Work in practice · Illustrative decision brief
One range.
Three different priorities.
Where should the team investigate shopper movement, protect the current range, or repair execution?
Synthetic example. Every figure, store group and circumstance is fictional. The inputs illustrate documented Charter fields; no retailer report or client work was used. Prepared September 7, 2026 · Version 2.0.
- Range
- 6 existing breakfast-bar packs
- Stores
- 360 stores · Three separate groups
- Evidence
- Performance, shopper movement and assortment
Recommended direction for this example
Give each group its own next step.
A common sales concern can conceal different priorities. Use the evidence to decide where to investigate shopper movement, preserve a pack’s role, and resolve execution questions.
Group A · 120 stores
Investigate Group A.
Classic loses volume within a flat six-pack portfolio while eligible in-stock remains steady. Review the native shopper movement and assortment evidence before proposing a range change.
Group B · 120 stores
Protect Group B.
Classic has a stronger Composite Score position and greater exclusivity here than in the other groups. Challenge a uniform removal proposal against its local shopper role.
Group C · 120 stores
Diagnose Group C.
Classic’s sales weaken as eligible in-stock deteriorates. Investigate execution and eligibility changes before treating weak sales as evidence that the pack no longer earns its place.
The evidence behind the distinction
The same pack has different contexts.
All rows concern Classic 8-pack. Channel Performance, Switching and Assortment Performance retain their own periods and reporting populations.
Scroll the table to compare all three groups. The evidence labels stay visible.
| Evidence | Group A | Group B | Group C |
|---|---|---|---|
| Net units · prior 13 weeks | 15,600 | 16,380 | 9,360 |
| Net units · current 13 weeks | 12,480 | 15,600 | 6,240 |
| Repl In Stock · current period | 95% | 98% | 78% |
| Switching sales index · prior = 100 | 88 | 98 | 76 |
| Composite Score rank · six packs | 5 of 6 | 2 of 6 | 6 of 6 |
| Sales from loyal Walmart shoppers | 35% | 68% | 51% |
| Exclusive category repeaters | 2% | 8% | 4% |
The rank orders six displayed native Composite Scores. It is not a category-wide deletion rule. Loyal Sales refers to loyalty to Walmart. Exclusivity divides exclusive customers by that product’s category repeaters; it does not predict whether shoppers would leave after a removal.
Check periods and reporting populations
Channel Performance compares June 6 to September 4, 2026 with March 7 to June 5. Both periods contain 13 complete weeks. Own-item POS units and retail dollars are net of returns, for store-fulfilled channels with no tender filter. Equal period length does not establish seasonal comparability.
Switching compares two separate 26-week periods using card-identified shoppers, Continuous Panel and Buy In-Store only. Its prior-period-100 index is calculated from that report’s Sales Value, not from the CP unit rows above.
Assortment Performance uses a separate 52-week traceable-card population, August 30, 2025 to August 28, 2026. Its available period ends a week earlier. This example uses uploaded store groups with all available basket channels. The three lenses share reviewed store and product selections, not a customer-level join or an interchangeable population.
A real native report also needs sufficient data support. Validate the authorized output and broaden the scope transparently if a measure is unavailable.
Look inside the period
Group C needs an execution investigation.
Classic averages 706 net units per week in the first five current weeks, then 338.8 in the remaining eight. Eligible Repl In Stock moves from 96% to 66%. That timing makes execution worth investigating before drawing an assortment conclusion.
This is a descriptive comparison, not a causal test. Eligibility coverage also changes from 95.2% to 89.3% of possible store-days. The rates use summed daily in-stock contributions divided by summed eligibility indicators. Check those exclusions and corroborating inventory evidence; the gap is not a lost-sales estimate.
Inspect the weekly evidenceTurn the read into follow-through
Agree on the next evidence and owner.
Validate the scopes, challenge each interpretation and agree on what would change the recommendation. The interactive report keeps the detail and follow-up actions beside the evidence.
- Confirm the decision scopeAccount lead
- Investigate the Group A shopper movementInsights lead
- Review the role of Classic in Group BAccount and insights leads
- Resolve the Group C execution questionReplenishment lead
- Agree on the next decision reviewAccount lead