Unhappy With Your POS System? Take A Peek At Your Last POS RFP. Don’t You Feel Bad Now?

Written by Todd L. Michaud
April 18th, 2012

Todd Michaud runs Power Thinking Media, which helps retailers and restaurants tackle the convergence of social, mobile and retail technologies. He spent nine years delivering technology solutions to more than 10,000 retail locations as VP of IT for Focus and Director of Retail Technology for Dunkin’ Brands.

As retailers—over the years—have asked for POS improvements, vendors have responded by baking changes into the core products. The problem is that the results are now over-burdened with so many options they are a nightmare to use, tragically difficult to support and wallet-emptying to purchase. As a result, I don’t know of a single retailer or restaurant company that is currently happy with its POS system. It may be the cost, the support, the features or the complexity of the system, but every retailer I have talked to—for as long as I can remember—wishes that it had something different. What a crazy reality that is.

The problem stems from retailers not knowing what they really want or need, so they ask for everything they can think of. Just for giggles, go pull out the last POS RFP you put together and see what percentage of requirements that were in the RFP are actually in use today. I bet you’d be surprised, especially if it was a long time ago.

Why does it always seem the features that help vendors win the RFP process are the ones that help it get kicked out months or years later? Companies tend to buy based on “bang for their buck,” when in reality they should do the opposite: Look for systems with the least amount of things that aren’t high priority, because they shouldn’t have to pay for what they don’t want or need.

(Related Stories: The Sign Of POS Hardware End Times: IBM Sells All Of Its Point Of Sales To Toshiba and With IBM’s POS Sale, History Really Does Make A Difference)

No POS salesperson wants to tell a customer that his or her offering doesn’t meet a specific requirement. The answer, historically, is always “Yes” or “It can do that if you sign on the line.”

“We have 1,000 different reports out-of-the-box” should not be on the marketing slick. It should be hidden with the other dirty secrets like, “Even though we tout this feature, it doesn’t really work.”

For every item on your RFP that the vendor doesn’t provide today, ask yourself if your business really needs functionality that hundreds or even thousands of other companies haven’t asked for or that the vendor has decided it is not worth its capital investment to build. Take a long hard look at that requirement and really determine if it is a must-have or a want-to-have. Want-to-haves are the number-one killer of POS implementations.

If your requirement is about a functionality that you hope to have in the future but doesn’t exist today, try to gauge the likelihood that the project will actually happen in the next three to five years. Try to take a real, honest assessment of what you actually need for three to five years. How much will your core business really change?


Comments are closed.


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!

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...

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.