EVIDENCE-BASED LP by Read Hayes, Ph.D., CPP
Options Are Good A
s a general rule, the more positive options we have, the more readily we can prevent or solve problems. Our current crime and loss prevention development and evaluation efforts are focused on providing retail decision makers with multiple options. To do this, some of our work on infant formula and vodka theft, for instance, involve working on multiple procedural and technological protective measures to see how they work and compare. By placing proposed solutions into StoreLab innovation sites and working to iron out problems and make adjustments, we learn some best practices. And by separately testing the solutions in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), we provide real-world performance comparisons.
As a general rule, the more positive options we have, the more readily we can prevent or solve problems. Future columns will provide readers the results of some of this testing. In the meantime, here are the results of two recent innovation/adjustment and field test projects. The first involves testing hard EAS tags on high-loss apparel in a major department store chain. In the test we looked at new hard tags designed to be more difficult to remove or shield than existing hard tags.
Hard Tag Test
The new tags were provided by Canada’s Retailers Advantage in two forms. Our team recommended making the new tags a different color in order to immediately let would-be offenders…the target audience…know this tag was different. Our offender interview research clearly indicates theft deterrence is much more likely when offenders are alerted to the protective countermeasure’s presence and function. They need to see it or know it’s there, and they need to understand how it will make their theft attempt harder, riskier, and/or less rewarding. It should not be a secret, or too tough for them to figure out. Shopper interviews in a StoreLab location further support the need to make solutions more obvious and
46
Dr. Hayes is director of the Loss Prevention Research Council and coordinator of the Loss Prevention Research Team at the University of Florida. He can be reached at 321-303-6193 or via email at rhayes@lpresearch.org. © 2011 Loss Prevention Research Council
understandable. So in this test the tags came in the standard gray as well as red. The existing tags were of course gray. Test stores were randomly assigned to get one of the two tag versions, with control stores maintaining the status quo of existing hard tags. Test results indicated tested apparel item losses were increasing during the test, but the new gray-tagged test stores loss levels went up only slightly more compared to control, while the red-tagged test stores experienced almost no loss increase. This test not only provided evidence of the improved impact and cost-benefit of the new tags to retailers, but good evidence that making new solutions presence more obvious to the target audience might be a sound strategy.
Peg Solution Test
High-loss products like printer ink create constant problems for retailers trying to keep busy customers happy with open item access, while trying to also remain profitable and violence-free from chronic theft. The second test involved working with a peg solution from InVue designed to make theft of ink much more difficult and risky. In this product-protection solution, customers must slowly turn a lever to access the ink, which proved to be acceptable with customers just needing one or two units. For interviewed offenders wanting multiple units to make needed cash, the slow turning action was very frustrating and took so long they felt more at risk. The initial StoreLab phase also found some needed durability and additional fixture usage notification was indicated. Test results indicated the refined peg solution reduced losses compared to control stores levels, and at a cost-effective rate. Our research team is using brain-mind-behavior concepts to work with over thirty retail chains and the same number of solution providers on developing and evaluating more options for everyone. As always, we look forward to your insight, comments, and questions. We would also love to someday work with your team on the issues that are facing your company. Please contact me at rhayes@lpresearch.org with your comments or questions.
noveMber - DeceMber 2011
|
LPPortaL.coM
