This is page 2 of:
Albertsons LLC Ditching Self-Checkout Chainwide
Another problem with self-checkout has been a sharply growing number of product exceptions, which slows the lines. The early grocery self-checkout systems only needed to make exceptions for a handful of age-restricted items, such as tobacco, adult publications, condoms and alcohol. Today, those intervention-requiring—product lists have expanded to include a wide range of over-the-counter medications, plus bleach, vinegar and, in California, spray paint, among many other items, Buzek said. Some are for terrorism reasons and others are simply loss-prevention matters.
Albertsons is also removing the self-checkout lanes relatively slowly, doing it as stores are being remodeled, due to the costs involved with flooring and conduit.
With the self-checkout removed, what’s next? “We are removing all of the self-checkout lanes, but there isn’t a standard configuration that we’re replacing them with,” said Christine Wilcox, director of communications for Albertsons LLC. In some stores, self-checkout will be replaced with more express lanes, which is what Kroger is experimenting with. In other stores, Wilcox said, additional regular checkout lanes will be added. “It depends on the store and what that store needs.”
As for the reason for ditching self-checkout, that was more explicit. “We feel like having express lanes where a person can actually talk with a checker and have a conversation and check out their groceries” is a better approach, she said.
Self-checkout systems also suffer from something that few other IT systems have to deal with: the people operating the systems—consumers—have no training. And unlike other kiosks, such as airport ticket systems, bank ATMs or Redbox movie-dispensing kiosks, self-checkout systems tend to be rather tricky.
“Any time there’s a mistake between the databases, it requires an intervention,” Buzek said. “If the customer doesn’t put it on the scales properly,” it would also require an intervention. Indeed, when KMart halted its self-checkout lanes in 2002, Buzek said, it was because “they never trained or motivated their cashiers,” who are the only ones who could train consumers.
One of the intended advantages of self-checkout has been an element of privacy, where consumers might not want stores associates, who could easily be neighbors, to know what all of their purchases are. But whenever an intervention—whether it’s due to a customer error or a product that needs an employee’s approval—occurred, the privacy went away. And as interventions have become much more frequent, the privacy benefit has been diluted.
-Marc
July 7th, 2011 at 4:26 am
As UK retailers continue to roll-out self-checkout systems we can only hope that they too read of the experiences as described in this article. Self-checkout serves an important role – convenience, speed – if the customer knows how the process works and no errors are made that require interventions. The moment an intervention is necessary these advantages are lost – indeed I have seen customers abandon the process and leave the store in frustration (and count myself amongst that group). Innovative, consumer centric retailers will realise the necessity to find the balance and will target the checkout experience as an integral part of the overall shopping experience – it is afterall the least enjoyable part in any event – are we not always anxious to find out how much more we have spent than budgetted? Reassuring the shopper that the retailer cares throughout the process by offering a series of alternative solutions to the checkout process is surely as integral to the experience strategy as product and merchandise ranging.
July 7th, 2011 at 7:42 am
Interventions are definitely an issue. If the customer perceives there will be an intervention, they will typically avoid Self Checkout. If they get caught in one at Self-checkout, they can get frustrated. Proper Training of a self-checkout associate on how to deal with an intervention is key.
Self-Checkout should have always been about choice. Unless your regular lanes are backed up or completely unstaffed, the consumer has a choice. The real issue is the lack of a good incentive to use self-checkout.
I can’t understand why in this economy, with consumers actively searching for ways to shop smarter and willing to work to get a deal, that these retailers haven’t responded to customer requests to provide a benefit for using self-checkout. There should a reasonable loyalty program incentive available. Providing a Loyalty based incentive for a consumer to use a self-checkout terminal seems like an easy way for a retailer to help satisfy this consumer desire.
July 7th, 2011 at 10:04 am
Isn’t great customer service really about helping a shopper the way they want to be helped? While some want human interaction, many prefer technology solutions such as self-checkout. Studies are now showing over 70% of smartphone users prefer using their phone for help in a store vs an associate. There are many types of shoppers and it seems retailers should look at the entire picture. Removing these kiosks will likely deter more shoppers than it helps
July 7th, 2011 at 10:08 am
Another side to the problem of interventions is the possibility of getting caught behind someone who requires an intervention–either due to the product issues mentioned in the story, or due to unfamiliarity with the self-checkout process. I find myself only using self-checkout if there is a lane free, I only have a small number of items, and I know that the products I have are unlikely to require intervention.
I also agree that a small incentive might make more people consider self-checkout.
July 7th, 2011 at 10:59 am
I think retailers have made bad decisions in the way they utilized SCO. For example, at certain times of the day having ONLY SCO open, but staffed with an associate where you have no choice but to ring up your 80 items in the SCO lanes while the associate watches you and just handles the interventions.
And yes – adding a discount for SCO would be a major boon.
Ultimately you should have the CHOICE of which to use. Which one is better for YOU as the consumer.
July 7th, 2011 at 12:43 pm
I agree that the major cause for disenchantment with self-checkout systems is caused by interventions. In many cases interventions result from poorly written programs that often do not view decision-making factors from the customer’s perspective. To help reduce interventions retailers should ‘debug’ their software to make it more user-friedly. I also feel that instituting “frequent self-checkout” incentive programs will encourage customers to use the self-checkout more frequently. With the tremendous success of the Frequent Flyer programs, let’s see if we can come up with a catchy and fitting name as a self-checking promotion. Please send in your suggestions. Who knows, a new incentive program may be launched! (Example: Self-check for $Check$.)
