The Accenture Global Customer Preferences Study for Chemicals

The call to become customer smart

Foreword
The creation of customer
value is a cornerstone
of any serious business
strategy. With that in
mind, many chemical
companies striving to stay
ahead of the competition
have embarked on a
journey to become more
customer-centric. Simply
enough, this means
serving customers with a
clear understanding of the
value exchange between
buyer and seller. But that
is easier said than done.
Accenture and the American Chemistry
Council (ACC) teamed up in early 2010
to explore that issue, and analyze
the key buying factors at work when
companies consider suppliers of
chemical products. The reason: It is
clear that more often than not, the
concept of “customer centricity” is
poorly understood in the industry,
and actions are too often based on
unfounded assumptions rather than on
evidence. Using a systematic approach
and a robust methodology, we received
answers from more than 1,200
company representatives throughout
the chemical value chain on the
following questions:
2
• What are the key buying factors in
the industry, and which ones trump
others?
• How is the relative importance of
buying factors distributed across
regions and segments of the value
chain?
• What are the key areas for
improvement and action for chemical
companies seeking to increase
customer loyalty and value capture?
Our survey and analysis resulted
in clear preference profiles among
buyers, enabling a thorough
assessment of customer values across
the industry value chain. Some of
the findings were expected, others
were not. Many of the findings point
to areas where there is a need for
closer alignment between the needs
of customers and standard industry
practice—and often, to opportunities
that suppliers can pursue to grow
revenues and market share. The key, to
a great extent, is improved customer
insight and customer segmentation,
working in conjunction with
operational excellence—in other words,
a higher level of customer centricity.
Finally, let us be clear: Customer
centricity does not mean rushing to
give every customer better service,
or treating all customers more or less
the same. It is a wake-up call to do
exactly the opposite, and focus on
treating different customers in the
most appropriate manner—that is, to
become “customer smart.”
Introduction
From March through June 2010, Figure 1. Buyers’ and suppliers’ survey panel by value chain position.
Accenture, in partnership with the
American Chemistry Council and Total panel by value chain position
TrueChoice® Solutions, conducted Value chain position Number of responses
a study to develop a better
understanding of the factors that Buyer Supplier
drive decisions around the selection
Chemical company 177 212
of suppliers in the industry. The
result—the Accenture Global Customer Converter 57 23
Preferences Study for Chemicals—
Distributor 31 59
explores the buying values in the
industry today, and helps identify Manufacturer 241 228
areas of opportunity in buyer-supplier
Retailer 17 19
engagement.
Total global buyers 523 541
Conducted online, the study surveyed
buyers and sellers across the industry. It
involved more than 1,200 respondents,
representing companies up and down Figure 2. Buyers’ and suppliers’ survey panel by geography.
the industry value chain, and from Geographic regions with more than 20 participants
both emerging and mature economies
around the globe (see Figures 1 and 2). Region Number of responses
The respondents came from all roles Buyer Supplier
in customer engagement processes
including procurement, product North America 153 182
design and management, marketing,
Europe 140 147
customer support, technology, R&D and
manufacturing. China 76 93

The research also looked at buying India 46 31

values in the three fundamental Brazil 22 28
chemical industry business models (see
Figure 3):

