---
title: "FMCG Industry: Beware of \"Fake Data\"!"
description: "Last week, news of fraudulent investment attraction data in three places in Henan went viral. One county's investment bureau reported 7.8 billion yuan to the province, while actually attracting less than 100 million yuan—such an exaggerated figure is truly astonishing. In interviews, the parties involved explained that the problem was not their own work style, but the high-pressure targets from superiors. Faced with the requirement of \"must grow,\" grassroots units had no choice but to cope by fabricating data at will. The higher-ups, without any vigilance, used these absurd numbers directly, leading to this explosion. In my view, both sides bear responsibility..."
author: "邢仁宝"
publisher: "New Distribution"
email: "zhaobo258@gmail.com"
telephone: "+8615854817671"
published: "2026-04-14"
categories: "Distribution & Channels"
language: "en"
canonical: "https://xinjignxiao.com/en/articles/fmcg-industry-beware-of-fake-data-58805a2a/"
markdown: "https://xinjignxiao.com/en/articles/fmcg-industry-beware-of-fake-data-58805a2a.md"
original_source: "https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/hry0tbQg1TjOD8QF3l548w"
translation: "https://xinjignxiao.com/zh/articles/%E5%BF%AB%E6%B6%88%E8%A1%8C%E4%B8%9A-%E8%A6%81%E8%AD%A6%E6%83%95-%E5%81%87%E6%95%B0%E6%8D%AE-58805a2a.md"
attribution: "New Distribution — https://xinjignxiao.com/en/articles/fmcg-industry-beware-of-fake-data-58805a2a/"
citation: "邢仁宝. “FMCG Industry: Beware of \"Fake Data\"!.” New Distribution, 2026-04-14. https://xinjignxiao.com/en/articles/fmcg-industry-beware-of-fake-data-58805a2a/"
usage_policy: "https://xinjignxiao.com/ai-policy.txt"
---

# FMCG Industry: Beware of "Fake Data"!

> Last week, news of fraudulent investment attraction data in three places in Henan went viral. One county's investment bureau reported 7.8 billion yuan to the province, while actually attracting less than 100 million yuan—such an exaggerated figure is truly astonishing. In interviews, the parties involved explained that the problem was not their own work style, but the high-pressure targets from superiors. Faced with the requirement of "must grow," grassroots units had no choice but to cope by fabricating data at will. The higher-ups, without any vigilance, used these absurd numbers directly, leading to this explosion. In my view, both sides bear responsibility...