Peter
July 7th, 2011 at 1:27 pm
Personally I like having the option of self check-out and I feel that eliminating the option is a mistake and will not enhance customer service. Nothing ticks me off more than standing third, fourth, or fifth in line with a gallon of milk while the customer in front exercises his/her “enhanced customer service” by chatting away with the clerk or sending the clerk off on a wild goose for a carton of cigarettes tucked away in a vault somewhere.
July 7th, 2011 at 1:48 pm
I agree with the previous posters. I would love to use self checkout and avoid the fake chit chat at the cash register. But have you ever tried to use your reusable bags at the self checkout? Impossible! (at least at my grocery store). One maddening experience was enough. I’ll never use them again if I can’t be green and use my reusable bags.
July 8th, 2011 at 10:52 am
Another mistake contributing to the downfall of Albertsons. It seems it is all about the company and not about what the consumer wants. Joe is rolling in his grave. Self-Checkouts are important to those customers that don’t want to deal with slow checkers who constantly have to get management approval for some little thing. Self checkouts are much faster and no lines and waiting. Maybe Albertsons should concentrate on their pricing first and get the customer into their store to shop before deciding how to get them out.
July 8th, 2011 at 10:58 am
Wow! Self checkout at Albertsons is the only thing that makes going into that store bearable. Their lines and customer service otherwise is terrible. They have these “3’s a Crowd” banners everywhere indicating that they will open a new line whenever there are more than 3 people in line, but I consistently see lines wrapped around in the aisles. Although Albertsons is my closest store, I will most likely stop going there once my beloved self-checkout is gone.
July 8th, 2011 at 6:29 pm
I wonder if merchants have any idea of the shrinkage from self checkout. If the average low-tech thief knew how easy it is to fool those things, they’d have a ball.
About a year ago, with management approval (because they insisted it couldn’t be done) and while they watched, I was able to “steal” a $40.00 hi-intensity halogen lamp and several other small items. The system never caught it. A good checker would have seen every item.
Yes, management did check my bags and “stolen” items were returned. No, I won’t say how I did it in a public forum.
July 8th, 2011 at 9:16 pm
I think Peter’s idea of a Frequent Self-checking reward program is great!!! I feel that rebating customers with a discount or credit would encourage people to use the self-check facilities more often. Here is a suggested simple name for Peter’s Self-Checking program: Self-checking Rewards Program. (SRP).
July 11th, 2011 at 9:26 am
I like self checkout. I almost always use it. At Harris Teeter if I have a reusable bag I just put it on the scale and press the ‘My Bag’ button. No problem. Harris Teeter always has an associate to help with a beer or wine purchase.
July 11th, 2011 at 10:42 am
What, are you all SCO employees in some fashion? Intervention my foot. Tell it like it is, the things do NOT work well even if the smartest customer does exactly as required. Customers also do not like being b*tched at by a machine BTW.
I am computer savy and a seasoned shopper to say the least and have yet to use a SCO lane where your so called “intervention” was not needed.
Fortunately one chain in my area already removed the things. Why? customer complaints! There were so many “Interventions” needed over a years period that other store functions were lacking due to the staff needed to handle the “Interventions.”
Plain and simple, SCO’s suck. Another Bill Gates example of putting technology out in the public before it performs as expected.
July 11th, 2011 at 1:00 pm
I’ll venture to bet that another reason the SCO’s are being removed is because of cheater theft. I’ve seen situations where the intervention employee was busy at a second kiosk so was unable to see that an unscrupulous customer at the other was only ringing up part of their purchases. Hmmm, makes me wonder if both customers might be in cahootz?
July 11th, 2011 at 3:48 pm
It’s gotta be the consumer theft. There was an enormous investment in putting those things in. And the “rewards” option (which some of us advocated from the beginning) was never even seriously considered.
I don’t use them unless forced, so don’t notice shenanigans, but it only makes sense that the stores are losing some serious money on that. Between using your own bags, juggling a half-open purse and keeping it off the scale, juggling eyeglasses (not so necessary just to sign your name at the full-service counter), and juggling a credit card, what’s not to like about SCO? And yet, in my store, there’s often a long line waiting at SCO, but almost instant service at the fully staffed counters. I’m often out the door while they’re still waiting. People seem to get hypnotized by the option of playing with the technology themselves. It’s a misconception that just because you get to be in control of the process, it always moves along faster. Our technological infatuations and impatience backfire sometimes. There’s bound to be a backlash when they take them out though.
July 11th, 2011 at 3:53 pm
Oh, and BTW, I’d bet that all the reasons we’re reading about for abandoning SCO are carefully crafted by the public relations departments of these grocery chains. It’s gotta be about store theft. Cynic I am . . .
July 16th, 2011 at 7:08 am
I love self checkout. No lines…
July 20th, 2011 at 5:51 pm
i just called corporate to tell them they were losing me as a customer. I didn’t mind paying albertson’s convenience pricing because I could get in and out in less than 5 minutes. Now, I have to stand in line.
If I have to stand in line, walmart is less than a 1/4 mile away and their prices are half that of Albertson’s.
So I guess albertson’s is doing me a favor by forcing me to go where the cheaper prices are anyway,
This was a horrible customer service move.
July 20th, 2011 at 6:14 pm
Other posts have me thinking…. Way to go, Albertson’s…. Your decision costs me time and now I am suspicious that corporate is lying about the real reason why they look SCO away,
The reason has to be theft. That is the only reason that makes sense,
January 4th, 2012 at 1:20 pm
I know this is an old story but I just read this article in the NRF STORES magazine: http://www.stores.org/STORES20Magazine20January202012/man-vs-machine
The key quote: “But most stores are finding that freeing up staff to work more closely with customers makes more sense.” This contradicts the premise of a “very high focus on customer service” that supposedly justified the removal of the self-serve kiosk.