Recently, an article was written in an industry magazine making the argument that catching shoplifters should not be a focus of a loss prevention department. I disagree with the content of the article and feel the whole picture of shoplifting was not properly addressed.
First off, having a vendor that benefits from alternative methods to catching shoplifters write an article is going to be slanted from the start. One should have just labeled it a "undercover" sales pitch. As a vendor myself, I want to try and address this issue from a neutral stance as best I can.
The first area I disagree with is allocation of resources based on the numbers stated. Shoplifting as a percent of losses "floats" from number one to number two over the years and represents a higher percent of loss than 24%. Yes, if you drop that percentage for an article, it is easier to make an argument that it should not be a focus based on resources and allocation based on priorities.
Another area I felt was missed is the "one program" fits all approach. A seasoned LP Director or VP will analyze their product mix, merchandising standards and determine if shoplifting is an issue for that Brand. If you sell lawn equipment there is probably no need to catch shoplifters. If you sell electronics and the merchants feel a large portion should be on display, then having a program to catch shoplifters might me appropriate. Grocers tend to be an excellent example of the need to catch shoplifters based on HBA items and Liquor on the sales floor. They are also a major target for the professional, ORC level shoplifter.
Geographics come into play here. A retailer might have a need to catch shoplifters in major cities like Miami, L.A., New York etc and yet not have a need in Idaho. Again, implement a strategy based on type of merchandise/merchandising standards and include in the analysis where coverage is needed based on the criminal activity present.
Have we ignored the impact of ORC level activity and how it impacts the shortage number? What would happen to this activity if everyone stopped making apprehensions? Hard to make an argument that it would not increase.
Should the possible danger of catching shoplifters cause the program to be shelved? That is a very good question. 3 strike laws, ORC level activity has increased the potential for injuries to occur. Add a State with liberal concealed weapon laws and it gets heavier. The industry has to move farther to a no engagement policy. If the shoplifter wants to fight, disengage and call the police. Let the police do their job. This can only be accomplished with better hiring policies, training and strict enforcement of inappropriate conduct.
Yes, I believe in prevention over apprehensions. The old saying is true.....you cannot apprehend your way to shortage control. However, shoplifting is like cancer...if you do not do something to stop or maintain it, it just keeps growing.
Thoughts anyone?
Enjoy the week,
Steve
LPDT, LLC offers the only E-Learning training for Retail Loss Prevention at www.LossPreventionAcademy.com. In addition,we offer a FREE job and resume posting board for Loss Prevention at www.LPjobsFREE.com. Check out our awareness posters for shortage and safety at www.LPPosters.com. You can follow us on Twitter under LPACADEMYcom and Facebook under Loss Prevention Academy.
We are pleased to announce a partnership that will take our online, e-learning courses for Loss Prevention North into Canada. Soon, the Canadian Police Knowledge Network through it's new division, Private Security Training Network will offer three courses via their site and LMS. 468x60.png){kind=small}
468x60.png){kind=small}
468x60.png){kind=small}