Ship more to hit target, or fix the distributor’s stock?
Merefield’s distributor orders are rising while retailer sales are flat. Your manager asks for another shipment before month end.
The question
This authored field-sales case uses the distribution scope described by Unilever Indonesia. It does not claim a national hiring norm.
| Cases | |
|---|---|
| Opening distributor stock | 400 |
| Shipments to distributor | 1000 |
| Distributor sales to retailers | 700 |
| Proposed extra shipment | 300 |
No returns or losses. Retailer sales are steady at 175 cases per week; shipments are not consumer sell-through.
“Reconcile stock, estimate weeks of cover, and propose the next field action.”
Not saved by this site. Your browser may restore text when you navigate back.
A strong answer, step by step
Open each step in turn. This is one strong answer, not the only one.
Step 1: Reconcile the inventory
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Use invoiced shipments as the demand measure
Tempting, but it misses something. Shipping 1,000 cases to the distributor does not mean retailers bought them all.
Calculate closing stock
The strong move. Sell-in and sell-through measure different events.
See how a strong candidate says it
“Closing stock is 400 plus 1,000 less 700: 700 cases. At 175 cases per week, that is four weeks of cover before the extra shipment.”
Why it works: Sell-in and sell-through measure different events.
Step 2: Test the proposed shipment
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Show the inventory increase
The strong move. The shipment increases the distributor’s inventory burden.
Use the extra order as evidence of momentum
Tempting, but it misses something. A seller’s target cannot establish customer demand.
See how a strong candidate says it
“Another 300 cases would leave 1,000, or about 5.7 weeks of cover at unchanged sales. There is no evidence here of faster retailer demand.”
Why it works: The shipment increases the distributor’s inventory burden.
Step 3: Go to the field evidence
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Repeat last month’s shipment plan
Tempting, but it misses something. A national average does not show which retailer needs which SKU.
Inspect availability and the order path
The strong move. Field evidence distinguishes excess stock from the wrong stock in the wrong place.
See how a strong candidate says it
“I would review stock by outlet and SKU, visit a sample of retailers, and check whether distribution gaps, price, shelf availability or an order problem explains flat sales. Aggregate inventory can hide local shortages.”
Why it works: Field evidence distinguishes excess stock from the wrong stock in the wrong place.
Step 4: Agree replenishment on demand
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Use verified needs and a stock plan
The strong move. A repeatable sale needs a healthy customer channel.
Ship regardless of inventory
Tempting, but it misses something. Forced inventory can bring returns and reduce future orders.
See how a strong candidate says it
“I would propose replenishment tied to confirmed outlet demand and an agreed stock range. I would report target risk openly and avoid loading the channel solely to improve this month’s sell-in.”
Why it works: A repeatable sale needs a healthy customer channel.
The answer, in short
- Decision
- Do not load another 300 cases without verified outlet need.
- Because
- The distributor already holds four weeks of cover at current sales.
- What would change it
- Verified incremental demand, stockouts by SKU or a jointly agreed stock policy could justify a targeted order.
Common traps
- Presenting sell-in as consumer demand.
- Assuming aggregate stock rules out individual outlet shortages.
Check your answer
- Did you reconcile closing stock to 700 cases?
- Did you calculate four weeks and about 5.7 after shipment?
- Did you distinguish distributor sales from consumer purchases?
- Does the next action inspect actual outlet and SKU demand?
Last reviewed Nov 10, 2026