paul harvey 1 Paul Harvey, Associate Director

European discounters Aldi and Lidl have been stealing a march on big multiples like Tesco and Asda, aggressively enticing shoppers in through their doors with lower prices and basket-beating deals.

But with research showing that price is only the fourth-biggest driver behind shoppers’ choice of retailer, and with 94% of customers who shop at a discounter also regularly shopping at a multiple, there’s a huge opportunity to fight back.

So here are the eight key areas where we think change needs to happen if the multiples are going regain their market share...

1. Simplify tiers

Research shows that consumers consider the discounters’ own-brand products (usually their cheapest offerings) to be comparable in quality to mid-tier products at a multiple. Which puts the discounters streaks ahead in the price war and makes competing on entry-tier product ranges almost irrelevant. Multiples need to focus on differentiating between their tiers, where possible offering both a mid-tier and high-tier product range and making sure there’s a very clear proposition about what makes the high tier superior.

2. Offer comparable products

People often cite price as being one of the key reasons multiples have lost market share to discounters. However, the multiples need to fight the temptation to try and price-match across the board, or they’re likely to take a profit hit of approximately £1 billion. The most significant area when it comes to price is the 1500-or-so products the multiples have in common with the discounters – so the focus should be on offering comparable costs on those products that overlap, rather than trying to match them on everything.

3. Improve operations

There’s no question that implementing the previous step comes with a cost, but people often overlook how much money some simple operational improvements can save. For example, lots of stores have poor visibility of how many hours it actually takes to carry out the daily processes required to meet customer demand, meaning that employee shifts are often misaligned to demand across the week. This gap between the intended store-operating model and the in-store reality often results in huge losses, in both time and customer satisfaction. It’s key that organisations don’t let their focus on external competition distract them from strengthening their internal processes.

4. Align marketing campaigns

On average, blind taste-tests say that the quality of multiples’ products is higher than that of the discounters – regardless of price. In fact, some recent research we did showed Asda Smart Price Cheddar Cheese to be the winner with our blind-testing cheese-tasting panel, despite also being the cheapest. So the multiples shouldn’t be afraid to shout about their quality. If they can market both the standard and the value of their basic ranges in a similar way to the discounters, this will definitely resonate with consumers.

5. Myth-bust perception

Most people think that the discounters offer service and quality that’s comparable to a multiple, despite the fact that research says otherwise. (That’s mainly down to expectation-setting – if people’s expectations are low, as is true for Lidl and Aldi, then it’s easier to look good.) But multiples need to myth-bust this in their marketing and keep reminding consumers of the facts: that they can offer them a far superior range, better service, shorter queues, fresher products, better taste and the same like-for-like prices as the discounters.

6. Increase availability

Shoppers are quick to notice when a supermarket has availability issues, and out-of-stocks are a huge irritant. Yet retailers often review and drive availability at a whole-store level, which can direct action in the wrong places. A more tactical approach is needed, focusing on the availability of core products so that there’s never a time when a customer can’t find what they really need. Multiples also need to be clear on non-core products and why it’s not possible to always have them in stock, promoting their commitment to low cost, freshness, no waste, etc.

7. Create a passion

Despite clear evidence that multiples are better than discounters in just about every area, people still continue to love places like Lidl and Aldi. Why? Because people rarely care as much about facts as they do about experiences. They want a positive and enjoyable shopping trip and they want to feel enthusiastic about what they buy. So while multiples do need to think about myth-busting in the ways I mentioned in steps 4 and 5, the key comes in recognising that experience is almost always a bigger motivator than fact. They have to give customers a reason to feel passionate about them and their products.

8. Promote ease of shop

People perceive that it’s quicker and easier to shop in a discounter, but that’s only partially true. Queues are actually often longer in a discounter, but since the range is so much smaller than at a multiple the overall experience may be faster – despite that meaning that the customer may not have got everything they needed. So from a marketing perspective multiples need to remind customers of the advantages of shopping at one store that has everything they need, which will ultimately provide a quicker-per-item shop. However, they also need to commit to working on internal processes to genuinely increase the speed and efficiency of a consumer’s shopping experience – the walk has to match the talk.

To read more, visit and download the full ‘Beating the Discounters: myth-busting and the £4billion opportunity’ report.


Download the full report now


A solid foundation for project controls.

 SW Photo2 edited

By Stephen Wilson, Associate Director at Newton. Supported by Leo Martin, Maritime Transformation Director at BAE Systems.


We’re trying to deliver this ship despite the plan 


This phrase, and others like it, are a troubling indicator that a project’s operational efficiency is taking a significant hit – when such a fundamental part of a project is seen as a blocker to effective progress.

The importance of a sound plan which is trusted across the workforce cannot be understated. Leo Martin, Maritime Transformation Director at BAE Systems states,

“The right plan is absolutely paramount for success. It sounds simple, but it is often the simplest things that get overlooked when faced with a lot of complexity in a project. My advice is not to scrimp on investing in planning capability as I have seen this type of investment have a huge impact on delivery, particularly when you have a highly engaged workforce.”

