StorefrontBacktalk: Macy’s Won’t Make Its RFID Move Until Everyone Else Does

Through a special arrangement, presented here for discussion is a summary of a current article from StorefrontBacktalk, a site tracking retail technology, e-commerce and mobile commerce.

Macy’s is quickly moving ahead with its RFID item-level tagging efforts but is also indicating that significant additional moves will only happen when key competing retailers make their item-level RFID moves. It seems that the $25 billion chain has figured out the difference between being an industry leader and leading an army of one.

An article in RFID 24-7 indicated that Macy’s trial’s goals are focusing on improving cycle counts and maintaining physical inventory accuracy. Bill Connell, Macy’s senior vice president of logistics and operations, was quoted, “We are in the process of evaluating the use of RFID specifically as it relates to replenishment for our apparel and footwear business. And we are deployed into six distribution centers for furniture and bedding. We’re quite pleased with the initial results.”

But Mr. Connell’s next thought, about industry cooperation, was more telling.

“We have stated that as part of the RFID Initiative, we have an eye toward industry adoption by mid-2012 and we fully expect to be an early mover along that timeline. Industry adoption means everybody agreeing to do it, and once that is agreed to, we intend to be an early mover,” Mr. Connell said.

There’s nothing quite as enjoyable in the middle of summer as a nice bit of retail arm- twisting. In this instance, though, it’s absolutely appropriate. Walmart — with its Sam’s Club division — tried going the RFID route alone and discovered that even the world’s largest retailer can only do so much on its own.

Unfortunately, everyone is testing RFID in very different ways. For standardization, which is what suppliers need and what Macy’s is insisting on, that’s bad news. Staples is trying to bring the per-tag cost way down with a re-usable tag approach, while J.C. Penney is focusing solely on high-end products (no last-mile supply-chain checking) and Walmart itself is now freaking out privacy experts by allowing customers to leave its stores carrying fully activated tags, hoping that the customer will later throw them out.

This means that Macy’s is pressuring for both RFID item-level adoption and consistency in its adoption among a wide range of retailers. This is very good for the industry, but it’s a very clever move by Macy’s. First, it takes the pressure off of the chain for rapid deployment — despite the one-year self-proclaimed target — and doesn’t force Macy’s to move any faster (or to invest precious IT funds any faster) than its rivals. It, therefore, is minimizing the ever-popular leader penalty.

Second, it gets Macy’s out of the awkward threats against suppliers. If the industry doesn’t move, there are no threats. And if the industry does move, the supplier anger is diluted because it’s directed at lots of retailers.

Every once in a while, Macy’s reminds us how standards should happen.

BrainTrust

Discussion Questions

Discussion Questions: What do you think of Macy’s approach to its RFID trials and rollout as well as vendor compliance? Is this the path to drive standardization?

Poll

11 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Paula Rosenblum
Paula Rosenblum
12 years ago

I have been often called “Negative Nancy” when it comes to my opinions about RFID. I guess it’s a good time to express my point of view once again.

1) RFID in the supply chain is mostly a solution looking for a problem. Code 128 license plates do a fine job on cases and pallets, and the liquid and metal “physics problem” make the “no line of sight” issue moot.

2) Item level RFID on apparel and footwear is very interesting. RF-EAS tags can provide a dual purpose. BUT…I believe the gating factor to adoption is the cost of READERS, not tags. I believe the benefits are muted if you cannot get full store coverage. You still get some benefit, but not full benefit.

3) Ditto with item level RFID on general merchandise, except we run into a “metal problem” – we lose the “no line of sight” opportunity again.

4) I also don’t think it’s so much about “supplier angst.” In fact, applying RFID tags to garments is a lot easier than it used to be..it becomes part of source tagging, which has been going on forever.

I’m not surprised Macy’s has decided to wait. I think it’s wise, and I think we should start taking a harder look at reader prices and stop looking at the tags.

I look forward to the day when RFID does for stores what bar code did for distribution centers–eliminate the need for physical inventories, or make them far more rare and accurate through interim cycle counts. That day will come when reader prices drop. It will come, but it’s not quite here yet.

Fabien Tiburce
Fabien Tiburce
12 years ago

This reminds of the difficulty it took the BlueTooth specification to work seamlessly and universally across devices. Early attempts were plagued by driver problems; incompatibilities which made the technology great in theory but a headache in practice. RFID will probably get there but the onus is on manufacturers and vendors to nail the standard first.

Roger Saunders
Roger Saunders
12 years ago

Like Universal Product Codes that we all adjusted to some 30+ years ago, RFID needs retailers and manufacturers working together to bridge to consumers. UPC had detractors and skeptics as they evolved in the marketplace.

And, RFID (certainly the technology has been around for a number of years), will gain acceptance by the triangle of retailers/manufacturers/consumers — provided they work together in the understanding of driving efficiencies and cost-savings into the supply, distribution, and purchase phases.

Marge Laney
Marge Laney
12 years ago

This is news? Many retailers make sheep look like rugged individualists. Early adopters don’t have a big impact on other retailers in most cases. Many retailers take the stand that they “have a very special business and are not a normal retailer,” which is preposterous. Hesitancy to adopt new paradigms has its root in the desire to maintain the status quo, even in the face of a better more profitable solution. RFID, unfortunately, has a long row of beans to hoe before making a significant move into item level adoption in retail.

Ryan Mathews
Ryan Mathews
12 years ago

Maybe it is, maybe it isn’t.

So far there hasn’t been a big payoff on being a retail RFID leader, but hope does seem to spring eternal.

I think they are right to back off their initial targets. Better to lose a little face than millions of ill-spent IT dollars.

