Government

Showing posts with label Government. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Government. Show all posts

Tuesday, 1 July 2014

World of Industrial Distribution changing with B2B Revolutions


Using distributors as an alternative to selling direct is very far from being a soft option, though it may be inevitable. Here we consider the manufacturer distributor relationship and look at its three commonest problems.

Industrial distribution has grown apace over the last 30 years. It has been driven by pressures of ever increasing selling costs and the demands from users for rapid service. Industrial companies which previously managed their own direct salesforces are having to learn how to pick distributors; and they are finding out the difficulties of training and guiding distributors' selling efforts. The skills which the industrial marketer needs today are not those of motivating reps to seek inquiries and stimulate sales but in pulling the demand through the distributor chain.

The term "distributor" is used loosely to cover a wide range of middlemen. In its strictest sense a distributor should:
  1. Purchase goods from his supplier for stock;
  2. Actively promote and sell this stock to users;
  3. Provide advice and service as appropriate for the product he sells;
  4. Invoice and collect money from his customers.

Usually a distributor is appointed by a manufacturer and may well operate a franchise for just one type of product. Kango hammer distributors could not sell Hilti or Bosch hammers but there is nothing to stop them selling a whole range of compressors and air tools which make a sympathetic product line up. Thus a distributor is very different to a wholly owned company depot, as independence allows it to stock a range of different products to suit customers' demands.

Mostly distributors are not formally appointed and sell whatever brands they like. Electrical wholesalers usually sell three or four brands of cable, and their allegiance to their supplier may stop with the price. The purist distinguishes between this wholesaling activity and the appointed distributor. From the manufacturer's point of view, selling trucks through distributors or lubricants via engineers' merchants pose similar problems of pulling demand through a sales outlet which they do not own.

To understand the motivations of the distributor and the manufacturer it is necessary to consider the driving force which brings them together. First let us consider how distributors begin. Often they start life as sales agencies - someone who has worked in an industry for a period sets up on their own selling a product he/she understands to customers he knows. Usually the product is a consumable or standard equipment costing tens to hundreds of pounds. It is a short step for the agent to add new and complementary products, get a small unit on a trading estate and buy and sell stock rather than take a commission.

The origins of the distributor require characteristics of local specialization and an entrepreneurial culture. The key to everything is stock turn and margins. A fast moving consumable may have a 25 per cent margin (i.e. a 33 per cent mark up) while a piece of kit which turns over at a slower rate may command a 40/50 per cent margin (i.e. a 66 per cent to 100 per cent mark up). - The Changing World of Industrial Distribution

The entrepreneurial distributor, originally the salesman, soon becomes desk bound and spends time on the important function of buying. A sales team is employed and being entrepreneurial the salaries are modest in the hope that commission will provide the incentive to sell.

Counter staff are paid peanuts. The whole essence of the distributorship has become a pipeline with buying and selling as the principal functions.

The manufacturer or principal on the other hand is moving away from being sales orientated. The manufacturer wants to cut back directly employed sales staff and focus on niches of demand. The manufacturer wants to concentrate on creating awareness and demand for the product through advertising. A system is needed for ensuring customers can easily obtain products anywhere in the country. A wholly owned depot is usually expensive and so the move to distribution. Distributors have a deep knowledge of local markets. They buy in bulk and save the manufacturer the trouble of sending out hundreds of invoices (which the law of averages says will have a fair peppering of bad debts). The distributor's stock saves the manufacturer space and money.

Of course, not all industrial products are suited to the distribution route. In general standard products pitched at a large and diverse target market and requiring a low level of technical competence in the salesforce are most readily suited to distributors.

The three most common sources of problems between manufacturers and distributors relate to excessive discounting, territorial disputes and arguments over the lack of distributors’ promotional efforts.

Disputes over excessive discounting by distributors.

Distributors work to a list price set by their principals and offer discounts to their own customers. Sometimes fierce local competition causes these discounts to get out of hand.

For example, since 1980 electrical wholesalers have been forced to offer larger discounts to stop their customers (the electrical contractors) buying from DIY superstores. The pressure on prices spirals backwards to the manufacturers who periodically try to tame the distribution network. Disputes are frequent where products are of high value (or bought in volume) and an extra one per cent is worth a fight. Office equipment, commercial vehicles and compressors have become battlegrounds with discounts the main weapon. Peace is restored if demand rises and the availability of products become restricted.

