The Shopping Experience Gets a Tech-Up

To provide a better shopping experience and draw more customers into stores, retailers shouldn’t look at futuristic technology; they need to look to the past. Consumers are frustrated with their inability to locate the items they want to buy and lousy customer service.

Inexperienced and non-existent sales associates drive consumers out of stores and they either don’t buy or they buy online.

Out-of-stocks and the necessity to go through a maze of aisles to find what she wants make it easier to shop at home using the computer. Nothing is more frustrating than putting up with traffic to get to the store and spending precious minutes trying to locate a product, only to find that it is out of stock…and then trying to locate an employee who will confirm that the item is not available.

Back to the basics should be the rallying cry of retail.

How about knowledgeable sales people? Wouldn’t that both improve the in-store experience and remove the need for all the high-tech stuff in-store?

This is not rocket science. The reason consumers don’t like the in-store experience is THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH KNOWLEDGEABLE EMPLOYEES IN THE STORE. It’s a frustrating experience all the way around.

The web has shown shoppers how self-service can be easy. If she goes to a store, she expects human interaction. With people who know what they are talking about.

So technology can help ENABLE employees. Retailers really need to get over the idea that it can REPLACE them.

The trouble with brick and mortar retail today is that little is done to enhance the personal connections people want to experience. Technology that simply delivers an uncomfortable internet experience begs the question; why make the trip? In-store technology should amplify the personal service experience by leveraging the associate’s time and knowledge. Technology investments not linked to this strategy are doomed to failure. Therefore, the question is never “what is the best technology?” but, rather, “what is the best technology to create personal connections with our customers?”

Technology allows big companies the ability to “act small.” Acting small facilitates personalized service. Combining the powers of technology and personal service is superior to emphasizing one over the other. Although technology provides more consistency and accuracy than the most conscientious and skilled associates, it is not nearly the quality service weapon of technology and personal service combined.

Sales associates can add warmth, sensitivity, advice, and a smile to the service. They can lead the customer through technology-based steps in the service process and then close the loop on the transaction–personally!

The real challenge of customer service automaton is the execution of a standardized and measurable automated customer service strategy. Putting touch screens and buttons all around a store is not good enough. The customer needs to understand why the technology is there, what will happen when they use it, and trust that they will always receive service as advertised! The associates need to understand that the technology is a tool for them to service their customers, that they need to help their customers use the systems, and how they are supposed to do that within the context of their other duties.

Advanced technologies are not always the answer, and even when they are they need to be effectively combined with basic technologies. Advanced technologies can be intoxicating with their incredible new applications. It is easy to get caught up in the hype of advanced technology and lose sight of the fact that service providers and customers use basic technology most of the time. Retailers need to understand the experience their customers are looking for and develop a strategy that delivers with technology tools that help make it happen.

These days, going to a brick and motor store is no longer the only option, or even the default option, for consumers. In order to improve consumers’ in-store satisfaction, retailers should examine why consumers choose to shop at brick and motor stores to begin with. Two significant reasons why consumers now choose to go to brick and motor stores include a desire for immediacy and expertise in the sales staff. By focusing on improving these and similar benefits that brick and motor stores provide better than other sales channels, retailers can improve their customers’ in-store satisfaction.

However, I am uncertain about how much technology can improve customer satisfaction in the store itself. While it certainly streamlines the point of sale transaction, I doubt how the self-scanner from Stop & Shop would improve consumer happiness, particularly when contrasted with other services the chain could provide, like assisting customers with the loading of their bags into their cars. Similarly, the J.C. Penney and Limited technologies referenced are simply performing tasks that the sales staff would normally be able to accomplish. We’ve all seen what happened when Circuit City decided to trim their most experienced sales staff; retailers should be wary of letting computers do what their staff does best. Plus, I bet sales staff are far superior at bringing in upsales than computerized maps of stores.

Most of the comments so far have centered on the fundamentals of knowledgeable store personnel, fast and friendly service, and easy store navigation. And all those things certainly make a difference in how much consumers enjoy shopping the store they choose–and in how often they choose that store versus others.

But perhaps we are framing the question in the wrong light for best learning. Perhaps consumers aren’t really “enjoying shopping in stores less than they used to.” Perhaps they have simply found a way to shop that they prefer more than stores, period.