Last week, news of fraudulent investment attraction data in three places in Henan went viral. One county's investment bureau reported 7.8 billion yuan to the province, while actually attracting less than 100 million yuan—such an exaggerated figure is truly astonishing.
In interviews, the parties involved explained that the problem was not their own work style, but the high-pressure targets from superiors.
Faced with the requirement of "must grow," grassroots units had no choice but to cope by fabricating data at will. The higher-ups, without any vigilance, used these absurd numbers directly, leading to this explosion.
In my view, both sides bear responsibility.
For the reporting side: Where is the rigor and sense of responsibility? Even if superiors demand more, shouldn't they uphold the bottom line of data integrity?
For the superior side: Where is the sensitivity to data? They skipped even the step of comparing with previous years and checking anomalies, directly copy-pasting the numbers—this itself is dereliction of duty.
The deeper issue is: not making differentiated requirements for different markets and levels, and blindly pressuring, essentially forces grassroots to fabricate data.
This incident is a highly cautionary case for the FMCG industry, worthy of serious reflection.
Data fabrication is common in the FMCG industry, and there are four deep-rooted reasons behind it that we must confront one by one.
# **Underlying Vulnerability: Data Distorted at the Source**
The FMCG industry has developed for many years, with digital tools evolving—from manual reports to SFA systems, and now to AI intelligence. Tools are increasingly advanced, but the problem of data distortion has never truly disappeared.
The root cause is that data collection and reporting ultimately fall on grassroots salespeople: Does a terminal store actually exist? Is the monthly sales volume 10 boxes or 50 boxes? Have resources truly been implemented? Are there people who inflate numbers to complete performance targets or extract expenses?
These problems cannot be solved by tools; they rely on people's sense of responsibility.
And sense of responsibility is often directly linked to a company's management intensity.
I remember years ago when I worked at Coca-Cola, the company established a data verification mechanism. By calculating theoretical inventory through the system, they compared it with weekly and monthly physical inventory counts by salespeople to ensure data accuracy.
But this system still had loopholes. Salespeople often colluded with customers to fabricate data in distribution and physical inventory checks. Many salespeople, upon hearing of headquarters inspections, would overnight coordinate with distributors to "adjust" inventory to match the system exactly.
This shows that technical means can only compress the space for fabrication, but cannot fundamentally eliminate it. Exploiting system loopholes and losing integrity to fabricate data remain common industry ills.
# **Fabricating on Demand: Data Reporting Hides Industry Unspoken Rules**
Besides source distortion, there is a more common and subtle problem—data "flexibility" according to needs.
Some company headquarters or superior departments often temporarily request data for plan approval or market evaluation. For example, when applying for terminal display expenses, they need to report the number of terminals and per-store sales to derive expense needs and control cost ratios.
Under this logic, the direction of data depends entirely on "what is needed at the moment." To apply for promotional resources, the number of outlets and sales are inflated; to evaluate and inspect markets, relevant market data is shrunk, reducing the probability of problems being exposed during spot checks and making accountability less likely.
The same set of data presents completely different faces depending on the needs of superiors. This "differentiated fabrication" is quite common in the FMCG industry, and many have become accustomed to it, even considering it natural. But it erodes the credibility of the entire data system and affects top management's true judgment of the market.
# **Pressure Conduction: "One-Size-Fits-All" Targets Push Grassroots to the Brink**
If the first two problems are partly execution-level, this one is more the responsibility of management.
Superiors only care about results, not market reality, and blindly demand growth. No one explicitly says "go fabricate data," but the targets set are impossible to achieve—the implication is: figure it out yourself.
The root of the problem is the lack of awareness of differentiated management. "One-size-fits-all" target setting: your market must grow 10%, and his market must also grow 10%. But some markets have weak foundations and can only grow at most 2%. Under such targets, grassroots cannot deliver without fabricating numbers.
The core crux is the communication gap between superiors and subordinates. Superiors do not understand the real situation at the grassroots, set targets behind closed doors, and only pursue good-looking numbers. Over time, superiors lose credibility, and fabrication becomes a common practice and norm.
# **Management Failure: Daring to Tell the Truth is the Long-Term Solution**
Another easily overlooked reason for the prevalence of data fabrication is that superior managers lack responsibility and dare not face market problems, fearing blame from their own superiors.
A truly responsible management should not simply pass performance pressure down to the grassroots. They should personally go to the front-line market, listen to the "artillery fire," find problems, and dare to report the market situation truthfully to the boss, even if the conclusion is unpleasant, without forcing grassroots to fabricate data to survive.
Before the New Year, at a dinner, I heard General Manager Xu of a liquor company share his experience: Facing consumption downturn and poor performance, he proactively proposed to the boss to adjust the assessment method, abandoning result-oriented evaluation in favor of process indicators, and solidly doing basic actions. As a result, team cohesion strengthened, and performance steadily recovered.
He said a sentence: Performance-only theory regardless of context will only crush the entire customer system.
This sentence deserves careful consideration by every manager.
Data distortion, fabrication on demand, pressure-induced falsehood, and management failure—these four problems overlap and together form the "hotbed" for data fabrication in the FMCG industry. They do not exist in isolation but constitute a systemic management loophole.
Identifying problems is to solve them. Below, we discuss countermeasures from four dimensions.
# **Countermeasures: Systematic Breakthrough from Four Dimensions**
## **1. Technology Empowerment: Compress the Space for Human Manipulation at the Source**
To reduce data distortion, we must first work on the collection stage. Using technologies such as five-code integration, chip tracking, and AI digital intelligence, we can achieve intelligent collection and full traceability of sales data across the entire chain, real-time grasp of inventory and sell-through data at all levels, and fully replace manual reporting.
Terminal visits are verified through AI image/video automatic recognition, compressing the space for human fabrication at the source, using technology to replace manual work and ensure data authenticity.
## **2. Establish a Closed Loop: Multi-System Cross-Verification, Abnormal Data Not Overnight**
A single system inevitably has blind spots. The key to data governance is to form a closed loop where multiple systems corroborate each other. For example, after integrating the distributor DMS system with the SFA system, salesperson orders, distributor shipments, and terminal receipt confirmations can all be cross-checked and continuously corrected.
Only when internal systems are interconnected can a true closed-loop correction be achieved, forming a more efficient and reasonable management loop. At the same time, a data alert mechanism should be set up. Once data differences exceed a threshold, an alarm is triggered immediately, notifying relevant personnel to conduct on-site verification. Let abnormal data be captured at the first moment, not discovered only when it explodes.
## **3. Smooth Communication: Make "Telling the Truth" a Basic Rule of the Team**
Many data fabrications are not rooted in people's moral issues but in communication mechanism problems. If grassroots have channels to say "this target cannot be achieved, and here's why," and if superiors are willing to listen and understand, the situation of "pressure from above, passive fabrication" can be avoided.
Conversely, if grassroots' resources and bonuses are tightly controlled by superiors with no room for appeal, conflicts will only accumulate, and fabrication will continue to recur. Two-way communication is not a soft cultural construction but a hard prerequisite for data governance.
## **4. Top Leader Sets the Tone: Management Cannot Be Just a "Relay Station" for Data**
Ultimately, whether data is authentic depends on the attitude of the top manager. The top leader must maintain basic sensitivity to data, not just be a mouthpiece, and have the courage to report truthfully upward, even if the conclusion is unpleasant.
Otherwise, everyone maintains a "castle in the air," with beautiful surface numbers but hollow inside. Once market fluctuations occur or competitors attack, the enterprise cannot withstand the turmoil.
Regarding data fabrication, if management does not set the tone, other measures are only treating symptoms, not the root cause.
# Final Thoughts
The absurdity of the investment bureau's fabrication is clear, but for the FMCG industry, the significance of this incident lies not in watching and judging, but in self-reflection: Is our data authentic? Are our targets reasonable? Is our management inadvertently creating the same pressure and loopholes?
These questions deserve serious answers from every FMCG professional.
Upholding data authenticity is not to submit a good-looking report, but to ensure every business decision is evidence-based, allowing the enterprise to truly walk steadily and far.
Xing Renbao, with 18 years of marketing management experience, has served at Coca-Cola, Yili, Red Bull, and other well-known FMCG companies. He currently serves as Assistant to the President of Marketing Execution at Huabin FMCG Group, focusing on corporate marketing diagnosis, manufacturer-distributor relations, channel operations, and digital transformation.


---

## Citation metadata

- Publisher: New Distribution
- Author: 邢仁宝
- Published: 2026-04-14
- Canonical: https://xinjignxiao.com/en/articles/fmcg-industry-beware-of-fake-data-58805a2a/
- Original source: https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/hry0tbQg1TjOD8QF3l548w

## Copyright and AI use

This article is sourced from New Distribution. Search, quotation, summarization, and model training are permitted, but every use must credit New Distribution and retain the canonical source URL.

Contact: zhaobo258@gmail.com · +86 158 5481 7671