|
|
| |
For the past 35 years, barcodes have allowed retailers to keep track of products in the store and as they leave the checkout counter. The system works because each stock-keeping unit in the store has a unique barcode. But there is a new technology on the horizon that stands to revolutionize product labeling—and personal privacy.
This technology, known as radio frequency identification (RFID), will soon let retailers—as well as manufacturers—uniquely label each individual package with an identifying code. Although RFID has been around since World War II, the idea of using it to track consumer goods is relatively new.
The RFID tag is a tiny silicon chip with a number called the EPC (Electronic Product Code) on it. When an antenna (no larger than a postage stamp) is attached to the tag, the code can be scanned by a remote reading device up to ten meters away. If equipped with a transmitter, the tag emits a signal that can be picked up at much greater distances—even by satellites.
It is still too expensive to place individualized tags on each item in the supermarket, so RFID is now chiefly used to identify shipping pallets and cargo containers. But near-term futurists see the day when it will be cost-effective to label individual store items—perhaps no more than five or ten years from now.
Richard Gerstman, chairman emeritus of Interbrand (brandchannel's parent company), foresees benefits for retailers, manufacturers and consumers. "With RFID, the package will become more of an information gathering device," he says. "This will help with store shelf replenishment, gathering information about the purchaser, forecasting for the store, and deterring theft. It will provide cost-savings for the stores and hopefully for the consumer."
|
|
| |
Civil libertarians are quick to point out that the tags could also be used to track individuals or to gather closely held personal information. Says Gerstman, "People have to be concerned about privacy. RFID is a very powerful tool, much more powerful than the barcode. You are tracking an individual item rather than tracking the whole group of items. With barcodes, all they know is that you've bought this product. With RFID they will know a lot more. If it is on the product, they will even know how you use the product. There is a big difference."
Cédric Laurant is policy counsel with the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) in Washington, DC. In July 2004, he told the US House Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection that "widespread use of RFID tags could enable corporations to track every move consumers make.... By aggregating data to form consumer profiles, corporations could make inferential assumptions about a consumer's income, health, lifestyle, traveling habits, buying habits, etc. This information could be sold to governments to create a dossier of individual citizens or simply sold to other corporations for marketing purposes."
Defenders of the technology have suggested that consumers worried about loss of privacy could simply tear the tags off their packages before leaving the store. However, there are reasons why this may not be practical. First, the technology will allow retailers to track where merchandise was bought, so the tags will have to be intact when processing customer returns. Second, the tags will almost certainly include warranty information that will have to be retained for the lifetime of covered products. With these constraints, it hardly seems likely that consumers will be completely free to remove the tags.
Earl Cox, president of Scianta Intelligence, envisions a new market for data obtained by monitoring trash bins outside consumers' homes. "Legally if you throw something in the trash, it's then public property," he says. "You can go and grab it out of somebody's trash. At [one large university], they teach a course in urban archeology. They go out and rummage through trashcans. They build up a whole composite of a neighborhood based on trash. From a marketing standpoint, something like [RFID] would be very valuable. You could essentially drive down a back street, walk down an alleyway, just hire people to do it three or four times a day." Adds Cox, "You can build a pretty accurate statistical profile of the demographics of people's age, gender, education, disposable income—all this stuff."
Given that RFID may soon allow manufacturers to determine who drinks beer during football games, Richard Gerstman believes consumers will start asking for something in exchange for this information. "The manufacturers will eventually start working out deals with people where consumers can get beer much cheaper or they can get free purchases for some of their beer in exchange for this information," he says. "I think there's going to be more negotiation going on in the future. Advertisers and marketers will be able to get a lot of information from people about their habits by negotiating for information."
But Thomas Hine, author of The Total Package, is not so sure. "People don't want to negotiate," he says. "When Priceline.com was allowing bidding for groceries and gasoline, it just didn't work. People didn't want to have so much uncertainty and emotion to win a tank full of gasoline or to get so much off on a package of Cheerios. It was madness." Hine adds, "The way you sell things is by having people not think very much."
|
| |
|
Assuming price negotiation does actually catch on, Earl Cox thinks that the economics of RFID may ultimately limit how much negotiation ends up taking place. The problem is that implementation of RFID technology is not cheap. When the cost of the technology is factored in, he says, "there probably won't be any real savings to the end user just because of the relationship between cash flow capital budgeting versus inflation rates."
Hine and Gerstman do find common ground when the negotiations become more subtle, however. Drawing an analogy between RFID and store-discount or customer-loyalty cards, Hine says, "Most people don't weigh their privacy against the card. It's just so irrational not to have the card. It's scarcely a choice. It's certainly not something that people see as empowering for themselves."
Says Gerstman, "One thing I think the consumers will like is the use of [RFID] to make it easier for them to check out. Checkout will become much more automatic in the future."
Although few consumers think about it today, one of the great benefits of barcodes was that they sped up the checkout line. Professor Daniel Godwin of Rochester Institute of Technology recalls listening to a keynote presentation by the president of a national grocers association some years ago. Godwin says the speaker pointed out that the thing people actually hate the most is waiting in the checkout line, and that they hate it as much as going to the dentist.
As a matter of convenience, RFID stands to speed up the checkout line even more than barcodes. In The Visionary Package, Gerstman and co-author Herbert Meyers predict that RFID technology would eventually let shoppers scan the items they wished to purchase before entering the checkout line. When they reach the cash register, their bill would be waiting for them, already tallied and ready to sign (Palgrave, New York).
But is privacy really a legitimate bargaining chip for greater convenience? EPIC's Laurant says there are two ways to look at this question. On the one hand, there is the libertarian view that every individual must have the freedom to choose whatever he or she wants, whether that is to protect privacy or put convenience first. The opposing view is that allowing individuals to trade privacy for convenience would empower retailers and RFID users and lead to loss of privacy for all consumers.
It seems quite possible the battle lines over RFID will end up being drawn at the checkout counter. Most of the benefits that manufacturers and retailers initially pointed to when they began thinking about RFID (lower costs to consumers, higher product availability, better tracking of inventory, theft reduction, reduced wastage) have yet to be realized. Says Earl Cox, "I haven't seen any of that—I go out to Wal-Mart and talk to these guys, and I've worked with the government.... I haven't seen anything except an acceptance that RFID is doing away with barcodes. That's how they look at it."
[2-Jan-2006]
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Randall Frost, a freelance writer based in Pleasanton, California, is the author of The Globalization of Trade. His work has appeared in Worth, The New England Financial Journal, CBSHealthWatch and a variety of educational publications.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
Jul 31, 2006
|
Building Appeal -- Randall Frost
|
|
|
Part art, part science, the field of branding architecture has never been more relevant to firms around the world.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
Mar 13, 2006
|
Standards: Who Needs Them? -- Edwin Colyer
|
|
|
By setting standards, organizations like ISO, EFQM, and Eco-label create a mark of distinction for brands to promote. But rules differ greatly between the groups on who gets to use the mark and how.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Copyright © 2001-2010 brandchannel. All rights reserved.
|
|