Skip to content
MarkSchemeMarkScheme
Sign up — no card

9990 · 2.1.1

Retail store design — practice questions

Practice and worked examples for 9990 Retail store design. Short previews only — attempt the full question in MarkScheme against the official scheme.

Worked example 1

A fashion retailer replaces its grid layout with a free-flow design, widens aisles, and places bestsellers on a power wall to the right of the entrance. Sales rise 12% in three months. Using retail design psychology, explain these changes and evaluate their effectiveness.

Show solution outline

Apply — layout types: Free-flow removes rigid aisles, encouraging exploration and longer dwell time — shoppers encounter more products incidentally. The power wall (right of entrance) exploits the tendency to look right on entry, placing high-margin bestsellers in the first visual field. Wider aisles reduce crowding stress (link 2.2.1), supporting approach behaviour.

Apply — wayfinding: Clear signage and sight lines reduce frustration; customers who navigate easily stay longer (Underhill's Why We Buy observations on path tracking).

Evaluate — strengths: Field evidence (12% sales rise) supports ecological validity — real shoppers, real purchases. Free-flow suits high-involvement browsing (2.3.1) where discovery matters.

Evaluate — limitations: Individual differences — some shoppers prefer efficient grid layouts for goal-directed trips. Confounding variables — simultaneous marketing or seasonal stock may explain sales rise. Ethical issue — deliberate path manipulation may exploit low-involvement shoppers without informed consent. Cross-cultural validity uncertain — layout norms vary internationally.

Worked example 2

A supermarket manager trials a new loop layout for one day to compare its performance against the existing grid layout. Both layouts were tested on a day with 2,000 customers. The data collected is as follows:

  • Grid Layout: 400 transactions, total sales of £8,000.
  • Loop Layout: 550 transactions, total sales of £12,100. Calculate the conversion rate and average transaction value (ATV) for each layout. Based on your calculations, advise the manager which layout is more effective, using psychological principles of retail design.
Show solution outline

Step 1: Define Key Metrics

  • Conversion Rate (%) = (Number of Transactions / Number of Customers) × 100
  • Average Transaction Value (ATV) = Total Sales / Number of Transactions

Step 2: Calculate Metrics for Grid Layout

  • Conversion Rate = (400 / 2,000) × 100 = 0.20 × 100 = 20%
  • ATV = £8,000 / 400 = £20.00

Step 3: Calculate Metrics for Loop Layout

  • Conversion Rate = (550 / 2,000) × 100 = 0.275 × 100 = 27.5%
  • ATV = £12,100 / 550 = £22.00

Step 4: Analysis and Advice The loop layout is demonstrably more effective based on the calculations.

  • Psychological Explanation: The grid layout is efficient for goal-oriented shoppers but does not encourage exploration. The loop layout, by creating a single, guided path, forces customers to travel past a wider range of departments and products. This increases exposure to items not on their shopping list, which likely increased dwell time and triggered more impulse purchases, leading to a higher conversion rate (27.5% vs 20%).
  • Financial Impact: The higher ATV (£22 vs £20) suggests that the guided journey of the loop layout led customers past more promotional displays and higher-margin products, increasing the value of each basket. The combined effect is a significant increase in total revenue (an extra £4,100 from the same number of customers).
  • Conclusion: The manager should adopt the loop layout as it is more effective at converting visitors into buyers and at increasing the average spend per buyer.
Mark a 9990 question on this topicFull lessonOpen in course studio