Could mobile scan and pay lead honest shoppers into a life of crime?
Among the chief complaints of consumers in perhaps every study ever done on supermarkets in recent decades has been the checkout. This dissatisfaction has led retailers into self-checkouts, the use of traffic flow technology to properly staff the front-end, and the testing mobile scan and checkout.
Mobile scan and pay tech in the U.S. has seemingly been in perpetual test mode for years. Interest remains relatively high, however, as mobile tech becomes integral to the daily lives of consumers and as store operators look to reduce costs and cut back on employee redeployment.
However, a new study by criminologists at the University of Leicester (England) asserts that retailers may find themselves with a shrink issue on their hands if mobile scan and pay tech is more broadly used.
According to the authors of “Developments in Retail Mobile Scanning Technologies: Understanding the Potential Impact on Shrinkage and Loss Prevention,” a reduction in interaction with associates during shopping trips is likely to lead consumers who would normally not be tempted to take something without paying. Some shoppers may rationalize walking out with items that have not been purchased because of issues with scanning.
The use of the self-scanning leads to an average rate of loss more than 122 percent higher than average, according to data from available research on the topic.
One of the co-authors of the study, professor Adrian Beck from the University of Leicester’s Department of Criminology, said that, while retailers and consumers both see potential benefits in mobile scan and pay technology, the theft issue represents “some potentially rather worrying long term consequences.”
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: Do you agree that theft rates are of particular concern when it comes to mobile scan and pay technology in grocery stores? Could mobile scan and pay lead normally honest consumers to consider theft? How would you recommend retailers pursuing the use of mobile scan and pay technology minimize losses due to theft?
Take Our Instant Poll
Loading ...
Join the Discussion!
10 Comments on "Could mobile scan and pay lead honest shoppers into a life of crime?"
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Principal, Cathy Hotka & Associates
My Giant store recently forced all customers into self-checkout, unless their basket is 12 items or less (which makes no sense to me). One associate moves from station to station helping stumped customers deal with produce and other issues, and it doesn’t appear that there are eyes on the whole process. The potential to “forget” to scan a pricier item is absolutely there.
While there are obvious labor savings, customers have to wonder whether their fellow shoppers are being completely honest.
President, b2b Solutions, LLC
With all the shrink concerns about self-checkout I was surprised that our local Sam’s Club had had installed several. However, it beat the typical long lines if you had just a few items.
A customer could forget to ring an item. However, with Sam’s you always have that friendly checker at the door making sure you didn’t forget something.
CEO, FutureProof Retail
CEO, Boltive
Chief Amazement Officer, Shepard Presentations, LLC
Most people are honest. So, do you make your rules, processes and policies for honest people, or for the very small percentage that will try and take advantage of you? Focusing on how to mitigate shrink may penalize the honest customers with a cumbersome process. When the rules and process become too rigid — and not easy to work through — you lose your honest customers to a store that creates a better (easier) experience. Be careful how you treat (or mistreat) the honest customer.
Founder, CEO, Black Monk Consulting
Yes — technology opens the door to both deliberate and accidental shrink.
Will it add larceny to the heart of some? I guess it might, but that shouldn’t be the primary concern. Every retail system is open to shrink and has been since the days when fast children did snatch and grabs in the souk.
The question ought to be, do these systems promote an inquiry in the rate of accidental shrink? If the answer to that is yes, then they need to be rethought before they are deployed at scale.
As to the final question — again, assuming we are talking about deliberate shrink — retailers are never as good at shrink control as they think they are. They should be as vigilant as they can in terms of these new technologies, but that vigilance needs to be tempered by the reality that one unintended consequence of building better mouse traps is the evolution of smarter mice.
Global Retail & CPG Sales Strategist, IBM
The good news is, studies have shown over a couple decades now that shoppers are inherently honest overall in the U.S. This has been proven over the long-term with self-checkout terminals. Are there variances in this trend based upon specific local economic conditions? Yes. However, most metro areas tend to have consumers who leverage these technologies for their own convenience, and not to alter their persona into a life of crime.
President, Global Collaborations, Inc.
Costco was testing the technology and it is now absent from those stores, so I am assuming it did not work out. My observation is that employees spent a lot of time getting consumers set up and checking out, so it did require a lot of employee time and did not make long lines go faster.
CFO, Weisner Steel
I don’t think we need to worry about “unconscious” dishonesty here … plain old theft and (actual) dishonesty could well be enough to sink the idea (not that we won’t continue to hear about it). There aren’t that many “truly dishonest” people you say? Fine: it doesn’t take many. And not to be a Luddite, but this sounds very much like one of those ideas eagerly promoted by tech and finance people who have very little if any actual experience selling things.
President, Protonik