Does Small Store Location Matter?

A Test of Three
Classic Theories of Retail Location
ABSTRACT. Just how important is physical location as a source of small-firm advantage? In this paper we
consider this question by testing the predictive validity of three classic perspectives: central-place theory,
spatial interaction theory and the principle of minimum differentiation. In addition, we identify and test two
managergrounded hypotheses focusing on locational continuity and transactional convenience. We test these
hypotheses on a sample of small U.S. retail hardware stores and find significant support for central-place theory
and both manager-grounded hypotheses.

One of the most critical decisions a small retail establishment makes is choice of location
(Kuo et al., 2002). As Levy and Weitz note, while retailers can change their pricing,
service, and merchandise assortments in a relatively short time location decisions are
harder to change because retailers frequently have to either make substantial
investments to buy and develop real estate or commit to long-term leases with
developers (2004: 217).
Accordingly, and as this studys title attests, some see location as everything. However,
others are not so persuaded and provide convincing evidence for the strategic viability of
less convenient locations (Woodside and Trappey, 2001; Jones et al., 2003). In this study
we seek to shed light on these conflicting perspectives by exploring the strategic
significance of retail location as a physical resource (Barney, 1991). We undertake this
task by reporting findings from our study of the relationship between retail store location
characteristics and small retailer performance.
Our paper proceeds as follows. First, we review insights from three seminal works on
Journal of location theory and advance a set of hypotheses linking specific locational
attributes to firm performance. Next, drawing on insights from a group of small retail
managers, we identify two alternative location-related hypotheses. We then describe the
research design utilized in testing this set of hypotheses. Following a description of our
analysis strategy we report our findings from our sample of over 340 small hardware
stores. Our paper concludes with a discussion of the implications of these findings for
small-firm researchers and practitioners.
Theoretical Framework and Hypotheses
Just over two millennia ago the Chinese strategist Sun Tzu asserted that terrain plays a
potentially critical role in shaping a battles outcome. In his treatise, The Art of War
(1983), he also offered a preliminary typology of six basic types of terrain: (1) accessible
ground, that is, ground that can be freely traversed by both sides, (2) entangling ground,
which can be abandoned but hard to reoccupy, (3) temporizing ground, where neither
side gains advantage by making the first move, (4) narrow passes and (5) precipitous
heights, both of which were ideal for waiting for ones enemy, and finally, (6) positions at
a great distance from the enemy. As the previous descriptions suggest, some types of
terrain, such as accessible ground, are more amenable to offensive manoeuvres; others,
such as narrow passes and precipitous heights, favour more inherently defensive tactics.
Sun Tzus assertions also raise an important question of special interest to retailers
battling for customer patronage: To what extent does retail store location influence retail
store performance? During the past century there has been significant attention devoted
to this question. In the review that follows, we revisit three classic perspectives focusing
on the importance of proximity to customers and competitors, respectively, and also on
the non-location related role of product- and service-mix.
Retail Location Theory: Seminal Insights
During the past century retail researchers advanced several seminal theories concerning
the nature and significance of retail location. These included central place theory
(Christaller, 1933), spatial interaction theory (Reilly 1929, 1931), and the principle of
minimum differentiation (Hotelling, 1929). As Browns (1993) review of retail location
theory demonstrates, each perspective offers a different, and complementary,
perspective on the nature of locational advantage.
Central place theory (Christaller, 1933) focuses on the role of transportation costs and
predicts that demand for a good or service declines with distance from the source of
supply. While this theory fails to address the two possibilities of heterogenous goods,
such as expensive and infrequently purchased wares, and multi-purpose shopping trips,
it is nonetheless seen as possessing significant predictive power to the extent its core
assumption, of single-purpose shopping trips, corresponds with customer demand.

Accordingly, locations closer to the centre of customer demand warrant a rent premium,
compared to less central locales.
In contrast, spatial interaction theory (Reilly, 1929, 1931) assumes the possibility of
customers making tradeoffs between store-specific product- and service-related
differences vis--vis the shopping locations attractiveness, with what is transacted for
being more important than where the transaction occurs. Jones et al. (2003) provide
empirical support for this perspective with their finding that location was less important
for small convenience stores offering less standardized and more personalized goods and
services.
A third theory of retail location, advanced by Hotelling (1929), is the principle of
minimum differentiation. Whereas other perspectives focus on locational centrality,
Hotelling asserted that not every transaction depended upon access to an entire market.
Instead, what mattered was relative proximity vis--vis other sources of the same product
or service. In other words, proximity to rivals is more critical than proximity to customers.
The practical implication of this principle is evidenced by the automobile row
phenomenon found in many metropolitan areas, where several different automobile
retailers congregate in close proximity. Nelson (1958) advanced an accompanying
principle of cumulative attraction that articulates the underlying logic of minimal
differentiation.
According to this principle, a given number of stores dealing in the same merchandise
will do more business if they are located adjacent, or in proximity to each other than if
they are widely scattered (58).
