Repositioning a retail analytics company from dashboards to store replenishment decisions
Indian retailers already had BI tools, ERP analytics and data teams, so a pitch about better insight had nowhere to land. Research found ground the company could own.
- Challenge
A pitch about better insight, aimed at retailers who already had plenty.
- Approach
Buyer interviews, a competitive frame and win/loss evidence before choosing the position.
- Result
A new target buyer and a position the company can prove.
The situation
Retail analytics companies in India often built their story when retailers had little analytics of their own. Now ERP vendors sell analytics alongside their retail suites, BI dashboards sit at head office, and larger chains run data teams. Store stock also fills online and quick-delivery orders, so replenishment has become the pressing problem. A pitch about dashboards and forecast accuracy stalls after the demo, and the company keeps cutting price to compensate.
The question that mattered
What do Indian retail buyers now need that ERP analytics, BI tools and data teams do not provide, and who owns that need?
What we did
- 1
Research how priorities shifted
Interview heads of supply chain, category and data at grocery and multi-format retailers. A recurring theme: store replenishment must now cover online orders picked from the same shelves.
- 2
Map the competitive frame
Compare how ERP-native analytics, BI tools and in-house data teams are bought and where each stops. ERP analytics report history; in-house teams build forecasts that rarely reach a store order.
- 3
Audit what the company can prove
Review recent wins and losses. Losses cluster where the pitch claims better forecasts than the retailer's data team; wins come where the product turns forecasts into store orders.
- 4
Choose the buyer and the position
Test options with buyers, name heads of supply chain as the target, and state the position plainly: the company turns a retailer's own forecasts into daily replenishment orders for every store and dark store, alongside the ERP and data team.
What we delivered
The evidence and working documents the team kept.
- Buyer research on shifting priorities, by retail format
- Competitive frame: ERP-native analytics, BI tools and in-house data teams
- Win/loss and proof audit of recent deals
- Target buyer profile for heads of supply chain
- Positioning statement and messaging brief for sales and marketing
The outcome
Sellers
opening with the replenishment problem heads of supply chain own
Retailers' data teams
brought into evaluations as allies
Forecast-accuracy claims
removed from the pitch and website
Leadership
qualifying out deals where the buyer only wants more reports
The company now leads with store and dark-store replenishment for heads of supply chain, and treats a request for more dashboards as a poor-fit signal.
What changed in the GTM motion
The positioning statement and competitive frame sit in a brief that product, marketing and sales sign off before any new deck, campaign or launch. Sellers tag wins and losses against the frame, so leadership sees when ERP analytics or in-house teams start winning again.
Services in this programme
Case studies
More programmes like this
Are buyers comparing you with tools they already own?
Tell us where it is stuck. A founder replies within one working day.