Separating the SKUs that grow the business from those that only cannibalise it
Every quarter brought new flavours and packs, yet total category growth was barely moving.
Growth case- A multinational impulse snacks company
- Client
- Impulse foods
- Industry
- Growth Strategy
- Solution
- 12 weeks
- Duration
Results
- Incremental share of new-launch volume
- 35% → 62%
- Active SKUs
- −22%
- Gross margin
- +2.6 pts
The challenge
The portfolio had grown to 180+ SKUs across chips, namkeen and extruded snacks. Brand teams were measured on launch volumes, so new SKUs looked successful even when they mostly pulled sales from existing products. Leadership could not tell which SKUs were bringing in new buyers and occasions, and which were only moving volume around the shelf.
Our approach
How we applied the GROW Framework — from data to decisions and measurable growth.
Combined outlet-level retail-audit data, secondary sales, price-pack architecture and the promotion calendar into a single SKU-by-channel view.
Modelled demand transfer to separate incremental volume from switching. Nearly half of recent launches drew more than 70% of their volume from the brand's own SKUs. Meanwhile, low-price-point packs in small-town general trade were bringing in genuinely new buyers.
Classified every SKU as an Incremental Grower, Core Anchor, Switcher or Tail. The leadership team agreed to exit or merge switchers, move shelf space and trade spend to growers, and add an incrementality test to the launch stage-gate.
Put in place a quarterly SKU scorecard and a launch post-mortem at 6 months, so portfolio decisions stay tied to incremental growth rather than gross volume.
More for enterprise businesses