How to deal with the "long charge" of the store?

Company A signed a "ground pile" with the headquarters of the W Marketplace. Company B signed sales points with W stores. Since Company B is a promotional agreement directly signed with the store, the store will place the promotion of Company B next to the pile of company A. During the event, Company B always managed to reduce Company A’s “promotional points” by increasing promotional items. The store also had an attitude of conniving, and even suggested that Company A should give “benefits” to help them make arrangements. A company salesman repeatedly questioned the procurement on this matter, but it can only be relieved at that time, and the next day is restored. This makes the company guilty of difficulties, in the end who should sign an agreement more reliable, how to reach out everywhere, how to do it to spend a reasonable fee, but also do things well?

At present, many stores have begun to implement centralized management. On the one hand, they are necessary for the unified management of the stores; on the other hand, they can also eliminate some corrupt phenomena. From the store's point of view, this approach can maximize the use of resources. However, from the supplier's point of view, this kind of management of the store has caused inconvenience to its terminal operation. It is often the purchasing department and stores that have to reach out to the suppliers for fees, and the internal cost standards are not uniform - often the stores are not counted in the purchasing department; and the decisions made by the purchasing department always find excuses not to implement or weaken the implementation . In short, both parties do not buy each other’s accounts—two sets of standards and two sets of practices. The real reason for the suppliers’ dilemmas to find out the multiple charges is usually to say that the suppliers are charged more by the stores themselves. Say, there will be two kinds of situations: First, it is the intention of the store; Second, it is a last resort. Below, we will make specific analysis of these situations:

The intention of the store for this is also divided into different situations: First, the store allows or tacit approval of the headquarters and stores double reach, so that more suppliers can be “layered”, allowing the store to obtain greater benefits. In a sense, this is also a way for the stores to use institutional settings to increase the exploitation of suppliers. The east is not bright, and many lines are open. It can always require more; second, for management purposes, Through the cross-management of the Purchasing Department and the store's two lines, the two companies can supervise and contain each other to prevent one party from having too much rights and problems. From a certain perspective, internal supervision is more effective than external supervision. After all, it is in terms of operating indicators. In the face of interests, no one in the procurement and stores will be willing to give in.

The store is a last resort and it means that double charges are not intentional, but that the unilateral pressure on stage targets is too high to do so. The purchasing and store business indicators are assessed separately. However, these assessment indicators are all to be completed by the supplier, and not to find suppliers. As a result, the procurement stores each “reached out” to suppliers in order to accomplish their goals. In the purchase there is a poster fee, the store wants you to make a store promotion, the annual fee is paid in the contract, the return store wants you to make up for the loss ~~~~~, and you will use your rights to put pressure on you because he He will not be able to make a difference without giving pressure to you.

There is still no justification for personal grudges in procurement and stores. There are personal grudges in procurement and store personnel, they are not happy with each other, they do not buy one another, and even they deliberately want to give each other a good look. The supplier becomes a scapegoat and a punching bag. This is the "city gate fire, hit the pond fish," by the supplier as a sandwich cookie.

Step 1 to solve this problem. Understand the internal management of the store: to carefully observe the test, to see whether the store management is more formal, whether the procurement / store rights clear division, or simply chaotic, the standard store you need to understand more about its internal requirements, match its system To do things, if it is a non-standard store, then we must adopt other more flexible practices. 2. Do a good job of "budget" distribution: The best way to cope is to "take precautions." That is to say, the "budget" for the store will be separated, and the corresponding "resources" will be set aside for the purchasing headquarters and stores. After all, they have different indicators of their own. As suppliers, you can't ignore them, but you should understand that the balance of interests does not put eggs in a basket.

3. Pay attention to the balance of human relationships. Don't overtly reveal that you have a good relationship with someone because you will never be sure who is involved with who in the store. The safest approach is to be polite to anyone, to whomever you are dealing with, and to have a position to do things. Do not take a position arbitrarily. Remember that you are only doing business. Don't fall into other people's grudges. Just watch a play.