In some respects, all three theories share at least one common characteristic: the
theories emanate from positivist premises, which presuppose, essentially, that there is
an identifiable order in the material world, that people are rational, utility-maximizing
decision makers and that economic activity takes place in freely competitive,
equilibriumseeking contexts or settings (Brown, 1993: 186).
However, these commonalities notwithstanding, the theories also differ in their predictive
implications. While central place theory places a priority on the relative density of a
stores trading area, spatial interaction theory posits performance-related differences
emanating from the specific competitors product and service offering. In contrast, the
principle of minimum differentiation hypothesizes that proximity to rivals enhances
performance.
Accordingly, three divergent hypotheses follow:
H1. Small retailer performance is positively related to the store locations surrounding
customer density (Central place theory).
H2. Small retailer performance is unrelated to location but determined by the small
retailers product and/or service mix (Spatial interaction theory).
H3. Small retailer performance is positively related to the store locations surrounding
competitor density (Principle of minimum differentiation).
Practitioner Propositions: Exploring Theories-in-Use
Recently, Pearce (2004) called on management researchers to listen more closely to
practicing managers and subject their folk wisdom to careful analysis and more
systematic reality checks that could improve its veracity (2004: 178). In the spirit of
Pearces exhortation and other recent efforts to integrate managerially grounded insights
(Clarke et al., 2000; Pioch and Byrom, 2004), we listened to a group of retail store
managers concerning the nature of effective retail store management. While a full
description of our research design and sample is presented in the methodology section
that follows, we follow a slightly non-conventional format here by presenting highlights of
these managers theories in practice (Argyris and Schon, 1982) as they concern the
significance of store location.1
Of the 348 stores in our sample, 133 (38.2%) offered voluntary comments. Our analysis
of the comments proceeded in two stages. First, we sorted the comments by whether
they contained the keyword location. Using this heuristic we identified 11 comments
(8.3% of the total) that explicitly mentioned the word location. In the second stage, we
undertook a content analysis (Kolbe and Burnett, 1991) of the remaining 122 comments
and looked for any phrase or words pertaining to their specific stores location. Following
this strategy we found an additional nine responses for a total of 20 comments (or 15%
of all comments offered).

Two clusters of insights emerged from analysis of the comments. The first set of insights
concerned the extent to which managers either supported, or refuted, one or more of the
seminal perspectives advanced previously. The second set of insights concerned
additional hypotheses involving the nature of location-based advantage.
Concerning mention of the seminal theories, the most frequently mentioned perspective
was Hotellings principle of minimum differentiation. Exemplar comments supporting the
importance of locating near competitors included the following:
If I were starting a new business I would look for a location as close to a Big Box as
possible, preferably across the street, or even next door.(California manager)
We built at the same time next door to a Walmart. Strategy was traffic. We get sales
when Walmart is out of something. (Minnesota manager)
[We] wish our store was located right next door to the Big Box. (Illinois manager)
However, several small store managers advocated a contrarian view, preferring to be as
far away from competitors as possible:
My location away from Big Boxes makes it easier to compete! (North Carolina manager)
Being on an island helps to insulate us from the Big Boxes. (Washington manager)
A final insight, resonating with Hotellings principle of minimum differentiation, emanated
from the mixed blessing of retail malls, particularly as it concerned the small tenants
dependence on anchor stores:
When we learned that Home Depot and Menards were coming to town there was a bit of
nervous anticipation. At the same time, the anchor grocery store in our strip mall was
moving to a new location near Home Depot. We have had only two years of declining
sales (modest) since our Big Box retailer opened, but our sales increases have been
single digit. Prior to their entry into our market, we experienced several years of doubledigit growth. In many ways I believe these competitors have generated new customers
for our business. (Illinois manager)
Several store managers also voiced hybrid perspectives integrating central place theory
and spatial interaction theory. For these managers location was a key strategic element,
but only if strategically leveraged by offering unique and valuable products and services.
For example:
Concentrate on your stores strengths. Ours is our convenient location, our service level
and our friendliness. We no longer try to compete on price. We feel that we are worth
more. (Georgia manager)
Our location, nothing else around within 12 miles. Our dedication to greet each
customer, personalized repairs especially in the plumbing section. Our specialization in
contractor sales selling to the electrical, plumbing areas. (California manager)
A second cluster of insights suggested hypotheses not mentioned by any of the three
classic perspectives. Several managers, for example, stressed the importance of
transactional convenience. One Texas manager articulated the essence of this view:
I think convenience to the consumer is the only major competitive advantage we [that
is, small retailers] have. Understand that convenience includes everything in the
shopping experience from location (access), parking, inviting store environment, helpful
knowledgeable sales staff when needed, quick checkout and competitive pricing (not
equal or better) (Texas manager)
Another factor not expressly mentioned by location theorists concerned the importance
of location-specific embeddedness (Granovetter, 1985). The following comment
encapsulates the essence of such continuity-based advantage:
Operating at the same location for 131 years we have developed a strong loyal
customer base. This fact was proven in the last 2 years. On Fathers Day 2001 we had a
fire that destroyed our store, killed 3 firemen and hurt 50 other people. We thought of
closing. The community and customer base would not hear of it, within 2 days we were
up and running, our trucks were rolling the very next day. It was nothing short of
amazing. Despite not having a retail store we still had an increase of sales in 2001. (New
York manager)
We integrated these practitioner insights into our theoretical framework in two ways.
