First of all, the cost is a major factor. Once the cost justification is secured the next factor is the attention span. Will the employees be doing things on the technology (since they have access to the web) or providing service to the customers? In the years ahead the use of technology will be a must since the customer will have their own devices and just to keep up the associates will need the technology. It is the only way that in-store and online sales can be done in the store and compete with Amazon!

Cost, infrastructure and support are the typical objections cited by retailers. But I would love to see a study of associates who are adequately equipped with technology to assist customers in-store … my bet would be that the value of service and additional products sold would far outweigh the initial hardware costs.

I’ve heard a number of retailers suggest that the real reason they don’t let associates have access to Wi-Fi is the fear that they will spend time surfing the web and engaging on social media. If the retailer’s major fear is that associates will abuse the technology, then the managers probably have fundamental problems of how to engage staff to create a compelling experience in-store.

I don’t see employee distrust as the primary reason. The cost/benefit will also always play a role in the decision. But from my observations, the reasons are twofold.

First, most decision makers don’t understand the technology and don’t believe it will help sell more product. Second, most brick-and-mortar retail executives are out of touch with the consumer and don’t focus on improving the store experience.

These types of changes and technology adoptions only occur when a crisis hits and the customers begin leaving en masse. It is what we are seeing today. This “retail apocalypse” is nothing more than consumers taking control of where they shop. Where they get the best value and experience.

Weak retailers who have not embraced changing consumer shopping paradigms are the ones failing. They have not focused on what their customers really need and want. Strong, innovative omnichannel retailers are surviving and thriving.

Cost is definitely a concern, fear of associates using them for personal use is a smaller concern and there is also a concern of theft depending on the device. I would also add that many retailers have been slow to add technology because they are still not convinced the investment will pay off for them. As retailers see their stores continuing to struggle, they may begin to realize they have no choice. And it’s not just technology for associates. Retailers have cut staff, cut training and held off on store renovations and other needed investments because of weak sales. However, they continue to open stores, which I do not think is smart. Opening fewer stores, investing in technology and training for store associates is the better way to build up sales.

Maybe some retailers are holding back getting devices for their employees because they want their staff to personally engage with the customer. I know myself I want a sales person to be looking at me and helping me, not looking down at their device to tell me about the item I’m interested in. If I wanted to research products I could stay home and do it myself. Our generation wants attention in human form. Why are retailers trying to take away the outside shopping experience for us? Once again another example of how they don’t know what we want because they don’t know us. In my new book soon to be released, The Gen Z Answer Key for Business, I’m going to give you the scoop on our generation.

The problem is that comprehensive business case justification is rarely employed to determine the viability of in-store tech investments, actually. Potential revenue gains, increased inventory movement and staff productivity need to be quantified and an ROI developed. I am shocked at how often this is not done effectively. To respond to potential staff misusing the technology, I’d respond that the retailers that already have a track record of using it can attest to the tech’s value.

Yes, cost, distrust, and training are all factors but those reasons can’t stop the adoption of technology tools that help retailers compete. Isn’t it enough watching brand after brand struggle and fail holding on to the old no-tech model?

Retailers need to embrace technology that helps them relieve the pain points of their associates and customers. Retailers need to move beyond the shiny object syndrome with tech pilots and implement technology that is simple to use and solves problems. Most technology that fits that bill is intuitive for both the associate and the customer with minimal training required.

All of the reasons discussed are valid BUT the only way to compete today is to be able to access information that can help drive sales. Investment in equipment and training are crucial to making employees more effective and more efficient. As staff is cut those remaining must be better at their jobs for companies to prosper.

This survey is yet another example that shows that many retail executives and commercial leaders still don’t realize the tremendous change the retail industry is going through. They still don’t prioritize better data usage, digital transformation and the use of technology, or the best advantage they have over online stores — the human touch with the shopper on the selling floor. Retailers that will not prioritize those elements will be the losers in their category.

This article hit the nail on the head regarding major problems in today’s workforce, specifically the non-desk workforce which comprises 2 billion people. Companies don’t invest in tech tools for associates for a number of reasons: cost being the biggest and improper usage probably being the second. Employers don’t deem these tools as a worthwhile investment for non-management, and don’t recognize the monetary value they actually bring. Putting enterprise tools in employees hands helps associates perform their jobs more efficiently (improving customer satisfaction and the bottom line), increases engagement, and has proven to reduce turnover (another exorbitant cost for employers). Management worries that a mobile tool will cause employees to go into overtime if they’re using it after work hours, or that they will use the platform for non-work purposes. Those can easily be addressed by distributing “Fair Play Rules” to every associate and make them sign it like a contract. Attitudes about this are already changing as employers realize the cost of turnover and have been working harder to not only keep their employees… Read more »

Disregarding for a moment the remarkably self-serving nature of the “survey,” the article is distinctly vague on what “tools” are being denied, so it’s difficult to answer exactly the “why.”

Assuming, though, that something along the lines of “give everyone a smart phone” is what is intended, I think “trust” is the problem (both in terms of misuse and shrinkage.) Of course — for the “misuse” segment — it’s harder to explain why such a retailer wouldn’t seek out smartphone with more controlled apps; presumably they don’t think it’s necessary … whether or not that’s correct, is, of course, hard to know.

Mobile devices can be locked down (to allow only pre-selected apps) to take care of not only the trust issues, but also as security and compliance measures. There are few other concerns which are intertwined: conception, usage and support. Most of the ROI is built on fancy use cases, conceived sitting around tables in HQ office. Shop floor is a different ball game altogether and needs simple solutions, keeping in mind the large user base and quick turnaround of the associates in the industry Adding to the above, in the spirit of adding “WOW” factor, the solutions sometime becomes so complex to support technically and operationally, that most of them don’t generally pass the POC stage let alone user adoption. Thirdly, although lots of attention is paid towards functional solutions, hardly any investment and interest is given to the crumbling in-store network. No associate has the patience and time to wait for 60 seconds for a page to load. End result: mobile devices are dumped in a corner in a back office. Having said that,… Read more »

The Salesfloor survey adds incredibly relevant quantitative data to a scenario retail leadership cannot ignore. With the entire Internet at shoppers’ disposal, associates must be (at least) as informed as the consumer that walks into the store. Mobile devices are the equipment they need — tools that empower on-site sales staff via fast access to detailed information via the screens they carry or that they can quickly access from kiosks and counters. Note, here, that the mobile devices provided to associates must be beautifully designed, and this includes the user interfaces. They must require as few steps as possible to get to the necessary information. Too many steps (in any retail process) risks causing the entire initiative to fall flat; customers will be frustrated if the tools make their experience more cumbersome. We already understand that retail will never replace the associate’s human touch but we also increasingly understand that we must augment that all-important face-to-face interaction with technology that allows associates to dovetail the delivered experience with sophisticated consumer expectations. The goal, of course, is… Read more »