Is now the right time to reconsider using a dedicated Field Marketing Team?

Is now the right time to reconsider using a dedicated Field Marketing Team?

Given the current economic challenges facing brands and retailers, the costs (both financial and environmental) for operating dedicated, full-time field teams is surely becoming harder to justify?

Having teams of people, each driving around 30,000 miles a year to visit a few stores per day for around an hour each and then spend the rest of the time in the car, seems like an antiquated way of doing things. Even more so when you factor in the high (and rising) fixed costs that need to be paid, whether that person is out on the road or not.

The pandemic has already impacted the number and size of many dedicated teams, as brands de-prioritised store visits in favour of virtual activity, such as online training and video sales. As things gradually began returning to pre-pandemic levels, we now have a new set of challenges to deal with; primarily the triumvirate of rising inflation, global supply issues and a global economic slowdown that will likely result in a recession.

So what’s the alternative??

Syndicated Teams are nothing new. The idea being, instead of representing just one brand, the team will represent multiple brands (usually no more than 3-4, non-competing) when they visit a store, with each brand paying for a set amount of time (eg 1 hour) to carry out specific tasks, such as staff training, audits or merchandising.

Brands that invest in dedicated teams may argue that syndicated teams cannot provide the same level of quality and focus that a permanent branded team can. Or that they need to have full control of the team and don’t want to relinquish any of that, due to other brands being involved in the mix.

Yes, you will lose a little of that control, as there are other brands to consider within the visit, so you can’t suddenly decide you want John in Manchester to attend an event tomorrow, as that will impact the other brands in the syndicate. As for focus, well that’s debatable. If a brand is paying for a one hour visit, then that’s what they get. No dilution. The only difference is that when that hour is up, the rep moves on to the next brand, rather than moving on to the next store. As a result, they may be in the same store for 3 hours, but that saves at least two or three other brand reps from visiting the same store to do the same job.

Finally on quality; as long as the agency recruits the right calibre of people, not only to do the tasks required, but also that understand and have a passion for the products and categories they are representing, there is no reason they would do an inferior job than someone hired for a dedicated team. Indeed, the fact that they are representing multiple brands and products, arguably requires a higher skill set than someone representing a single brand.

But lets look at the benefits. Firstly, calls are usually charged on a ‘cost per visit’ basis, so you’re only paying for completed visits and not for the inevitable downtime that occurs on a daily basis. There are no long-term contracts, so brands aren’t tied into an agency on costly multi-year agreements. Syndicated teams are flexible and scalable, meaning you can turn on/off activity as required with no penalties.?On average, a syndicated team is 35-40% more effective per hour than a dedicated team, meaning they get more done, spending more time in stores and less time on the road being non-productive. Then finally, you have the environmental benefits; fewer cars on the road, doing fewer miles equals less congestion on the roads and fewer emissions polluting the planet.

There has never been a better time for brands to look at a syndicated solution as a credible and viable alternative to a dedicated field team, especially given the current operating environment and greater emphasis on maximising every pound of marketing investment.

Want to learn more? Say hello to us at: [email protected], call 01748 825815 or visit www.retailprofiling.com