First, we expanded our hypothetical framework to include two additional possibilities,
specifically:
H4. Small retailer performance is positively related to the store locations transactional
convenience.

H5. Small retailer performance is positively related to the stores locational continuity.
Second, in consideration of the distinctions made between certain retail contexts, such as
strip malls and freestanding locations, we controlled for building-specific characteristics
in our research design.
In summary, our research seeks to test the applicability of three classic theories of retail
location for a group of small retailers. In an effort to include these same managers
theories-in-use we also integrated two additional location-related hypotheses focusing on
transactional convenience and locational continuity (Figure 1).
Research Design
Sample
Our study was conducted in the United States retail hardware industry, an industry that
includes thousands of small retail establishments. The research was conducted under the
auspices of the Russell R. Mueller Retail Hardware Foundation, the research arm of the
North American Retail Hardware Association (NRHA). The association maintains an active
database of 40,000-plus hardware/home improvement retailers in the United States,
each of which is periodically invited to provide the trade association with store-specific
information including self-categorization data as either a hardware store, a home
improvement centre, or a lumberyard, and annual sales levels.
Our sample included all retail hardware stores in the NRHAs database in the states of
Texas, North Carolina, Washington, northern California and Iowa, and the metropolitan
areas of Chicago, New York City/Long Island, Atlanta, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Kansas City
and San Diego that satisfied two criteria: first, they identified themselves as hardware
stores, and second, they reported 2002 sales of between $500,000 and $5,000,000. We
did not discriminate based on whether the stores were single- versus multiple-unit
operations; likewise, our design did not control for membership in a retail hardware
trade-name franchise (Litz and Stewart, 1998).
Operationalizations
Dependent Variables
We utilized the standard retail productivity measure of sales-per-square-foot (Levy and
Weitz, 2004) as our performance measure, with 2002 sales divided by total square
footage. In order to more closely approximate a normal distribution we utilized a
logarithmic transformation.
Independent Variables
Customer density (Central place theory). We asked each respondent to identify their
stores zip code. We then located the most recent (2001) census estimate for relative
population density for the particular zip code area.
Product mix and service mix (Spatial interaction theory). Given spatial interaction
theorys focus on the individual stores specific product and service mix, we
operationalized the theory in terms of product and service mix diversity. The survey
included a list of 22 different product categories (see Table 1) and 36 different specialized
services (see Table 2).
Each respondent was asked to identify which products and services were included in its
product and service mix, respectively. We then summed the total number of product
categories included in the stores product mix, and total number of services included in
its service mix, as measures of product and service diversity, respectively.
Competitor density (Principle of minimum differentiation). Using each respondents zip
code, we located census data on the total number of retail establishments operating in
the same zip code as the respondent.
Transactional convenience. The survey asked respondents to estimate the number of free
parking spots located within 50 yards of the stores front entrance, and also the total
number of hours of operation during each day of a typical week. We then summed the
number of hours across all seven days and multiplied by 52 weeks to generate the total
number of hours per year the store was accessible to customers.
Locational continuity. We operationalized continuity for both the store and its customers.
In terms of store continuity, we asked respondents how many years their store had been
operating at its current location; in terms of customer continuity, we included census
data on the percentage of residents living in the same house for at least five years in the
stores zip code area.

Result
Model 1 examines the variability in sales-per-square-foot (dependent variable) as a linear
function of variables relating to all five of our hypotheses. In addition, we also considered
several disaggregated measures for number of retailers (Hypothesis 2) to examine for
effects related to specific types of retail establishments including (i) retail flooring stores,
(ii) retail home furnishing stores, (iii) retail hardware stores, (iv) retail building materials
stores, (v) retail gardening stores and (vi) general merchandise stores. Only general
merchandise stores achieved significance, which we include in Model 2. In Models 3
through 7 we include the variables related to each of the five hypotheses one at a time to
examine the stability of the parameter estimates established in Models 1 and 2. If the
sign and the significance of the parameter estimates do not change significantly in
Models 1 and 2, compared to the other more restricted models, we say that the
parameter estimates are stable and robust. In each model, we also include appropriate
control variables as indicated in the operationalization section.
The regression results based on bootstrap sampling reported in Table 4 show that the
customer density has a positive relationship with store performance, lending strong
support for Central Place Theory. On the other hand, our analysis failed to reject the
absence of relationship between store performance and product/service mix, indicating
evidence against Spatial Interaction Theory. Excepting the number of general
merchandise stores, the number of retailers was found to be statistically insignificant in
determining store performance, thus lending only limited support for the Principle of
Minimum Differentiation.
We also find that the transactional convenience measures, such as presence of free
parking spots within 50 yards of the stores front entrance and the number of hours of
operation during each day of a typical week, positively influence store performance at
the 1% level of significance in all regressions. Moreover, these regressions also show that
locational continuity, such as store continuity (number of years of operations in the same
area) and customer continuity (percentage of people living in the same house for at least
five years), also positively enhances store performances at the 5% level of significance.