Camille P. Schuster, Ph.D.
Camille P. Schuster, Ph.D.
12 years ago

This is not significantly different from what Walmart tried to do in their industry. The same issues apply. First, standardization of signals, readers, and codes is critical. Without that, the expense is too high and there will not be widespread use. Second, there is a point at which enough manufacturers and retailers need to be using the standardized system to reach the tipping point. Until that happens, the cost savings claims do not really hold up. This is an initiative that one company can champion but not make happen.

Bill Bittner
Bill Bittner
12 years ago

I attended the Macy’s discussion at the NRF show in January and their reported results still amaze me. The improvement in apparel inventory accuracy was astounding. After making some in-store observations I came to the conclusion that the reason apparel book inventories are so inaccurate is likely because of all the recounts. It is like the Heisenberg uncertainty principle of quantum physics; the closer you observe the physical inventory the less certain you become of its correct value. Because the observers are not accurately distinguishing the various sizes of the apparel merchandise, the more observations they make the less accurate the inventory becomes. In a test environment where you are taking frequent inventories to compare RFID tagged items to non-RFID, you increase the inaccuracy of the non-tagged inventory. Yes RFID improves accuracy, but the original base line error rate was artificial.

As much as we talk about RFID, the simple fact is that it is still too expensive for most retail supply chain situations. If by now we have not learned anything else about the implementation of retail technology it is that it must be phased-in. The best RFID strategy is for systems designers and hardware vendors to support a transition environment that allows retailers to implement in phases. In some product categories such as automobiles, appliances, etc., the whole supply and post-sale service channel is ready for RFID. Aircraft parts, pharmaceuticals, and other products where counterfeiting is a serious issue will become RFID candidates as infrastructure costs decline.

Manufacturers who want to control their supply channel and discourage diverting or excessive stock-piling will offer discounts to retailers who implement RFID receiving and report sales by serial number. Retailers who are faced with unusual shrink levels at certain locations may implement in-store or distribution center tagging of certain items. Using RFID for asset tracking such as tools, shopping carts, etc. and in-store promotion performance such as signage and end displays will help justify the infrastructure build out. As others see their competitors reaping advantages they will follow suit.

M. Jericho Banks PhD
M. Jericho Banks PhD
12 years ago

Don’t you love statements like “Walmart – is now freaking out privacy experts?” And we wondered where the fun went in retailing. Shame on us.

RFID provides and will continue to provide fun for years to come. I was part of the UPC development about four decades ago when the original design was a bullseye rather than a bar, and it took more than thirty years for every product in a supermarket to comply. Imported and random weight items were the worst, and we still say “UPC code” even though that means “Universal Product Code code.” Some things take time and some things never change, like our affection for the term “PIN number,” which really means “Personal Identification Number number.”

Today there’s the Aztec barcode system, which is gaining acceptance through its compatibility with cellphone readers and the accompanying use for special promotions. It’s very cool.

And then there’s RFID. How can it be made to work with cellphones to support the soi-disant “revolution” in in-store shopping aids for discerning consumers? And can cellphones be equipped to detect “live” RFID tags at home so that their information can be either stored or destroyed? That might help ameliorate the “reader problem” mentioned here by others and eliminate Walmart’s “freak-out” factor.

W. Frank Dell II, CMC
W. Frank Dell II, CMC
12 years ago

The bigger the retailer, the more they want the industry standard to be their way. Macy’s item price point is higher than the typical supermarket item. Therefore, the RFID tag and control has greater benefit. A good RFID system can replace their current item security system; for instance, for fur coats.

The RFID power is in having every item in the store tagged, not just higher value ones. Standards are important, but there needs to be variations for different types of retailers. Simply, all tags need to be de-activated at sales time.

As we have said all along, until the usage increases, the cost will not be driven down for wider acceptance. Think of it as the power circle for RFID tags.

Cathy Hotka
Cathy Hotka
12 years ago

Don’t be distracted by stories like this. RFID is a freight train, the major retailers are on it, and the potential increase in profits from being able to conduct monthly inventories is ENORMOUS. Big retailers will ignore item-level RFID at their peril.

Joe Andraski
Joe Andraski
12 years ago

First and foremost, the members of the VICS Item Level RFID Initiative, (VILRI) which include many of the largest retailers and brands in the world, are confident our effort will have a major impact on the broad scale adoption of the Initiative. The initial research into item level RFID conducted by the University of Arkansas clearly proved the business case for both suppliers and retailers by reporting increased sales and inventory accuracy, improved order fill and greater productivity.

These results have prompted phase II of the Initiative, which is intended to drive widespread adoption of item level RFID and the EPC standards through a combination of continued testing of item level RFID systems, development of best practices for retailers and suppliers and promotion of the technology with industry influencers.

From my perspective, it is exciting to experience the industry coming together in one of the, most important initiative of its kind in the history of the retail channel. Technology gains are concurrently taking place that will reduce the cost of doing business, while enhancing the shopper experience. For example, combining electronic article surveillance with the RFID tag will deliver a number of advantages, including the elimination of the large plastic EAS tag that is applied at retail. Security breaches that take place today will be dramatically reduced. And this is just the start.

The methods of improving the shopper experience, forecasting accuracy, security and more will continue to advance at a fast pace. It is certain that retail’s experience will impact other business verticals, which will decide to embrace VILRI. A star has been born because of Mother Collaboration and the vision and excitement of a few early adopters who worked feverishly to ensure that RFID works for the entire industry.

The adoption of other initiatives over the last 25 years, including the bar code, VICS EDI and Quick Response, all took time effort and collaboration. Many of the obstacles and challenges voiced by various entities back then, mimic what is being exposed today. To that we say, yea thee of little faith, be assured that progress will be made and this industry has never treaded water, but has been positive in its ambitions. The result is the most efficient and effective supply chain in existence, i.e. until VILRI and EPC.