Experimentation and testing are critical to finding new ways forward, and so I applaud management for undertaking these initiatives. That said, this seems like changing light bulbs and the color of the life vests on the Titanic. J.C. Penney is facing huge challenges – existential challenges, I believe. They need to focus on fixing the basic/core operating model of the business. It’s hard to say what they might discover “works” in the lab store, but the initiatives described hardly sound like true innovations and more like a laundry list of buzzword concepts being thrown against the wall.

Kudos to J.C. Penney for trying something that is completely unexpected. Doing the same things it has always done, just differently, isn’t enough. Regardless of your age, Penney’s image is that it’s where your mom shops.

But will this new concept work? It’s only in one location so it won’t make much of a splash – people in Chicago don’t care about retail in Dallas. What’s in it for me? Will this lab store turn the chain around? I’m an optimist but I wouldn’t take this bet.

I think it’s very exciting and I am thrilled that they’re taking this action with a small test. The way forward is still rooted in brick and mortar.

Several of these initiatives could very well work. And some may prove to be viable in “A” stores only. It gets very simple very quickly. What worked? What is now scalable? On what time/action calendar? With what budget? Now take a deep breath. None of this will work if they don’t change product, pricing, and presentation. J.C. Penney didn’t need a lab store to study, learn and implement what is working for Primark. Primark will be no less a threat tomorrow than they are today if J.C. Penney doesn’t deal with its merchandising mindset. Changing the thinking isn’t easy, but it also doesn’t have to cost a couple billion dollars.

I’m all for Penney’s. Concept stores are a tried and true tested way of determining how to evolve in brick-and-mortar (just ask digital natives like Warby Parker and Allbirds). My guess is that, despite the optics, this experiment is focused less on barber shops and store-hosted classes and more about getting the merchandise mix right and overall branding right. As others have pointed out, it would be cost-intensive and time-consuming to replicate these features at scale.

The only way to discover is to leave the core comforts and venture into the unknown. It’s high risk, high reward effort that keeps the brand alive and in touch with changing consumer expectations.

Ms Soltau and team should be lauded for their gutsy decisions to reinvent the in-store experience. The energy to change can never be tapped in an environment shackled by the unstated legacies of long standing ways of doing things.

I’ll take a shot at this. Perception is everything and I don’t believe the name Penney’s has much brand equity today, which I believe surfaces a challenge. Perhaps that perception could be changed by a new name with the Penney’s name below. At least it is new, and that could pay dividends over the old name and its perception. But I do think this concept thinking is brilliant and demonstrates the desire and enthusiasm of the leadership to make something great happen.

J.C. Penney needs to try something different to excite their customer base and I believe the “lab” concept is required to pull this reinvention off. Retail is theater and you can’t just guess at what the customer wants — you need to test the concept in a lab. Whenever you make technology changes you test them in a lab first. There is no difference here other than that the mistake you make by rolling out a poor store concept has lasting implications in the erosion of your customer base. You can’t just back off a store concept change the way you can a software change.

Maybe J.C. Penney should look to successful department store operators outside the U.S. like Harrods, KaDeWe, Selfridges, Galeries Lafayette or Le Bon Marché for marketing talent that understands theater.

No, this move by J.C. Penney to reinvent itself with a lab store will fail. The reason is very straightforward; malls are failing and so are department stores. Like all department stores, J.C. Penney is trying to keep a dying dinosaur alive. It cannot. The retail shopper is going online, not to malls, and certainly not to department stores. J.C. Penney would have more success by converting all of its’ remaining stores to hardware stores, which are still in a fast growth stage, instead of continuing to redefine a dying department store model. Why not?

I like this, a lot. Sure, they should’ve done it 10 years ago, but at least it’s happening. And as far as what’ll work, who knows? Could be anything. If DSW’s nail salon was successful, anything’s possible!

Penney’s is undoubtedly taking the right approach directionally by introducing a new concept that is nothing like the Penney’s store most shoppers have experienced. Gone are the overflowing racks of products, the dull gray color scheme, and lackluster styling in their apparel merchandising. The overall look and feel, more white space, brighter color scheme, and significantly improved merchandising is quite a departure — and a welcome one, I think. The new concept is a case of less is more — 13% less inventory, shows in the upscale look and feel. But is it enough? And is it too late? As others here have pointed out, the brand has an identity issue. Too many consumers think of JCP as where their parents shopped. They need to be bold and daring to create a sense of intrigue that will draw shoppers back in. Sephora wasn’t enough. Will services do it? It’s taking a page out of the Nordstrom playbook. If done right, and that means scaling it across their stores successfully, they could rise above the dull… Read more »