In summary, in terms of our hypothesized relationships (Figure 1), we find support for
Hypothesis 1 (Central Place Theory). Conversely, excepting Model 4 that showed a
positive relationship between diversity of service mix and performance, we find no
evidence in support of the Spatial Interaction Theory (Hypothesis 2) and only limited
support for the Principle of Minimum Differentiation (Hypothesis 3). However, significant
support is evident for both manager-grounded hypotheses linking performance to
locational continuity, both for the store and its residents, and transactional convenience,
both for the number of free parking spots and total number of hours of operation. No
significant relationships were evident for any of the different types of retail locations, nor
any of the environmental control variables.
Conclusion
This study seeks to advance understanding concerning the importance of small retail
store location. In the spirit of the earlier cited writings of Sun Tzu, the findings reported
here support the conjecture that terrain, or in this case, location, does matter. In addition,
this study also provides specific guidance as to the type of location small firms might
seek outspecifically, easily accessible positions at close distance to stable customers.
Apakah Toko Kecil Lokasi Materi? Uji Tiga Teori Klasik Ritel Lokasi
ABSTRAK. Betapa pentingnya adalah lokasi fisik sebagai sumber keunggulan kecilperusahaan? Dalam tulisan ini kita mempertimbangkan pertanyaan ini dengan menguji
validitas prediktif dari tiga perspektif klasik: Teori pusat-tempat, teori interaksi spasial
dan prinsip diferensiasi minimum. Selain itu, kami mengidentifikasi dan menguji dua
hipotesis managergrounded berfokus pada kelangsungan locational dan kenyamanan
transaksi. Kami menguji hipotesis ini pada sampel kecil US toko hardware ritel dan
menemukan dukungan yang signifikan bagi teori pusat-tempat dan kedua hipotesis
manajer beralasan.

Salah satu keputusan yang paling penting pembentukan ritel kecil membuat adalah
pilihan lokasi (Kuo et al., 2002). Sebagai Levy dan Weitz catatan, "sementara pengecer
dapat mengubah harga, layanan, dan aneka barang dagangan mereka dalam waktu yang
relatif singkat ... keputusan lokasi yang sulit untuk berubah karena pengecer sering harus
baik melakukan investasi yang cukup besar untuk membeli dan mengembangkan real
estate atau berkomitmen untuk panjang -istilah sewa dengan pengembang "(2004: 217).
Dengan demikian, dan sebagai judul penelitian ini membuktikan, beberapa melihat lokasi
sebagai segala sesuatu. Namun, yang lain tidak begitu yakin dan memberikan bukti yang
meyakinkan untuk kelangsungan hidup strategis lokasi kurang nyaman (Woodside dan
Trappey, 2001; Jones et al., 2003). Dalam penelitian ini kami berusaha untuk
menjelaskan perspektif yang bertentangan dengan menjelajahi makna strategis lokasi
ritel sebagai sumber daya fisik (Barney, 1991). Kami melakukan tugas ini dengan
melaporkan temuan dari penelitian kita tentang hubungan antara ritel karakteristik lokasi
toko dan kinerja pengecer kecil.
Kertas kami hasil sebagai berikut. Pertama, kita meninjau wawasan dari tiga karya mani
pada Journal teori lokasi dan memajukan satu set hipotesis menghubungkan atribut
lokasional khusus untuk kinerja perusahaan. Berikutnya, menggambar pada wawasan
dari sekelompok manajer ritel kecil, kita mengidentifikasi dua alternatif hipotesis-lokasi
terkait. Kami kemudian menggambarkan desain penelitian yang digunakan dalam
pengujian ini set hipotesis. Setelah deskripsi strategi analisis kami melaporkan temuan
kami dari sampel kami lebih dari 340 toko hardware kecil. Kertas kami diakhiri dengan
diskusi tentang implikasi dari temuan ini bagi para peneliti kecil-perusahaan dan praktisi.
Kerangka teoritis dan Hipotesis
Lebih dari dua ribu tahun yang lalu strategi Cina Sun Tzu menegaskan bahwa medan
memainkan peran yang berpotensi penting dalam membentuk hasil pertempuran itu.
Dalam risalahnya, The Art of War (1983), ia juga menawarkan tipologi awal dari enam
jenis dasar medan: (1) tanah diakses, yaitu, tanah yang bisa bebas dilalui oleh kedua
belah pihak, (2) melibatkan tanah, yang dapat ditinggalkan tapi sulit untuk menempati
kembali, (3) raguan tanah, di mana tidak keuntungan sisi keuntungan dengan membuat
langkah pertama, (4) melewati sempit dan (5) ketinggian terjal, yang keduanya ideal
untuk menunggu musuh seseorang, dan akhirnya, (6) posisi pada jarak yang besar dari
musuh. Sebagai deskripsi sebelumnya menyarankan, beberapa jenis medan, seperti
tanah diakses, lebih setuju untuk manuver ofensif; lain, seperti melewati sempit dan
tinggi terjal, mendukung lebih inheren taktik defensif.