The plan underpins everything: the sequence of build; the release of engineering information; the supply of materials and the foundation of reliable project controls, governance and decision making. Building and maintaining a reliable plan is a fundamental part of any successful project.

Over the past 15 years, right across the maritime and other complex engineering sectors, we have consistently found issues with organisations’ planning processes, despite their best efforts. This fundamental part of the project all too often becomes one of the key blockers to effective progress. The impact of this is huge: poor decision making, inaccurate forecasting, a lack of trust leading to working off-plan, and ultimately failure to deliver to our customers’ expectations.

Where forward-thinking businesses have invested to improve their planning capability, the results have had a huge impact on delivery, but it has taken the commitment of the business to improve. Below we have described four areas of an effective planning process which help improve planning accuracy, promote a culture of trusting and working to the plan, and drive more accurate project controls.

1. Plan alignment and data quality

We can’t expect a plan to ever be perfect - in fact, aspiring for planning perfection can have a seriously adverse effect on planning effectiveness. For a project to be successful however, the plan does at least need to be sufficiently accurate and representative of the current build-state to be credible, whilst also being flexible enough to react to changing customer requirements, particularly in the refit environment.

Businesses are typically equipped with good planning systems, but the planning team often lack experience or adequate training to use them effectively. This leads to teams using the planning systems incorrectly or developing workaround solutions and a myriad of offline and out of date spreadsheets. This has a catastrophic impact on project control with misalignment between planning levels and high-level key milestone plans being disconnected from low-level detailed plans. This lack of plan alignment means fundamental project controls such as Earned Value (EV) progress tracking are not available, understood or trusted. Material data accuracy is also impacted, with part numbering, stock level and fitted status errors leading to supply chain and logistics issues across the project.

While correcting such misalignments may seem difficult to achieve, it is not impossible where focus is put on training and using the planning systems correctly. In addition, building clear planning KPIs and tying these into project performance reviews can have a dramatic effect. One client achieved an increase in plan alignment from 26% to 98% in just six weeks through a focussed campaign on planning governance leading to a rapid increase in the trust the wider business had in the plan and confidence in associated EV metrics.

2. Plan ownership

Establishing a sense of ownership and accountability for the plan is invaluable and must involve representatives from all teams from the outset. All too often we see planning teams working in isolation away from the engineering, production, supply chain and sub-contractor teams. This results in poor behaviours through a lack of ownership and accountability for enacting the plan once it has been “agreed”.

Active engagement between the various departments is vital to establish a healthy tension between operations and planning to strike a balance of a stretching plan, while ensuring understanding of the other parties’ issues. We have seen this achieved in a number of ways depending on the organisation, such as:

  • Physically locating the planning team alongside the delivery team
  • Pairing up individuals in operations and planning teams to provide a “go to person” to resolve issues
  • Encouraging planning teams out onto the shop floor to appreciate the true state of a project
  • Redeploying planning resource to areas of the project they had previously worked to bring expertise and create a direct link between the planning and operations teams

Furthermore, empowering the workforce to take responsibility for highlighting issues with the plan is another important step. At one site, the production team had fed back that they had received an identical incorrect work instruction four times on four consecutive ships, before giving up on the fifth ship and using their own experience to work off-plan and get the job done. To facilitate this required clear communication channels back to the planning teams, and any changes made to the plan should then be communicated back, so that individuals can see their input is valued and has been taken on board.

3. Plan visibility and accessibility

To be successful, everyone needs to be able to access the plan. Working to just one source of data removes the time spent challenging and questioning the results of multiple data sources and allows more time to be spent actually progressing the project. Plans should be intuitive enough to allow you to drill down into the detail from the top-level milestones, and ultimately help you to drive the right actions. It should also be shared and communicated with the workforce to build collective responsibility and ownership among the team.

A successful example of this comes from one build project where the critical path was made visible to the entire workforce at all levels. Critical path work was highlighted at daily planning meetings and laminated cards highlighting critical path jobs were provided to the workforce. This increased awareness of the implications of downtime on critical jobs and months of potential risk were mitigated with key milestones achieved on time. In this instance the plan was cascaded down into tailored communication that had the effect of mobilising the workforce towards a common goal and relentlessly driving progress towards it.

4. Open and collaborative culture

Moving towards a culture of openness and collaboration around the plan is key to building a successful link between planning teams and the rest of the workforce. This is sentiment which is agreed by Grant Steven Head of Surface Combatants Outputs at Babcock International states, “Engagement at all stages of the end to end planning process is key to developing a credible and enabled plan.”

At one site, the plan wasn't trusted and therefore wasn't followed. This meant that operations were forced to manage the build offline, often leading to incorrect prioritisation. Engaging the operations teams to voice their frustrations and putting in place initiatives to resolve them started to build confidence in the plan. After communicating success stories and planning policies, the operations team began to believe the plan was accurate and, over a 12-month period, confidence in the plan (measured through a workforce questionnaire) went from 44% to over 70%.

