Wal-Mart’s Item-Level Strategy: Better That Tags Should Be Thrown Out Than Dealt With
Written by Evan SchumanJuly 29th, 2010
When Wal-Mart this week confirmed it has been quietly testing item-level RFID in two Arkansas stores for several months—along with plans to "incrementally roll out [item-level RFID] throughout the chain"—it raised quite a few eyebrows because of the way it's being done. The company is initially only tagging denim jeans, socks and underwear (let's try and ignore the fact that a radio transmitter inside a guy's boxers is nothing shy of creepy), and it's leaving the tags active until customers opt to throw them away.
The reality is that Wal-Mart's gradual deployment makes a lot of sense. The media-repeated cries of privacy invasion are simply silly, based on ludicrously unrealistic assumptions of how easy this data would be to access, assuming anyone had any reason to even try. The most interesting part of the rollout, though, is the tag disposal question.
This Story Is Only Available For Premium Subscribers. Click Or Login In Below To Read The Rest Of This Story.
Already a Subscriber? Login Here
Pages: 1 2
One Comment | Read Wal-Mart’s Item-Level Strategy: Better That Tags Should Be Thrown Out Than Dealt With
Leave a Reply
Readers, specifically those who want to comment on a story:
Our Comment SPAM system is getting very aggressive these days and has been blocking legitimate comments. If you post a comment and don't see it appear within 2 hours or so, can you please send a heads-up to customer-service@storefrontbacktalk.com? Ideally, please include the time you posted the comment. That will allow us to try and hunt for it. Thanks! P.S. We're working on fixing the system, but we don't want to lose any valuable comments in the meantime.
Our Comment SPAM system is getting very aggressive these days and has been blocking legitimate comments. If you post a comment and don't see it appear within 2 hours or so, can you please send a heads-up to customer-service@storefrontbacktalk.com? Ideally, please include the time you posted the comment. That will allow us to try and hunt for it. Thanks! P.S. We're working on fixing the system, but we don't want to lose any valuable comments in the meantime.
-Christine
July 29th, 2010 at 10:40 am
There are a lot of things to take away from Walmart’s new approach to RFID, but I don’t think one of them is that they started on the wrong foot.
Everyone talks about using RFID at the item level to eliminate out of stock at the shelf and they seem to assume a zero lead time for getting the reserve inventory. The fact is that if the stock is not in the backroom or on the next delivery, you’re going to remain out of stock. RFID at the container and pallet levels goes a long way to eliminating miss-selects, lost backroom inventory, etc. The result should be fewer out of stocks at the shelf. The infrastructure necessary to implement container level RFID and the processes necessary to handle emptied containers etc. serve as a good training tool for the challenges of item level RFID. The thing that made this whole thing a challenge was both the cost and immaturity of the technology. Costs did not come down as quickly as expected and read rates have not yet approached the level of bar codes. This has meant accuracy requirements of applications that relied on 100% read rates could never be met.
I like the new Walmart approach for a lot of the reasons already mentioned. Customer privacy has been made a non-issue by making the tags detachable. Shelf inventory management only needs to be “close” in order to be a lot better than it is today. By seeking win-win situations with manufacturers in difficult categories RFID will be more accepted, after all the retailer still records a sale when an OOS causes the consumer to choose a rival manufacturer. System and infrastructure designers have a lesson here, they must design solutions that can handle a phase in approach to RFID enabling retailers to gain benefits as new items come with RFID’s attached.
As far as the privacy issue, although Walmart has eliminated it as an issue at this point I am starting to believe some of the privacy advocates may have a valid point. Let’s say you walk through a doorway with an RFID reader. Your credit cards, passport, drivers license, jeans, and sneakers all have RFID tags. Taken individually, none of these numbers are a concern but when you combine them you have the ability to create a detailed record of who, what, where, and when ……..