Media. All Rights Reserved