Building plan adherence into business recognition schemes is another important step to improving openness and collaboration. Behaviours that support plan adherence and improvement should also be championed by the leadership group. Frequent visible demonstrations of the business’ commitment to the plan and its maintenance will help to drive a business culture of improvement and ownership rather than defensiveness and blame. This cultural improvement should also feed into customer relations as it becomes visible on site. Downtime caused by out of sequence working, reworking and inefficiency from non-enabled work, could be mitigated if all involved contributed and committed to the plan.

Responding to the four points discussed in this article in order to create and maintain a credible plan through the lifecycle of a project does take time, leadership and investment. But from our experience this investment yields huge dividend in improved project delivery. How will you look to take your planning capability to the next level and incorporate these key learnings to accelerate successful delivery of your projects?


1024 x 512 Twitter 1

For further discussion of the importance of 'One Trusted Plan', join us on 7th September 2017 at 12pm for a 30 minute webinar, featuring Leo Martin, Maritime Transformation Director at BAE Systems.

Sign up for our Webinar

 SW Photo2 edited

Stephen Wilson is Associate Director at Newton, specialising in complex engineering projects in the maritime sector. Click here to connect on LinkedIn

Tim Murray Tim Murray, Associate Director

We know that the multiples are better than discounters in just about every area. Research shows that Tesco, Asda, Sainsbury’s and Morrisons offer a far superior range, better service, shorter queues and a better taste than Aldi or Lidl.

Yet people continue to shop at discounters. Which tells me that they don’t always care about facts - they care about experiences.

Now that’s partly to do with perception and things like expectation-setting – people’s sense of how positive their shopping experience was is directly related to how positive they expected it to be, so the shops with the lowest levels of consumer expectation (i.e. Lidl and Aldi) find it easier to come off looking good.

However, I believe that this element of ‘passion’ is a key factor. People’s shopping habits (grocery or otherwise) are often more likely to be emotional than rational – experiential not factual. They want a story to tell. People don't just want practical benefits; they want to be part of a bigger story.

Think of those friends who regularly brag about the amazing bargains at Lidl, recounting the great deals they got to anyone who’ll listen. It’s partly about price but it’s also about the story of it all and the feeling of success. Perhaps it’s the British tendency to champion the perceived underdog and they feel superior for ‘getting one over’ on the bigger stores. Whatever the reason, they’re personally enthusiastic about their shopping experience and keen to share it with others.

So multiples need to replicate that. They need to recognise that experience is often a bigger motivator than fact and give customers a reason to feel passionate about their brands.

Tesco’s farm range is a good example – it positions itself as higher in quality than their previous entry tier but at a price point that competes with the discounters, plus the authentic, British-grown and healthy style of the branding makes customers feel good about buying it. The multiples can capture shoppers’ imagination and offer more than just a bargain.

So, when thinking about how to beat the discounters, multiples must make sure that they don’t get too distracted by trying to win in areas like price. Offering a great shopping experience and creating passionate shoppers is key to success.


To read more, visit and download the full ‘Beating the Discounters: myth-busting and the £4billion opportunity’ report.


Download the full report now


Andy small Andrew Hawes, Founding Director

Once stigmatised as down-at-heel supermarket chains, Lidl and Aldi have reinvented themselves by convincing customers their aisles are stacked with superior quality products at prices the UK’s big four of Tesco, Sainsbury, Asda and Morrisons struggle to match.

That proposition enabled the discount duo to steadily gain market share as consumers, whose spending power had been curbed by the recession and prolonged wage stagnation, became more price-conscious.

Yet research shows price is only fourth on shoppers’ priority list – behind proximity, range and habit - and with over 90% of discounters’ customers also visiting a higher-end supermarket, there’s a chance for a Big Four comeback.

To engage in a pure price war would be foolish – the discounters are doing just that, achieving 5-25% discounts versus the conventional chains, who on average would forego £1 billion in profits to reach parity.

Instead, the multiples need to remind customers of the advantages of shopping at one store with a full range, better service, equal or better quality and comparable prices. They also need to ‘myth-bust’ the perception that the discounter’s products are comparable.


Our own research of 40 people tested products from eight supermarket ranges (including dairy, confectionery, juice, produce, meat and fish), comparing both the multiples’ entry-tier and mid-tier products to Aldi’s and Lidl’s. The results showed a greater percentage of people still ranked the multiples’ entry-tier and mid-tier products above those of the discounters. Asda’s cheddar cheese was the cheapest and topped taste tests – yet customers are unaware of the actual difference in quality. 

Tesco’s farm range has begun to give shoppers a reason to feel passionate about the products they buy from the store again, in the same way they might recall an unexpected bargain obtained from a discounter to their friends over dinner. Positioned as higher quality than Tesco’s previous entry-level tier and priced to compete with discounters, the farm range makes shoppers feel enthusiastic about their buying decisions again.

If the full facts around quality of product and price are promoted to customers, along with the existing areas around range and habit where the multiples are already superior – how can they continue to lose market share?


To read more, visit and download the full ‘Beating the Discounters: myth-busting and the £4billion opportunity’ report.


Download the full report now