Behind almost every MDF approval or rejection sits an internal scorecard the brand pitching never actually sees. You don’t need to see it to pitch well against it — the criteria are fairly consistent across retailers, even if the exact weighting differs.
The four things nearly always on it
- Incremental sales the activity is expected to drive, above what would have happened anyway
- Margin impact — whether the funded activity protects or erodes rate
- How the ask compares to what similar brands are contributing for similar space
- Whether the brand delivered what it promised last time it was funded
That last point is quietly the biggest swing factor. A brand with a track record of doing what it said gets faster approvals on smaller evidence than a brand pitching for the first time, regardless of how good this particular idea is.
Why generic pitches score badly
“Brand awareness” as a stated objective scores poorly almost everywhere, because it can’t be measured against any of the four points above. Reframing the same activity around incremental sales or margin protection — even when the underlying idea doesn’t change — routinely changes the outcome of the same pitch.
Build your own scorecard before you ask for theirs
Draft your pitch against these four criteria before the meeting, explicitly, even if you never share the framework itself. It forces the honest question of whether the ask is actually strong — and it’s usually obvious in the room when a brand has done this and when they haven’t.
Want your next MDF pitch built against the criteria that actually get it approved?
Steven Woodgate, Founder, Emmer Green — former Head of Category (Technology), John Lewis & Partners; former senior commercial leadership roles at Samsung, Dell Technologies and Microsoft.
Leave a comment