Pernyataan Sun Tzu juga memunculkan pertanyaan penting dari minat khusus untuk
pengecer berjuang untuk pelanggan patronase: Sejauh mana toko ritel pengaruh lokasi
kinerja toko ritel? Selama abad terakhir telah perhatian yang signifikan yang ditujukan
untuk pertanyaan ini. Dalam review yang berikut, kita kembali tiga perspektif klasik
berfokus pada pentingnya kedekatan dengan pelanggan dan pesaing, masing-masing,
dan juga pada non-lokasi terkait peran produk-dan layanan-campuran.
Retail Lokasi Teori: Wawasan Seminal
Selama abad terakhir peneliti ritel maju beberapa teori mani mengenai sifat dan
pentingnya lokasi ritel. Ini termasuk teori pusat tempat (Christaller, 1933), teori interaksi
spasial (Reilly 1929, 1931), dan prinsip diferensiasi minimum (Hotelling, 1929). Sebagai
Brown (1993) meninjau teori lokasi ritel menunjukkan, masing-masing perspektif
menawarkan yang berbeda, dan saling melengkapi, perspektif tentang sifat keunggulan
lokasional.
Tempat teori pusat (Christaller, 1933) berfokus pada peran biaya transportasi dan
memprediksi bahwa permintaan untuk barang atau jasa menurun dengan jarak dari
sumber pasokan. Sementara teori ini gagal untuk mengatasi dua kemungkinan barang
heterogen, seperti mahal dan jarang dibeli barang, dan belanja perjalanan multi-tujuan,
itu tetap dipandang sebagai memiliki daya prediksi yang signifikan sejauh asumsi intinya,
perjalanan belanja single-tujuan , sesuai dengan permintaan pelanggan. Dengan
demikian, lokasi dekat dengan pusat permintaan pelanggan surat perintah premium
sewa, dibandingkan dengan kurang lokal pusat.
Sebaliknya, teori interaksi spasial (Reilly, 1929, 1931) mengasumsikan kemungkinan
pelanggan membuat timbal balik antara toko khusus produk-dan perbedaan terkait
layanan vis--vis tarik lokasi belanja, dengan apa yang ditransaksikan untuk menjadi

lebih penting daripada di mana transaksi terjadi. Jones et al. (2003) memberikan
dukungan empiris untuk perspektif ini dengan mereka menemukan lokasi yang kurang
penting bagi toko-toko kecil yang menawarkan barang dan jasa kurang standar dan lebih
personal.
Sebuah teori ketiga lokasi ritel, dikemukakan oleh Hotelling (1929), adalah prinsip
diferensiasi minimum. Sedangkan perspektif lain fokus pada sentralitas lokasional,
Hotelling menegaskan bahwa tidak setiap transaksi bergantung pada akses ke seluruh
pasar. Sebaliknya, yang penting adalah relatif dekat vis--vis sumber lain dari produk
atau jasa yang sama. Dengan kata lain, dekat dengan saingan lebih penting daripada
kedekatan dengan pelanggan. Implikasi praktis dari prinsip ini dibuktikan dengan "baris
mobil" fenomena yang ditemukan di banyak daerah metropolitan, di mana beberapa
pengecer mobil yang berbeda berkumpul di dekat. Nelson (1958) maju prinsip menyertai
"tarik kumulatif" yang mengartikulasikan logika yang mendasari diferensiasi minimal.
Menurut prinsip ini, "sejumlah tertentu dari toko berurusan di barang yang sama akan
melakukan lebih banyak bisnis jika mereka terletak berdekatan, atau di dekat satu sama
lain daripada jika mereka banyak tersebar" (58).
Dalam beberapa hal, ketiga teori berbagi setidaknya satu karakteristik umum: teori
berasal dari "tempat positivis, yang mengandaikan, pada dasarnya, bahwa ada perintah
diidentifikasi dalam dunia material, bahwa orang-orang yang rasional, utilitasmemaksimalkan pengambil keputusan dan kegiatan ekonomi berlangsung di kompetitif
bebas, equilibriumseeking konteks atau pengaturan "(Brown, 1993: 186).
Namun, kesamaan ini meskipun, teori juga berbeda dalam implikasi prediksi mereka.
Sementara teori tempat pusat menempatkan prioritas pada kepadatan relatif dari daerah
perdagangan toko ini, teori interaksi spasial berpendapat perbedaan terkait kinerja yang
berasal dari produk dan layanan yang menawarkan pesaing tertentu itu. Sebaliknya,
prinsip diferensiasi minimal hipotesis bahwa kedekatan dengan saingan meningkatkan
kinerja.
Dengan demikian, tiga hipotesis yang berbeda ikuti:
H1. Kinerja pengecer kecil berhubungan positif dengan kepadatan pelanggan sekitarnya
toko lokasi (teori tempat Tengah).
H2. Kinerja pengecer kecil tidak berhubungan dengan lokasi tetapi ditentukan oleh
produk pengecer kecil dan / atau campuran layanan (teori interaksi spasial).