• Feedstock foundation (FF) model— Figure 3. Number of buyer responses by chemical business model.
companies that are heavily focused on
producing the essential building blocks Feedstock foundation Number of responses
for downstream companies.
Petrochemical and intermediates 55
• Chemicals platform (CP) model— Chemicals platform
companies that cross several parts
of the chemical value chain, typically Polymers, synthetic rubber, fibers 51
based on a few core building-block Inorganic chemicals 13
chemicals and technologies. They use
a portfolio management approach to Market maker
target broad areas, such as health, Consumer chemicals 12
energy, transportation, housing and
construction. Paints, adhesives and inks 10
Agricultural chemicals 4
• Market maker (MM) model—
companies that focus on selected Other specialty chemicals 14
downstream end markets in areas
such as life science, agrochemicals,
paints and coatings, consumer care
and related technologies, where the
chemicals they manufacture are,
by nature, oriented toward those
segments.
3
The research methodology
The study utilized an innovative
technology from TrueChoice Solutions
that measures individual preferences
of respondents in real time using
econometric algorithms. In assessing
responses, researchers used a
conjoint analysis statistical technique,
which essentially determines how
respondents value different factors
in their buying decisions, making it
possible to determine how each factor
ranks in importance, compared to the
other factors.
Respondents rated the importance of
10 high-level attributes, each broken
down to three to six levels of detail
(overall 45 levels). Since the preference
of respondents ranged around 10
percent for each of the 10 attributes,
summing up to 100 percent for all 10
attributes, the higher the percentage
for an attribute, the more important
it was ranked from a buyer’s/supplier’s
perspective.
For each respondent, the importance
rating for the levels were all
normalized to the importance given
to price, adjusting price to the value
of “1.” Therefore, various factors were
assigned index numbers, according
to the responses. Thus, a factor
that ranks above 1 is seen as being
more important than price. Also,
the greater the increase over 1, the
more it is associated with reduced
price sensitivity and increased price
elasticity. Conversely, factors with
index numbers lower than 1 are seen
as less important than price.
4
Additionally, 13 qualitative questions
on supplier performance were asked
and ranked by buyers’ view on
suppliers and suppliers’ assessment of
their own company.
Results were analyzed for buyers’
and suppliers’ views, across the
value chain (chemical companies,
distributors, converters, manufacturers
and retailers) and for selected regions
(North America, Europe, China and
India). In addition, results for chemical
companies were split according to
their business model (feedstock
foundation, chemicals platform and
market maker).
This report looks at how these results
are reflected in several broad key
themes:
• Product quality and performance
• Reliability
• Channels and relationships
• Innovation
• Sustainability
These themes are discussed in more
depth in the following pages.
Buying values: Not all created equal
It is a widely recognized fact that
different people value different things,
and their willingness to pay for these
things varies with the perceived value.
However, the chemical industry has yet
to consistently apply this concept in its
marketing and sales operations. Over
the years, chemical companies have
made various investments in customer
relationship management systems,
skill development, price and margin
management software, electronic
channels for commerce and order-
management tools. But in general,
these investments have not yielded an
adequate return.

There are many reasons for this,

certainly—but a key issue is that those
investments have not been properly
grounded in a robust understanding
of customer preferences. Moreover,
customer insight needs to be
actionable, and translated into
segment-specific strategies. Then, the
segmented marketing-mix strategies
have to be executed throughout
the entire lead-to-fulfillment cycle,
from product management to sales,
technical and customer service,
and logistics. These actions need
to be enabled by the hard wiring of
segment-specific strategies within the
tools and systems underlying the lead-
to-fulfillment cycle.

Accenture’s research investigated the

dominant preferences among industry
buyers, and their distribution along
the industry value chain and across
business models and geographies. On
the following pages, we explore some
of the key factors that buyers consider,
and what they actually value in
a supplier.

5
Product quality and performance
Getting the basics right

Accenture’s research shows that

product quality and performance is
clearly the most important factor for
industry buyers when selecting a new
supplier or deciding whether to do
more business with an existing supplier
(see Figure 4). With an index number
of 1.29, it trumps innovation by 84
percent, knowledgeable salespeople
by 52 percent and relationships by 54
percent, when it comes to supplier
selection. (As described earlier, the
index number indicates a factor’s
importance relative to price; a number
higher than 1 is more important than
price, a number lower than 1 is less
important.) That should not come as a
surprise; variances in product quality
and performance can have serious
effects, such as line trouble and, in the
worst case, recalls or warranty issues.

