Indeed, having worked in the FMCG industry for 15 years, I consider myself quite knowledgeable about its development. I've led sales teams of thousands, and I've found that few brand owners provide career planning for frontline sales staff (even if they do, it's vague, more like painting a pie in the sky or an HR show), and few brand owners have precisely defined frontline sales staff: are they peddlers or marketing talents? For post-90s entering the FMCG industry, their first job is likely to be a grassroots operator. If this definition is unclear, the talent pipeline essential for future development is at risk. Of course, this is a comprehensive issue that needs gradual analysis. Today, let's first discuss the logic of salary and benefits for post-90s joining the FMCG industry, which is of most concern. Twenty years ago, the income structure for FMCG sales teams was: base salary + performance bonus + commission + year-end bonus. Today's FMCG industry still uses this compensation model. It's true that this model is still applicable, but the underlying logic has fundamentally changed. The Underlying Logic of Base Salary is Changing Viewpoint: Base salary shifts from buying time to buying value. What is buying time? For example, a salesperson's base salary is 3,000 yuan/month, which is 100 yuan per day. Theoretically, the brand owner spends 100 yuan to buy the salesperson's 8 hours a day. During this time, the salesperson does specific work required by the brand owner. In terms of assessment, as long as they are not late, leave early, or take leave, they get the basic salary. This income is stable; the brand owner buys time but cannot buy efficiency. What is buying value? For example, the base salary is calculated based on workload. The salesperson's specific work includes all basic actions conducive to product sales, including: number of outlets visited, number of carton displays set up in outlets, number of POPs posted in outlets, number of layers of freezer displays in outlets, etc. Pay for each item done. The more you do, the more you earn. It changes from buying the salesperson's working hours to piece-rate payment at any time during the day, similar to wages in some electronics factories. This income will widen the gap, allowing proactive salespeople to earn more base salary and passive ones to earn less, breaking the egalitarian base salary, and rewarding those who do more. The brand owner buys value, not time, but creating value requires time; the more value created, the longer time spent. Why these changes? The FMCG industry is changing, and the salary system should change accordingly. For post-90s, the biggest characteristic is the need for a platform to release their value. The best sign of value recognition is income. They don't like being constrained but can work hard for recognition. The base salary design should be updated to pay for their value. For enterprises, they want to offer more competitive wages to valuable employees rather than egalitarian pay. Both sides coincide. It should be emphasized: the value here is not selling goods, but specific work items conducive to selling goods, because the income from selling goods is assessed through performance and commission. Even if sales are low, the base salary must be paid; this logic cannot change, otherwise it will be difficult to recruit. The Underlying Logic of Performance Bonus is Changing Viewpoint: Simplify complexity Assess three items: outlet quality, outlet quantity, and stage-specific key matters Simplifying complexity is an important principle for setting performance bonuses. Few post-90s like long-winded, nagging assessments. The more performance indicators, the more they resist. At this point, performance not only becomes meaningless but also becomes the last straw that breaks the post-90s. Not judging solely by sales volume is one of the core aspects of performance assessment. Sales are important, but it's not advisable to measure post-90s performance solely by sales volume. For example, when post-90s first arrive at their posts, if assigned to a mature area, sales are good and income is high; if assigned to an immature area, sales are poor and income is low. Unlike the 70s and 80s who "accept fate," post-90s often choose to leave without notice. This is also the reason why many post-90s "disappear" after working for a while (disappearance means complete disappointment: not coming to work, not answering calls, not replying to WeChat, not handing over work, and not asking for wages). I often say: sowing and harvesting are not in the same season. Today's sales are the result of yesterday's market actions. The greatest contribution of grassroots operators to the enterprise is a series of sales promotion actions around the market. Therefore, assessment should focus on market development. The three key points of market development are: outlet quality, outlet quantity, and stage-specific key matters matching market development. Here is a simple list of performance assessment directions:

  1. Monthly outlet quantity refers to the number of valuable outlets, which can be determined by in-store score baseline and monthly sales, used to measure whether the business serves effective outlets and the increase or decrease in quantity;
  2. Monthly outlet quality is the assessment of basic market actions for the month, that is, the fragmentation of daily work mentioned above. Each fragment is assigned a corresponding point system. For example, if last month's total score was 500 and this month's is 400, it indicates a decline in the salesperson's market actions, which is a precursor to declining sales;
  3. Stage-specific key matters are set in line with the company's quarterly or semi-annual goals, such as promoting new products; the series of sales promotion actions for new products should be continuously assessed;
  4. Supervisors, managers, directors, and regional general managers should all assess outlet quantity and quality and pay attention to the most basic market units. The Underlying Logic of Commission is Changing Viewpoint: Set tiered indicators based on goal orientation, with differentiated commissions, not one-size-fits-all. Grassroots managers can conduct secondary distribution of total commission. An interesting experience: I once did salary setting training for a brand owner. After the training, a few post-90s sales supervisors came to chat with me, and we discussed two topics:
  5. Several excellent salespeople left because they sold 100,000 with a 5% commission, while weaker salespeople sold 30,000 also with a 5% commission. They were dissatisfied. In their concept, there should be a huge difference between strong and weak; the commission base for 100,000 should be higher than for 30,000.