For a potential clue, look at the examples cited in the WSJ article for what retailers are doing to improve customer satisfaction. Practically every one is an attempt to replicate a feature of internet shopping in the store.

Digital navigation devices. Touch screens showing selection and pricing. Interactive mirrors that “suggest” complementary items or colors. These are all services consumers get every day just by sitting down at a decent website.

Perhaps the real effect we are seeing in shopper satisfaction is very much akin to the consumer reaction to self-scan. They can avoid one key aggravation factor–fallible human beings who all too often are not that enthusiastic, knowledgeable or polite. And they can gain one key benefit–they are always actively engaged in and in control of the process. So they generally feel they are making progress and heading in the direction they want to go. (Balky computers and poorly designed search engines notwithstanding.) In short, we are starting to like dealing with computers better than we like dealing with other people.

There are exceptions of course. My local wine merchant and butcher are still great ways to waste away a Saturday morning. And I still enjoy browsing and chatting with knowledgeable sales people in my favorite stores. Cabela’s, Home Depot, Woodcrafters. But I’m even finding I do at least as much browsing and buying on the websites of those chains as I do in the stores now. Probably more.

I think retailers who own brick and mortar outlets have to rethink the role these physical outlets should provide in their overall effort to reach consumers.

No physical environment is going to replace the expanse of the Internet. You could spend a fortune training employees about products and a new vendor will introduce a twist that redefines the whole category. Consumers are no longer “shopping with a clue.” Most often, they have done online research and have already made their choice. They are coming to the store either because they “need it right away” or there is one characteristic (how does it look on me) they can’t quite satisfy by looking at a website. So if the physical product matches their preconception, the consumer is done.

So what does this mean for the retailer? Especially for supermarket retailers, I believe there is a whole new type of outlet to be introduced. The goal is to combine the physical and online presences in such a way that they complement one another. Let the consumer do their shopping online. There they can shop the online store, prepare a shopping list, and have it filled if they wish. The online store can offer products that are not usually carried in the physical store. The customer still goes to the physical store to pick up their shopping. The result is that you end up with limited line physical outlets supported by a vast Internet store that serves “the long tail.” This makes it easy to handle the “cold chain” issues and the smaller footprint means the locations can be closer to the consumer.

Product. Price. People. Place. In that order.

Maybe it’s the “Back To” season that’s gotten me thinking this way, but let’s look at the basics. Each purchase decision has its own set of criteria; various points along the rational-emotional continuum.

Why do we find in-store shopping increasingly dissatisfying? Because we are emotional beings and seldom is the shopping experience (Inline OR online–online is mostly about procurement, after all.) Engaging or compelling or lasting.

IF these technologies enhance the shopping experience AND help move more merchandise then they may make sense. Right now it seems like a lot more clutter and confusion.

I love contemplating the possibilities for company and consumer alike. One of my favorites to date is Sunglass Hut’s in-store/social media mash-up.

Is it moving more sunglasses? That remains to be seen.

I agree with Max; the reason that consumers are disliking their retail experience is because the retail experience is significantly worse now than it was in previous years. Poor customer service, rapid turnover of staff and stock-outs have led to a customer experience that drives consumers to online channels rather than encouraging them to explore the store and that stores brands across channels.

In order for stores to regain the traffic and enthusiasm of their customers, retailers need to prioritize the in-store experience.

If the product is not there, and the associates not trained in basic customer service practices, customers will flee the store, as well as the brand in total. So not only will retailers see a decline in store traffic, they will see cannibalization of their customer base by online alternatives as well.

The net of it all is that by being “penny wise and pound foolish,” retailers are in fact shooting themselves in the foot. New technology is not what is needed. (Which usually goes counter to my advice in this column) Rather, they must return to the blocking and tackling and make sure they have the basics down before they can proceed to leverage any new technology. New technology does not cover up for a lack of the basics, no matter how hard you try.

I think retailers need a better customer focus. The practical concerns are all valid, that customers need to find what they are looking for and checkout without waiting. The self checkout, when working, has helped. But too often lost in the process is the lack of emotion at retail. CVS and Rite Aid are perhaps the best example of this and in my opinion, amongst the least attractive retailers in the US. The stores are too large, have an office feel to them, and have way too many SKUs (assortment rationalization would do them good). Their pharmacies are overworked and (by nature) inefficient. And as a place to go to get healthy, no other retailers have as much junk food and as little fresh food on their shelves. They seem to focus more on sickness than on health.

