Free Webinar
10 Imperatives for Embedding RGM as a Mindset with BIC
.png?width=1600&height=900&name=Webinar%20Overview%20Page%20Rectangular%20Banners%20(1).png)
Stop building an RGM team that “does the work” but never owns the decisions.
Why RGM capability stalls in otherwise capable commercial organisations
Most CPG organizations don’t fail at RGM because they lack tools. They fail because leadership, roles, and decision rights stay ambiguous, so RGM becomes an analytics service, not a decision discipline. The result is familiar: great plans that don’t translate to customers, reactive firefighting that crowds out growth, and “mature” teams that still can’t get the basics executed consistently.
This session is different because it treats embedding RGM as an operating model problem. Mark Campbell lays out the sequential fundamentals he’s seen repeatedly determine whether RGM becomes a mindset across the organization, or remains a specialist function fighting for airtime, authority, and impact.
What You'll Learn
- How to align leadership on an RGM end state that can actually be measured.
Mark breaks alignment into business impact, processes, and behaviors, so the function can be tracked against hard and soft markers, and re-aligned when priorities shift. [04:36] - How to define RGM’s remit before building the team, so you don’t design the wrong function.
A clear view on where RGM sits on the spectrum: accountable for results vs. delivering through others, execution vs. transformation, and its role in decision-making. [06:30] - How to build an RGM organisation that doesn’t depend on “unicorns.”
Why operational excellence and strategic excellence rarely live in the same profile, and how organizational design should separate them when both are required. [11:14] - How to stop capability building from outpacing customer-facing execution.
Why “executing the basics” is the real scaling constraint, especially the ability for commercial teams to explain RGM simply and consistently in customer conversations. [13:55] - How to avoid data-led analysis and stay outcome-led instead.
A minimum viable product approach to data: rank sources by decision impact, resist assumptions that “more data” automatically improves accuracy, and avoid analysis paralysis. [19:48]
Meet the Speaker
 |
Mark CampbellSenior Manager, Global RGM at BIC |
Mark Campbell is a Senior Manager within BIC’s RGM Center of Excellence, with responsibility for the development of Pricing and Pack-Price Architecture capability and general RGM practice across Middle East Africa, Asia Pacific, and Global Export divisions. During his time with BIC, Mark has been responsible for the creation of assets, tools, and processes to build RGM capability across all 5 levers, as well as driving the creation and development of RGM resources across the globe.
Session Highlights
RGM teams fail on remit confusion: decide whether you own results or deliver through others, and whether you’re built for execution or transformation. Role clarity comes before org design, otherwise you end up with “square pegs in round holes.” [06:30]
“Execute the basics” is not basic: if commercial teams can’t explain RGM simply to customers, advanced tools won’t scale. Mark links many supplier–retailer tensions to a gap between RGM plans and frontline customer conversations. [13:55]
Minimum viable data wins: outcome-first analysis prevents data from driving the work and avoids analysis paralysis. Mark argues for ranking data sources by how meaningfully they improve the decision, not by how exciting they are to buy. [19:48]
Perma-crisis makes teams reactive by default, winning requires protected time for proactive, triple-win growth. Mark frames the post-Covid pattern as “burning platforms” that can be necessary, but leave value on the table if they crowd out category-building. [26:45]
Holistic growth stories travel further than isolated lever changes: bundle pricing, promo, packs, distribution, and terms under one category narrative. Mark explains why this reduces friction: some actions alone would trigger tension, but together they become coherent growth. [44:02]
Q&A
How do you stop “end state” alignment becoming a one-off workshop that drifts over time?
Mark’s view is to define both hard and soft measures upfront—impact, processes, behaviours—and track them continuously so you can course-correct, not just report outcomes. He also stresses spending extra time removing assumptions when leaders are less familiar with RGM. [05:01]
What’s the practical test for whether an RGM team has the right standing in the organisation?
If the intended role is to influence and be “in the room,” the team can’t be structurally distant from decision-making or too junior to carry authority in moments of tension. Mark is explicit that soft influence helps, but organisational authority sometimes decides whether RGM can actually land. [12:01]
How do you prevent advanced tools from outpacing commercial execution?
Mark argues you must make RGM explainable and routine in customer conversations first—otherwise there’s a disconnect between plan and execution. He uses a simple example: if teams struggle to communicate recommended retail prices, they won’t credibly sell sophisticated analytics-led solutions. [13:55]
What’s the best way to balance global “truths” with local solutions when markets don’t have the same data or tools?
Mark starts from the problem and the solution architecture, then works backward into the data and assumptions needed—especially in developing or traditional-trade markets. He warns against creating “haves and have-nots” across countries when rolling out large platforms unevenly, because it fractures engagement and capability. [22:12]
What data is truly essential for RGM decisions—what’s the bare minimum?
Mark avoids a universal hierarchy, but in his South Africa example he prioritises purchasable point-of-sale data as the starting point in a modern trade market, then layers additional sources only when they materially improve decisions. He also highlights a practical constraint: some “useful” datasets arrive in formats (like images) that create heavy manual work with limited incremental value. [24:11]
How do you increase retailer and internal sales execution on RGM recommendations when it’s ultimately their choice?
Mark’s approach is to build regular RGM review routines and use missed-outcome evidence to strengthen credibility: “It’s your prerogative, but here’s what you left on the table.” Internally, he emphasises cadence and accountability so sales teams understand the what and why, and RGM becomes “the way we do things,” not an optional add-on. [50:13]