H3. Kinerja pengecer kecil berhubungan positif dengan kepadatan pesaing sekitarnya
toko lokasi (Prinsip diferensiasi minimum).
Praktisi Proposisi: Menjelajahi Teori-in-Gunakan
Baru-baru ini, Pearce (2004) meminta peneliti manajemen untuk mendengarkan lebih
dekat dengan berlatih manajer dan tunduk mereka kebijaksanaan rakyat untuk "analisis
yang cermat dan ... more cek realitas sistematis yang dapat meningkatkan
kebenarannya" (2004: 178). Dalam semangat nasihat Pearce dan upaya terbaru lainnya
untuk mengintegrasikan wawasan manajerial didasarkan (Clarke et al, 2000;. Pioch dan
Byrom, 2004), kita "mendengarkan" kepada sekelompok manajer toko ritel tentang sifat
manajemen toko ritel yang efektif. Sementara deskripsi lengkap desain penelitian kami
dan sampel disajikan di bagian metodologi yang mengikuti, kita mengikuti format yang
sedikit non-konvensional di sini dengan menghadirkan highlights dari manajer ini '"teori
dalam praktek" (Argyris dan Schon, 1982) karena mereka keprihatinan signifikansi toko
location.1
Dari 348 toko di sampel kami, 133 (38,2%) yang ditawarkan komentar sukarela. Analisis
kami dari komentar melanjutkan dalam dua tahap. Pertama, kita diurutkan komentar
oleh apakah mereka mengandung kata kunci "lokasi." Menggunakan heuristik ini kami
mengidentifikasi 11 komentar (8,3% dari total) yang secara eksplisit menyebutkan kata
"lokasi." Pada tahap kedua, kami melakukan analisis isi ( Kolbe dan Burnett, 1991) dari
sisa 122 komentar dan mencari setiap frase atau kata-kata yang berkaitan dengan lokasi
toko tertentu mereka. Berikut strategi ini kami menemukan tambahan sembilan
tanggapan untuk total 20 komentar (atau 15% dari semua komentar yang ditawarkan).
Dua kelompok wawasan muncul dari analisis komentar. Set pertama wawasan
bersangkutan sejauh mana manajer baik didukung, atau dibantah, satu atau lebih dari
perspektif mani maju sebelumnya. Set kedua wawasan bersangkutan hipotesis tambahan
yang melibatkan sifat keunggulan berbasis lokasi.

Mengenai menyebutkan teori mani, perspektif yang paling sering disebutkan adalah
prinsip Hotelling diferensiasi minimum. Komentar teladan mendukung pentingnya
menemukan dekat pesaing termasuk berikut:
"Jika saya memulai bisnis baru saya akan mencari lokasi yang dekat dengan Box Big
mungkin, sebaiknya di seberang jalan, atau bahkan sebelah." (Manajer California)
"Kami membangun pada saat yang sama bersebelahan dengan Walmart. Strategi lalu
lintas. Kami mendapatkan penjualan ketika Walmart adalah keluar dari sesuatu.
"(Manajer Minnesota)
"[Kami] berharap toko kami terletak tepat di sebelah Big Box." (Manajer Illinois)
Namun, beberapa manajer toko kecil menganjurkan pandangan pelawan, lebih memilih
untuk menjadi seperti jauh dari pesaing mungkin:
"Lokasi saya jauh dari Big box membuatnya lebih mudah untuk bersaing!" (North
Carolina manager)
"Berada di sebuah pulau membantu untuk melindungi kita dari box Big." (Manajer
Washington)
Sebuah wawasan akhir, beresonansi dengan prinsip Hotelling diferensiasi minimal,
berasal dari berkat campuran dari mal ritel, terutama karena menyangkut
ketergantungan penyewa kecil di toko jangkar:
"Ketika kami mengetahui bahwa Home Depot dan Menards datang ke kota ada sedikit
antisipasi gugup. Pada saat yang sama, toko jangkar di mal kami pindah ke lokasi baru di
dekat Home Depot. Kami hanya memiliki dua tahun penurunan penjualan (sederhana)
karena pengecer Big Box dibuka, tapi kenaikan penjualan kami telah satu digit. Sebelum
mereka masuk ke pasar kami, kami mengalami beberapa tahun pertumbuhan dua digit.
