advertisement
advertisement
advertisement

This is page 2 of:

The Latest Grocery Chain To Ditch Self-Checkout Adds Theft And Other Issues To The Debate

September 27th, 2011

Sometimes, it also speaks to the perceived pleasantness of store associates. After all, whether a self-checkout is seen as nicer than a staffed lane really depends on how the cashier is. Some cashiers, candidly, offer a nicer experience than self-checkout interactions while others don’t. Trader Joe’s, for example, pushes associates to be so customer-oriented that self-checkout would make little sense. But other chains could be a very different situation.

Another factor is the perceived speed of checkout. Almost all self-checkout systems have been designed with the goal of handling no more than 10 items. But almost no stores ever advertise that fact, fearing it would discourage shoppers with overflowing carts from using self-checkout. In fact, stores really should discourage such shoppers from using self-checkout, because it will quite likely deliver a subpar experience for that shopper and everyone in the line behind him/her.

The lack of training—and/or associate hand-holding—of customers is another factor. Self-checkout is like any new technology experience. The first couple of times it can be awkward, slow and unpleasant. Many consumers may not want to repeat that experience, not realizing that it will be a lot better once they get used to self-checkout and understand how it works.

It’s like working with a new operating system. In the very beginning, productivity plummets, because almost nothing is where your fingers expect it to be. But if you stick it out, within a week or two, productivity might easily exceed where it had been with the old system. (Unless it’s a Microsoft OS, in which case you’re toast.)

But a common retail self-checkout approach of “throw ’em in the self-checkout waters and hope most don’t drown” was probably not the best way to engender self-checkout fondness. Not all customers will resort to self-checkout fisticuffs, but a few will.

Longtime self-checkout watcher—and IHL President—Greg Buzek has even argued that smartphones could play a role in decreasing self-checkout kiosk sales.

That brings up perhaps the ultimate self-checkout decision. With all of today’s technology changes—mobile being just one, but a huge one—and the changing customer expectations of fast E-Commerce-like customer service, how much effort does self-checkout merit? To do self-checkout properly requires oversight—from both an associate and a loss-prevention perspective—marketing and a means of encouraging self-checkout-friendly items (fewer than 10 items, no age verification items, no limit verification, etc.). In the ROI struggle, how well will self-checkout do in 2012 and beyond?

“We have to continually look at our cost of doing business,” said Big Y’s D’Amour-Daley. “Does this work? Does that work?”

For the Big Y, the question of whether to get rid of self-checkout ended up being the Big “Why Not?”


advertisement

Comments are closed.

Newsletters

StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!
advertisement

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

StorefrontBacktalk
Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.