There is, however, much that manufacturers themselves can do. If Mita promote their copiers as being of a higher quality than others, their distributors do not need to cut prices as fiercely. Volvo trucks with a reputation for reliability and high residual values will not be discounted to the same extent as Renault or Ford.

Disputes About Geographical Areas

Distributors quite naturally want exclusivity in the territory where they sell. Manufacturers may be insensitive to this issue, preferring a multiplicity of distributors in a region - in the hope that the wider spread of sales outlets will ensure more product will hit the target.

If the product is a high turnover consumable such as abrasive discs, plumbers' requisites, cable, cutting tools and the like, the distributor cannot hope to be granted exclusivity. In any case the buyer of the consumable seldom specifies a brand for this type of product, and the distributor wins business by offering a wide range, a high level of availability, excellent service and good prices.

However, where makes or brands are specified, geographical disputes between competing distributors can occur. If buyers buy locally, as in the case of shot blasting equipment, the principal can afford to carve the country into regions. If buyers buy nationally, as in the case of trucks, truck bodies and associated gear, there cannot be any geographical boundaries, and each distributor must accept competition with others. In practice, the franchise of a truck distributor is one of around only 20 to 30 spread across the UK, and in any area a distributor has the advantage of a local following which gives a lead over his fellow franchisees in other regions.

Disputes About Distributors' Selling Efforts And Promotion

Manufacturers soon find out that they have little or no control over their distributors' sales efforts. In fact if a manufacturer tries to encourage a distributor's salesforce with training or incentives, it may well suffer a rebuff. The distributor doesn't want its salesforce locked in to one product. Furthermore a day out on a manufacturer's training course is a day ('off the road") and has to be paid for.

The manufacturer recognising these limitations of the distributor is tempted to adopt a hybrid approach, using its own salesforce to cherry pick the largest and most worthwhile accounts and leave the distributor to sweep up the rest. Distrust arises and the distributor starts to ignore the franchise guidelines and even double deal, offering alternative products even though a franchise agreement may prohibit this.

The manufacturer must be quite clear about the trading arrangements from the start. Amicable solutions can be worked out based on the purchasing power of customers (over a certain size could be handled direct) or by end use (military customers may be handled direct). Introduction fees can be given to distributors to maintain their interest and keep them happy. - B2B-Internet


{{ The Guest Post Blogger organization was not involved in the creation of this content. - Dalvi Prabhakar B., Founder & Digital Manager (SEO,SEM,SMO) }}

Tuesday, 21 August 2012

LAWS RELATING TO WAGES & BENEFITS



Minimum Wages Act 1948

The Act contains list of all employments for which minimum wages are to be fixed by the appropriate Governments. It includes non-agricultural employments and employment in agriculture. It empowers appropriate Government to fix the minimum rates of wages for specified employments. Recently with effect from April 1, 2011 the National Floor Level of Minimum Wage has been raised to Rs. 115 per day.

Payment of Bonus Act 1965

The payment of Bonus Act is applicable to every factory and every other establishment in which 20 or more persons are employed on any day during an accounting year excluding some categories of employees as contained in the Act. PBA mandates payment of bonus to every employee in an accounting year, in accordance with the provisions of this legislation, provided that he or she has worked in the establishment for not less than 30 days and draws a salary or wage not exceeding Rs.10, 000 per month.

Minimum bonus shall be 8.33% of salary/wages earned or Rs. 100 whichever is higher, it is payable on completion of 5 years after 1st Accounting year even if there is no profit. If the allocable surplus exceeds the amount of minimum bonus, then bonus shall be payable at higher rate subject to a maximum 20% of salary/wages. Computation of bonus is to be worked out as prescribed in the Act. Bonus shall be paid within 8 months from the close of accounting year. A register showing the computation of the allocable surplus, another register showing the set-on and set-off of the allocable surplus, and register showing the details of the amount of bonus due to each of the employees, the deductions and the amount actually disbursed must be maintained.

