Merchandising
AuraScore 79/100

Assortment Rationalization and Margin Contribution Brief

Conduct a bottom-decile SKU productivity analysis to create an assortment rationalization and space reallocation brief.

Use this template when planning category line reviews or optimizing shelf space efficiency. It identifies unproductive SKUs and calculates the profit impact of delisting versus reallocating facing space.

Template

Role: Lead Category Assortment Architect specializing in micro-economic space productivity and SKU rationalization.

Context

  • Assortment Domain: {{category_name}}
  • Current Breadth: {{total_sku_count}}
  • Tail Performance Cutoff: {{bottom_decile_revenue_threshold}}
  • Working Capital Carrying Cost: {{carrying_cost_percentage}}
  • Vendor Funding & Rebate Structure: {{vendor_rebate_terms}}
  • Total Physical/Digital Capacity: {{shelf_capacity_limit}}

Task

Synthesize product productivity metrics into an assortment rationalization brief that identifies low-yielding SKUs, evaluates vendor net profitability under {{vendor_rebate_terms}}, and prescribes an optimized SKU lineup conforming to {{shelf_capacity_limit}}.

Method

  1. Segment the active assortment of {{total_sku_count}} into GMROI (Gross Margin Return on Investment) quartiles.
  2. Isolate products falling below {{bottom_decile_revenue_threshold}} to identify core delisting candidates.
  3. Calculate net contribution margins factoring in {{carrying_cost_percentage}} and {{vendor_rebate_terms}} for each candidate.
  4. Measure cannibalization transference: estimate what portion of tail SKU volume shifts to retained core SKUs.
  5. Calculate space productivity gains and working capital freed by trimming low-velocity variants.
  6. Reallocate capacity within {{shelf_capacity_limit}} toward high-growth, high-margin benchmark items.
  7. Construct the transition plan detailing phase-out timing and supplier renegotiation imperatives.

Constraints

  • MUST calculate net profit contribution inclusive of all {{vendor_rebate_terms}} and working capital charges.
  • MUST NOT recommend delistings that reduce net category revenue after demand transference modeling.
  • Keep recommendations within the constraints of {{shelf_capacity_limit}}.
  • Maintain coverage across vital customer price-point ladders.

Output format

  • Portfolio Health Assessment (summary metrics on top vs. bottom quartiles)
  • Delisting & Rationalization Matrix (itemized list of candidate SKUs, GMROI, and rationale)
  • Space Reallocation Model (square footage or digital facing reallocation breakdown)
  • Net Financial Impact Summary (projected working capital unlocked and margin delta)

Self-review

  • Are all calculations adjusted for {{carrying_cost_percentage}}?
  • Has demand transference to substitute products been mathematically factored in?
  • Does the total post-rationalization count align with {{shelf_capacity_limit}}?
AuraScore breakdown
79/100Provisional
Instruction clarity15/15 · Strong

Explicit role, a named task, and discrete steps the model can follow.

Context architecture12/12 · Strong

Background, inputs and variables the model needs before it starts.

Constraint engineering8/12 · Adequate

Hard boundaries — what the model must and must not do.

Output specification6/14 · Thin

A named, field-level shape for the response.

Reasoning structure10/10 · Strong

Ordered work items that force analysis before an answer.

Model compatibility10/10 · Strong

Length and structure that travel across frontier models.

Token efficiency7/10 · Adequate

Signal density — instruction weight without padding.

Reusability7/7 · Strong

Documented variables so the scaffold adapts to new inputs.

Robustness3/5 · Adequate

Quality bar, assumptions and behaviour when inputs are thin.

Observed performance1/5 · Thin

How much real usage the template has behind it.

ecommerce-retail
ecom-merchandising
complex-reasoning-analysis-math
assortment
sku-rationalization
category-management