6
Figure 4. Ranking of all buyer values across all segments, value chain positions and geographies.
1.0

Product quality and performance

Innovation that improves reliability/quality
Reliability of supply
Quality of complaint resolution
Management to prevent issue recurrence
Stability of supplier Buyer values of higher
Customer support relative importance than
Breadth of technical knowledge price (buyers are willing to
pay a premium)
Innovation focused on cost reduction
Price
Customization around delivery
Delivery speed and response
Buyer values of lower
Customer service and collaboration relative importance than
Time to complaint resolution price (buyers are not
Technical info access (e.g., via phone, online) willing to pay a premium)

Customized product specifications

Financial terms (supplier selection)
Quality and knowledge of salespeople
Customized product design
Relationships
Higher efficiency of existing equipment
Energy efficiency (sustainability)
Order tracking
Materials efficiency (sustainability)
Customization around support
Waste/water consumption reduction
Technologies that further integrate supply chain
Investments around clean technologies
Customized financial terms
Innovation around energy efficiency
Innovation improving functionality/features
Social/safety aspects
Emission reduction
Innovation (products, services, talent)
New materials innovations
Complaint tracking and accountability
Product stewardship
Innovation that improves flexibility
Order placement
Customer FAQs
IT-based innovations
New process automation
Escalation process
Brand
Financial terms (supplier selection)

Number of responses = 523 buyers

Ranking relative to price, where price = 1.0

7
All of this does not mean that factors
such as relationships and service are
not important—they are. But strengths
in those areas need to be built on a
solid product foundation. High levels
of product quality and performance
are the price of entry for preferred
supplier status in the chemical
industry.
Manufacturers are more likely than
other industry players to see product
quality and performance as key. This
view is likely due to the fact that
manufacturers are especially aware
of (warranty) problems that can arise
when products are off-spec.
Further downstream, distributors and
retailers place greater importance
on cost than on product quality and
performance, while converters see it
as only slightly more important than
costs. Here again, these segments of
the value chain simply tend to be more
price sensitive.
From a geographic perspective,
product quality and performance is
a particularly important factor for
Chinese chemical companies, who rank
it 33 percent higher than the already-
high industry average (see Figure
5). This is most likely a reflection of
past high-profile quality problems in
that country, such as the melamine-
contaminated milk issue and the
2007 Fisher-Price recall of 1.5 million
Chinese toys due to concerns over
lead-based paint.
8
Figure 5. Ranking of product quality and performance by geography.
Buyer location (number of replies by region)
China (76)
India (46)
North America (153)
Europe (139)
Total
Number of responses = 523 buyers
Numbers do not total, as not all regions are reflected
Ranking relative to price, where price = 1.0
These findings point to the need
for chemical companies to develop
a more granular view of customer
and customer-segment needs and
expectations in this area. Often,
however, it is not economically feasible
for chemical companies to produce
varying quality levels of product for
different customers. It can simply
be more cost effective to produce
everything on-spec, even if some
customers can tolerate significant
variation.
Nevertheless, there are cases in which
varying quality levels are worthwhile.
The research shows that product
quality is less important to buyers
in India, compared to those in North
America and China. This difference
could be due to the fact that a large
portion of Indian manufacturing
output is consumed domestically or
in the neighboring economies. For
example, pigments and coatings
for the India-based Tata Nano Car,
which sells at a retail price of slightly
above $2,500, are likely to be subject
to different quality expectations,
compared to those used on
subcompact cars in mature economies.
1.72
1.08
1.32
1.15
1.29
1.0
Taken together, such factors can
support the case for creating different
quality levels to match different
customer expectations. However,
whether those expectations can
be profitably met by lower-cost
production technologies, supplier
development agreements or low-cost
country sourcing is largely a question
of strategy, rather than customer
preference.
Thus, the opportunity here lies not
so much in producing different
products as in better aligning the
marketing and price-point mix with
customer requirements. For example,
companies that can emphasize their
ability to produce 100 percent on-spec
products may want to leverage that
in their messaging to manufacturers
in order to develop premium-pricing
opportunities in highly quality-
sensitive market segments such as
medical equipment.
9