Dalam banyak hal saya percaya pesaing ini telah menghasilkan pelanggan baru untuk
bisnis kami. "(Manajer Illinois)
Beberapa manajer toko juga menyuarakan perspektif hybrid mengintegrasikan teori
tempat pusat dan teori interaksi spasial. Untuk manajer ini lokasi adalah elemen
strategis kunci, tetapi hanya jika strategis leveraged dengan menawarkan produk dan
layanan yang unik dan berharga. Sebagai contoh:
"Berkonsentrasi pada kekuatan toko Anda. Kita adalah lokasi yang nyaman kami, tingkat
layanan dan keramahan kami. Kami tidak lagi mencoba untuk bersaing pada harga. Kami
merasa bahwa kita lebih berharga. "(Manajer Georgia)
"Lokasi kami, tidak ada yang lain di sekitar dalam 12 mil. Dedikasi kami untuk
menyambut setiap pelanggan, perbaikan pribadi terutama di bagian pipa. Spesialisasi
kami dalam penjualan kontraktor menjual ke listrik, daerah pipa. "(Manajer California)
Sekelompok kedua wawasan disarankan hipotesis tidak disebutkan oleh salah satu dari
tiga perspektif klasik. Beberapa manajer, misalnya, menekankan pentingnya
kenyamanan transaksional. Seorang manajer Texas diartikulasikan esensi dari pandangan
ini:
"Saya pikir kenyamanan kepada konsumen adalah satu-satunya keunggulan kompetitif
utama kami [yaitu, pengecer kecil] memiliki. Memahami bahwa kenyamanan meliputi
segala sesuatu dalam pengalaman belanja dari lokasi (akses), parkir, mengundang
lingkungan toko, membantu staf penjualan berpengetahuan bila diperlukan, checkout
cepat dan harga yang kompetitif (tidak sama atau lebih baik) ... "(manajer Texas)
Faktor lain yang tidak secara tegas disebutkan oleh teori lokasi bersangkutan pentingnya
spesifik lokasi embeddedness (Granovetter, 1985). Komentar berikut merangkum esensi
dari keunggulan-kontinuitas berdasarkan seperti:
"Operasi di lokasi yang sama untuk 131 tahun kami telah mengembangkan basis
pelanggan setia yang kuat. Fakta ini dibuktikan dalam 2 tahun terakhir. Pada Hari Ayah
tahun 2001 kami memiliki api yang menghancurkan toko kami, menewaskan 3 petugas
pemadam kebakaran dan melukai 50 orang lainnya. Kami pikir penutupan. Masyarakat
dan basis pelanggan tidak akan mendengar itu, dalam waktu 2 hari kami bangun dan
berjalan, truk kami yang bergulir pada hari berikutnya. Itu tidak kekurangan
menakjubkan. Meskipun tidak memiliki toko ritel kami masih memiliki peningkatan
penjualan pada tahun 2001. "(manajer New York)
Kami terintegrasi wawasan praktisi ini ke kerangka teoretis dalam dua cara. Pertama,
kami memperluas kerangka hipotetis kami untuk memasukkan dua kemungkinan
tambahan, khususnya:

H4. Kinerja pengecer kecil adalah positif terkait dengan lokasi toko itu kenyamanan
transaksional.
H5. Kinerja pengecer kecil adalah positif terkait dengan kelangsungan locational toko.
Kedua, dalam pertimbangan perbedaan dibuat antara konteks retail tertentu, seperti mal
strip dan lokasi berdiri bebas, kita dikendalikan untuk karakteristik tertentu-bangunan
dalam desain penelitian kami.
Singkatnya, penelitian kami berusaha untuk menguji penerapan tiga teori klasik lokasi
ritel untuk sekelompok pengecer kecil. Dalam upaya untuk menyertakan manajer yang
sama 'teori-di-gunakan kami juga terintegrasi dua hipotesis-lokasi terkait tambahan yang
berfokus pada kenyamanan transaksional dan kontinuitas lokasional (Gambar 1).
Desain Penelitian
Contoh
Penelitian kami dilakukan di Amerika Serikat industri perangkat keras ritel, industri yang
meliputi ribuan perusahaan ritel kecil. Penelitian ini dilakukan di bawah naungan Russell
R. Mueller Retail Hardware Foundation, lengan penelitian dari Amerika Utara Asosiasi
Retail Hardware (NRHA). Asosiasi mempertahankan database aktif 40.000-plus pengecer
perbaikan hardware / rumah di Amerika Serikat, yang masing-masing secara berkala
diundang untuk memberikan asosiasi perdagangan dengan spesifik menyimpan
informasi termasuk data diri kategorisasi baik sebagai toko perangkat keras, perbaikan
rumah pusat, atau penjualan kayu, dan tingkat penjualan tahunan.
Sampel kami termasuk semua toko hardware ritel di database NRHA di negara bagian
Texas, North Carolina, Washington, California Utara dan Iowa, dan daerah metropolitan
Chicago, New York City / Long Island, Atlanta, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Kansas City dan San
Diego yang puas dua kriteria: pertama, mereka mengidentifikasi diri mereka sebagai
toko perangkat keras, dan kedua, mereka melaporkan 2002 penjualan antara $ 500.000
dan $ 5.000.000. Kami tidak membeda-bedakan berdasarkan apakah toko yang single
dibandingkan operasi beberapa unit; juga, desain kami tidak mengontrol keanggotaan
dalam franchise hardware retail trade-nama (Litz dan Stewart, 1998).
Operationalizations
Variabel Dependent
Kami menggunakan ukuran produktivitas ritel standar penjualan per kaki persegi (Levy
dan Weitz, 2004) sebagai ukuran kinerja kami, tahun 2002 penjualan dibagi dengan total
luas. Dalam rangka untuk lebih dekat mendekati distribusi normal kita dimanfaatkan
transformasi logaritmik.
