LP Magazine

JAN-FEB 2019

LP magazine publishes articles for loss prevention, asset protection, and retail professionals covering shrinkage, investigations, shoplifting, internal theft, fraud, technology, best practices, and career development.

Issue link: http://digital.lpportal.com/i/1078914

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 55 of 77

UNEXPECTED LOSS IN THE BAGGING AREA had a rate of shrinkage 18 percent higher than those that did not. Controlling Self-Checkout Systems: Keeping Shoppers Honest and Accurate The research looked in detail at how these various types of SCO technologies might best be controlled in the short to medium term, focusing particularly on the amplification of risk, how to enhance capacity to detect errant behavior, and minimizing product-driven errors. Controlling Fixed Self-Checkout Guardianship. This was considered to be the most important factor by respondents to the research but also difficult to ensure compliance at store level. The key was ensuring suitable, properly trained, and motivated supervisors were used and that they were operating in an environment that facilitated rather than hindered their duties. Overall, respondents to this research thought the optimal supervisor-to-SCO machine ratio was 5:6, although this could flex depending upon the SCO environment in place. Technology. Scan-verification technologies were most prevalent—weight-based checking and video analysis of customer scanning behaviors. The former was the most established, although opinions varied on its applicability with some deciding to turn it off because of its impact on the customer experience. Others had taken the decision to adapt and refine it to better fit their retail context and achieve an acceptable balance between risk amplification and minimizing customer friction. Given the challenges of controlling fixed SCO systems, the latter approach would seem a good option to adopt. Product-verification technologies were not used at all in the case-study companies, although some were beginning to trial them. Designed to help mitigate misscanning errors and help speed up the checkout process, these technologies could make a real contribution to managing SCO losses and improving the customer experience, but as yet further work is required to make them a viable prospect. Design. Developing effective ways to amplify risk and enhance detection in the SCO environment—creating zones of control—was found to be important. Key was the location of the SCO area within the store, how customers were channeled through this space, the location and sight lines of the SCO supervisor, and the use of risk amplifiers such as CCTV and signage. Controlling Scan-and-Go and Mobile Self-Checkout Systems In comparison with fixed SCO systems, scan-and-go and mobile SCO currently offer far fewer opportunities to amplify risk and enhance detection. The majority of current controls are focused on six process-based factors. Robust User Identification. Ensuring that retailers had a clear, verifiable way of understanding who was registering to use their systems. Establishing User Expectations. Retailers should only be offering this facility to those who clearly understood the "rules of the game"—that it is a privilege and not a right to access this way of shopping and that it comes with clearly defined expectations on the part of the retailer, including that a shopper will be audited on the first use. Delivering Credible Audits. Delivering deterrence and detection of errant users through the use of consumer behavior-driven algorithms and utilizing capable guardians. The latter need to be supported with Probability of Error by Basket Size 18 33 45 55 63 70 75 80 83 86 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 Error Rate (%) Number of Items Controlling the SCO Environment AMPLIFY RISK & ENHANCE DETECTION MINIMIZE PRODUCT-DRIVEN ERRORS COMPLIANCE CONTROLLING THE SCO ENVIRONMENT Guardianship Technology Process Design 54 JANUARY–FEBRUARY 2019 | LOSSPREVENTIONMEDIA.COM

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of LP Magazine - JAN-FEB 2019