Payment of Wages Act, 1936

Enacted during the British Rule in 1936 on the recommendations of the Royal Commission on Labour, the Act regulates the payment of wages to workers and ensures that they are disbursed by the employers within the stipulated time frame and without any unauthorized deductions. Enforcement of the Payment of Wages Act is primarily the responsibility of the State Governments. The Central Government is responsible to enforce the Act only in mines, railways, oilfields and air transport service by virtue of Section 24 of the Act.

Inspectors are appointed under the provisions of the Act who conduct regular inspections to ensure that the employers pay the wages timely and correctly. Defaulting employers are advised to pay full wages in time.  In case of non-adherence to the advice, there are provisions to prosecute.

The Act lays down that the wage period exceeding one month should not be fixed and payment of wages must be made before the entry of specific day after the last day of the wage period.  The specific day is the seventh day of a month where the number of workers is less than 1000 and tenth day in case the number of workers is 1000 or more.  All wages must be paid in current legal tender.  The wages can also be paid by cheque or credited to the bank account of the employed persons with the written authorization of the letter.  The beneficiary under the Act are, however those who are in receipt of wages below the Rs. 10,000/- per month.

The Act provides that the wages of an employed person shall be paid to him without any deductions except those authorized under the Act.  Deductions permissible from wages inter-alia relates to unauthorized absence from duty, deductions for house accommodations, recovery of advances and statutory dues etc.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Indira Rajaraman: The power grid knockout


The immediate cause was the inability of the Regional Load Dispatch Centre (RLDC) to control overdrawing of power by states connected to the grid. The RLDC was not empowered to operate circuit-breakers, and could only warn erring states. The erring states were too powerful politically for the RLDC to do anything other than sound repeated warnings.

Why should politics have anything whatever to do with something as routine as drawing electricity from a grid? Clearly, if technical systems of this type have not been ring-fenced from political pressures, a regional chieftain could hold the entire country to ransom, pulling down the country if he or she is displeased. Something is seriously wrong with the structuring of the Indian federation.

I have written repeatedly about the desperate need for an inter-state platform where states could meet regularly on their interconnectedness on a number of issues. The Constitution actually provides for such a platform in the form of an Inter State Council (ISC) under Article 263, but the Council came into being only in 1990. The ISC provides in principle a forum where states could meet on issues, and decide in concert on ceding to technical bodies like the RLDC the right to operate traffic signals in a purely rule-bound manner.

This kind of process, whereby members of a group cede to an external authority the right to enforce discipline among the group, in a way that cannot be legally challenged by a displeased member, is very common. In academic departments in American universities for instance, where yearly salary fixation based on productivity involves contentious and unpleasant decisions, it is not uncommon for faculty to agree to an externally appointed Head, who functions in effect as a constitutional dictator.

In practise, the ISC has atrophied through disuse into a somnolent institution tucked away somewhere in the folds of the Vigyan Bhavan office complex. The ISC commissions studies of various kinds, but by the time the study reports fall due, the personnel at the ISC have changed several times over. Every once in a while, the ISC acts as the local partner of the Canada-based Forum of Federations, for conferences on what are sometimes quite topical issues. The conference is held, but there is no follow-up.

Around 10 years ago when I lobbied strenuously for a revival of the rightful role of the ISC, I got two responses. One was that the National Development Council (NDC) provides the platform I was looking for. The second was that when an issue involving state co-operation comes to the fore, temporary platforms spring up to deal with it.

The NDC is a large unwieldy body that meets sparingly, with a set agenda typically centred around approval of national Five-Year Plans. Meetings of the NDC have ritual value like meetings of the United Nations General Assembly, but lead to no systematic resolution of problems.

Temporary platforms do indeed get formed when there is a pressing issue calling for co-operation and consensus between states. The most recent and successful of these is the Empowered Group of State Finance Ministers, which shepherded the coming on board of all states on the value added tax (VAT), and is presently carrying forward – with many a hookup – the further move to a dual-track Centre-state goods and services tax (GST). And of course river water disputes are governed under a separate Constitutional provision (Article 262).

Even so, there are many issues that arise from time to time, each one possibly a problem confined to just a few affected states, that do not by themselves justify a separate temporary platform. But these could if ignored snowball into a general sense of isolation and dis empowerment, which could severely hamper the co-operation needed for any federation to endure. The number of states affected by any single issue could be small, but the problem itself could be large and of overwhelming importance to them.



Thanks : source
Enhanced by Zemanta