Variabel Independen
Kepadatan pelanggan (teori tempat Tengah). Kami meminta setiap responden untuk
mengidentifikasi kode pos toko mereka. Kami kemudian terletak terbaru (2001) sensus
perkiraan untuk kepadatan penduduk relatif untuk wilayah kode pos tertentu.
Bauran produk dan layanan campuran (teori interaksi spasial). Mengingat interaksi teori
spasial fokus pada produk dan layanan campuran tertentu toko individu, kita
dioperasionalkan teori dalam hal keragaman produk dan layanan campuran. Survei ini
menggunakan sebuah daftar 22 kategori produk yang berbeda (lihat Tabel 1) dan 36
layanan khusus yang berbeda (lihat Tabel 2).
Setiap responden diminta untuk mengidentifikasi produk dan jasa yang termasuk dalam
bauran produk dan layanan masing-masing. Kami kemudian menyimpulkan jumlah
kategori produk yang termasuk dalam bauran produk toko, dan jumlah layanan yang
termasuk dalam campuran layanan, sebagai ukuran keragaman produk dan layanan
masing-masing.
Density pesaing (Prinsip diferensiasi minimum). Menggunakan kode pos masing-masing
responden, kami terletak data sensus pada jumlah total perusahaan ritel yang beroperasi
di kode pos yang sama dengan responden.
Kenyamanan transaksional. Survei tersebut meminta responden untuk memperkirakan
jumlah tempat parkir gratis yang terletak dalam 50 yard dari depan pintu masuk toko,
dan juga jumlah jam operasi selama setiap hari dari seminggu khas. Kami kemudian
menyimpulkan jumlah jam di semua tujuh hari dan dikalikan dengan 52 minggu untuk
menghasilkan jumlah jam per tahun toko diakses pelanggan.
Kontinuitas lokasional. Kami dioperasionalkan kontinuitas untuk kedua toko dan
pelanggan. Dalam hal toko kontinuitas, kami meminta responden berapa tahun toko
mereka telah beroperasi di lokasi saat ini; dalam hal kontinuitas pelanggan, kami

termasuk data sensus pada persentase penduduk yang tinggal di rumah yang sama
selama minimal lima tahun di daerah kode pos toko.
Result
Model 1 examines the variability in sales-per-square-foot (dependent variable) as a linear
function of variables relating to all five of our hypotheses. In addition, we also considered
several disaggregated measures for number of retailers (Hypothesis 2) to examine for
effects related to specific types of retail establishments including (i) retail flooring stores,
(ii) retail home furnishing stores, (iii) retail hardware stores, (iv) retail building materials
stores, (v) retail gardening stores and (vi) general merchandise stores. Only general
merchandise stores achieved significance, which we include in Model 2. In Models 3
through 7 we include the variables related to each of the five hypotheses one at a time to
examine the stability of the parameter estimates established in Models 1 and 2. If the
sign and the significance of the parameter estimates do not change significantly in
Models 1 and 2, compared to the other more restricted models, we say that the
parameter estimates are stable and robust. In each model, we also include appropriate
control variables as indicated in the operationalization section.
The regression results based on bootstrap sampling reported in Table 4 show that the
customer density has a positive relationship with store performance, lending strong
support for Central Place Theory. On the other hand, our analysis failed to reject the
absence of relationship between store performance and product/service mix, indicating
evidence against Spatial Interaction Theory. Excepting the number of general
merchandise stores, the number of retailers was found to be statistically insignificant in
determining store performance, thus lending only limited support for the Principle of
Minimum Differentiation.
We also find that the transactional convenience measures, such as presence of free
parking spots within 50 yards of the stores front entrance and the number of hours of
operation during each day of a typical week, positively influence store performance at
the 1% level of significance in all regressions. Moreover, these regressions also show that
locational continuity, such as store continuity (number of years of operations in the same
area) and customer continuity (percentage of people living in the same house for at least
five years), also positively enhances store performances at the 5% level of significance.
In summary, in terms of our hypothesized relationships (Figure 1), we find support for
Hypothesis 1 (Central Place Theory). Conversely, excepting Model 4 that showed a
positive relationship between diversity of service mix and performance, we find no
evidence in support of the Spatial Interaction Theory (Hypothesis 2) and only limited
support for the Principle of Minimum Differentiation (Hypothesis 3). However, significant
support is evident for both manager-grounded hypotheses linking performance to
locational continuity, both for the store and its residents, and transactional convenience,
both for the number of free parking spots and total number of hours of operation. No
significant relationships were evident for any of the different types of retail locations, nor
any of the environmental control variables.
Kesimpulan
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk meningkatkan pemahaman mengenai pentingnya lokasi
toko ritel kecil. Dalam semangat tulisan-tulisan sebelumnya dikutip dari Sun Tzu, temuan
dilaporkan di sini mendukung dugaan bahwa medan, atau dalam hal ini, lokasi, tidak
peduli. Selain itu, penelitian ini juga memberikan panduan spesifik untuk jenis lokasi
perusahaan kecil mungkin mencari-khusus, mudah diakses posisi pada jarak dekat
dengan pelanggan stabil.