Instead, these stores need a feminine touch. Smaller scale, more items at eye level, less blue and gray carpeting, less fluorescent lighting. More highlight displays, better segregation of products, more emotional signage. They need to focus more on promoting health and need to shrink the Frito Lay assortment. After all, these stores are competing with companies like Kiehl but feel more like Home Depot. Target, despite all the hype, is not much better.

Technology has made shopping online incredibly functional. Bringing that functionality to the real world is important, but just as important is adding something special.

Everyone is looking for three things when they go shopping. Price, quality, and service.

Everyone is competing on price, and quality is usually equal, so the key is service.

Those companies that provide quality service are the ones that are going to get quality shoppers.

If you build a strong employee base, you will end up with a strong bottom line.

It’s not the technology. It’s the practice.
It’s not the employee training. It’s the practice!
It’s not even the hiring practices much of the time. It’s the PRACTICE!

In-store technology should not be a primary feature of retail interaction. It should be an enabler of a superior merchandising practice and shopping experience–define “superior” in the terms that shoppers tell us.

In my opinion, most technology should operate smoothly behind the scenes to make merchandising more dependable and accurate, staff more competent and shoppers more consistently successful.

Yes, a few clever devices have their place in some retail environments. Magic mirrors work great at makeup counters and in eyeglass shops. Smart phones can come in handy for shoppers who want to do their own competitive price checks on high-consideration items. Mobile devices can help improve merchandising performance and enable associates to access helpful information for shoppers.

Ultimately though, in retail it’s the practice that counts. The technology is just something our associates use to make it happen better, like pens and paper, telephones and vacuum cleaners and deodorant.

Good to address such a small issue as the last question on a Friday. The biggest shopper disappointment in b&m stores is not finding what they want. Everything else fades after that. You can have the best service, prices, selection, d cor, signs, etc., but if you don’t have the product, fuhgeddaboudit. The comments here about “knowledgeable employees,” “easy-to-find,” and all of the other retail pabulum are moot if you don’t got the goods.

That’s why the myriad new developments enabling retailers to provide endless inventory by combining in-store and online inventories is so important. This along with free store delivery of online orders and shifting inventory between b&m locations to fill customer orders. Product To The People!

So many valid points have been brought up about the factors leading to consumers’ unhappiness shopping in stores. Customer Service, as we all know, is the basic distinction between one store versus the next and new technologies have limits to improving this in-store service. (Maybe a Customer Alert Detector that would beep to make a store employee aware there is a customer around the area could work…they should make “an app for that”!)

But seriously, online shopping technology is just evolving. We can only to begin to imagine things that will leave you in awe about what you have just done on a website, and this form of shopping always seems to have the item “in stock.”

This brings me back to brick and mortar. It seems that retailers have all become the same in their quest to compete and consequently lost the “awe factor” that keeps the customer coming back to their store. New and exciting displays, sounds and even pleasant smells of the store are sadly, all but gone. But with the right technology, live interactive displays, info monitors on new items, etc, etc, creating “the experience” could make a comeback.

The simple fact that the customer can touch the product in the store (assuming it’s in stock) could be the edge brick and mortar will always have over online shopping. The real future is already here; a combination of brick and mortar with ties to online shopping and vice versa. Many retailers already have an option to order online and pick up in store, allowing you to save shipping charges. This aspect alone, offers a great deal of room for improvement as well as brick and mortar growth opportunity.

How many consumers that want to buy a specific item research online, including finding out if the item is in stock, and then go to the store to pick it up? I know I do. In this age of instant gratification, brick and mortar ultimately has the edge over online, so why not capitalize on this? Far too often though, stores use their internet division as a reverse solution to the customer for an out of stock item. Using this fallback of trying to please a customer helps fuel the consumers’ unhappiness with the store.

New technologies have already improved some of the in-store shopping experience. But technology will not replace the “basics.” Offering outstanding and knowledgeable customer service with a well merchandised product line of in-stock items will always keep the consumer satisfied and coming back for more. Customers may not always be right, but customers have the right for satisfaction and a pleasant shopping experience.

Technology should equal convenience and engagement.