  6. An excellent salesperson went to develop a weak area and left after a month or two. When asked why, he said: the company's salary system has problems. Although I don't have much performance, I am genuinely working hard. The company should not only pay for my performance but also for my efforts, so my commission should be higher than others. These two topics actually reflect the thinking logic of the post-90s generation. It's not that they are becoming more picky, but that they want more attention, to have every effort noticed, and to prove every bit of their value. This puts higher and more detailed demands on managers. My suggestion for commission is: set various commission coefficients. For example, the total commission is currently the number of boxes distributed by the salesperson * A yuan/box. Grassroots managers can adjust according to actual market conditions, such as distribution indicator coefficient, channel type coefficient, overall goal achievement coefficient, etc. The commission can be: boxes * A * commission coefficient. The Underlying Logic of Year-End Bonus is Changing Viewpoint: Promises must be fulfilled; it's best to split it into quarterly bonuses. Regarding year-end bonuses, every brand owner has their own design ideas; matching is most important. Common forms include:
  7. Distribute year-end bonuses evenly based on the company's overall performance for the year; more profit, more distribution; less profit, less distribution;
  8. Conduct a comprehensive evaluation of employee performance at year-end and distribute year-end bonuses based on the evaluation results;
  9. Distribute year-end bonuses according to pre-set KPIs; if you achieve a certain performance standard, you get the corresponding bonus promised in advance;
  10. Distribute N months' salary as a year-end bonus. For post-90s, two points need consideration. First, for small and medium-sized enterprises, it is essential to achieve 100% fulfillment of year-end bonuses. For example, even if the company loses money, if employees meet their assessment standards, the year-end bonus must be issued on time and in full. Promises must be fulfilled; otherwise, the company will lose credibility. Second, a year is too long; seize the day. For many post-90s, living well now, living in the present is their life philosophy. A one-time year-end distribution has less and less incentive significance. Using the year-end bonus to restrain employees from leaving is meaningless. It is recommended to split it into quarterly bonuses. In Conclusion: Currently, there is a very common phenomenon in FMCG: recruiting management trainees is an important task for brand owners. Even for top brands, the number of people who eventually stay and serve the company is very few, generally not exceeding 20%. Some people have summarized 10 reasons for leaving:
  • Feeling that personal development space in the company is limited;
  • Salary and benefits have a large gap from personal expectations;
  • Poor mutual trust between employees and leadership; employees find it difficult to communicate with superiors, and their ideas are not valued;
  • Disagreements with leaders on company philosophy;
  • Overly complex interpersonal relationships in the enterprise, leading to low morale and depression;
  • Company restructuring, shareholder or main operator changes, etc., leading to forced departure;
  • Personal reasons (such as choosing to start a business, leaving the city where the company is located, going abroad, taking postgraduate entrance exams, etc.) leading to departure;
  • Unclear career planning for employees, with large gaps between personal expectations and reality in terms of promotion, training, salary increases, incentives, and taking on more work responsibilities, leading employees to feel few growth opportunities and choose to leave;
  • Poor office environment, such as radiation, noise, passive smoking (this item accounts for a certain proportion among female departures);
  • Contract expiration or project end. The summary is very accurate, but in my view, salary and benefits are the main contradiction. That is, the salary and benefits offered by brand owners are unacceptable or make them unable to tolerate some things they consider unreasonable. As long as the main contradiction is resolved, other secondary contradictions will be resolved accordingly. But for brand owners, FMCG is not a high-profit industry, and total labor cost investment is limited. So please design carefully, let the capable get unexpectedly high income, and eliminate those who are not suitable for survival in the FMCG industry.