The seemingly ubiquitous nature of EAS (Electronic Article Surveillance, or tagging as it’s more commonly known) in the retail sector belies the struggle behind trying to make this simple idea fully incorporated within the management and merchandising structure.
In the 20 or so years since it was introduced to the UK, the once bulky – not to mention unsightly – antennas and tags have undergone the most radical of makeovers. Materials and styling once chosen purely for longevity, with not even a nod to aesthetics, have evolved alongside the greater aspirations of architects and store designers to feed the public appetite for sleeker and sexier retail environments.
Without doubt, the advent of DSP (Digital Signal Processing) has made systems more reliable, tags and labels smaller and time-consuming false alarms almost a thing of the past. In turn, this has allowed EAS to become a much more versatile tool.
If EAS works better, looks better and is responding better to the threat of theft, is it a better investment now for retailers and their security managers than it was 20 years ago, or is there a more fundamental issue that still needs to be addressed? The answer has to be that, in essence, the same old problems are still with us. Deciding on an EAS system should involve people at different levels of a given organisation, but it rarely does. Such decisions demand input from the shop floor upwards.
Specification and management
In-house managers can often be the best placed people to initiate a system specification (provided that they have control over their own budget and don’t undermine any previous investment). For example, choosing equipment from a manufacturer purporting to use a ‘unique’ technology could ultimately lead to less choice and, therefore, higher prices.
As long as reliable systems are installed EAS will work, but it’s up to security management and staff to complete the package, not to abdicate responsibility to the supplier. If the management doesn’t know why one tagging position is better than another, then the chances are their staff will not know either. If a system is to function properly, it’s crucial that everyone understands its role.
The involvement of third parties constitutes yet another hurdle for successful security system management, with more and more architects being asked by companies to include EAS systems in designs for store refits and image updates (with many architects involving themselves in specification).
Breaking out of retail
One question that’s often asked is: can EAS expand outside of the retail environment? It’s use in the office sector is still limited at the present time, mainly due to purely physical constraints. However, it can be done. By their very nature, office buildings tend to have more exits, and staff have access to many more areas. That said, portable, high value goods such as laptop computers, PCs, calculators, telephones and even software can all be protected by tagging. Alarms may be audio or visual to indicate when an item has passed through a protected exit. Yet it’s still relatively uncommon.
The next real quantum leap for EAS is RFID (Radio Frequency Identification). This is an idea initiated by the ongoing source tagging debate, taking and encompassing tracking to work alongside RF tagging. Essentially, this would enable items to be tracked from the point of manufacture or distribution to the customer as well as a loss prevention device.
RFID would include the ability to help detect refund fraud by being able to scan a given product and immediately find out its status. At present, detecting this type of fraud is very much in the hands of the security manager. In any event, auditors and loss prevention staff must have the ability to cross-reference transactions and refunds before it’s going to be possible to eliminate the huge losses suffered as a direct result of refund fraud.
Of course, all of this means new systems at various points in the supply chain, developing new technology to read chips at a distance and the added cost of incorporating chips or labels. Massive investment would be required from both manufacturers and retailers, not to mention a standardisation of all EAS systems.
Ultimately, the only way in which the use of EAS will be extended is for a common standard to be implemented across the board, and a protocol adopted that is not dependent on any one manufacturer.
After all, strong-arm tactics to push a single technology wouldn’t be tolerated in the public domain, so why should it be allowed in the commercial security sector?
