High-Risk Item Protection & Monitoring
RFID smart shelves with real-time removal alerts achieving <1% shrink on high-risk items versus 2-5% manual EAS with 60-80% shrink reduction and 95%+ tagging compliance.
Why This Matters
What It Is
RFID smart shelves with real-time removal alerts achieving <1% shrink on high-risk items versus 2-5% manual EAS with 60-80% shrink reduction and 95%+ tagging compliance.
Current State vs Future State Comparison
Current State
(Traditional)1. Store identifies high-risk items: electronics, health & beauty, razors, designer handbags subject to high theft rates (2-5% shrink). 2. Store associates manually apply EAS tags: attach security tags to products during receiving or stocking process with 20-30% tagging compliance (many products missed). 3. EAS system at exit detects tagged items: if customer exits with tagged merchandise, alarm sounds, LP investigates. 4. Tag removal circumvention common: thieves remove tags, disable with magnets, or exit through non-alarmed doors bypassing EAS system. 5. High-risk item shrink remains 2-5%: EAS provides minimal deterrence due to low tagging compliance and easy circumvention. 6. No real-time monitoring: theft detected only at exit alarm (after product removed from shelf) or annual Inventory Management shrink discovery. 7. Lost sales and shrink significant: high-margin products frequently out-of-stock due to theft ($50,000-$150,000 annual loss on high-risk categories).
Characteristics
- • Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Systems
- • Risk Management Software (e.g., MetricStream, AuditBoard)
- • Inventory Management Systems
- • Physical Security Systems (CCTV, RFID, EAS)
- • Data Analytics and Dashboards
- • Spreadsheets (Excel)
- • Workflow Management Tools (e.g., Monday.com, Pulpstream)
Pain Points
- ⚠ Heavy reliance on manual processes leading to errors and delays.
- ⚠ Siloed systems that hinder holistic risk oversight.
- ⚠ Limited personnel and budget for comprehensive monitoring.
- ⚠ Difficulty in filtering relevant risk signals from large data volumes.
- ⚠ Variability in risk scoring and control implementation reduces consistency.
- ⚠ Complex compliance requirements across multiple standards.
- ⚠ Delayed response to risk events due to lack of automated alerts.
- ⚠ Inconsistent documentation practices across different teams.
- ⚠ High upfront technology investment with ongoing labor costs for manual audits.
- ⚠ Challenges in integrating disparate systems for real-time visibility.
Future State
(Agentic)1. High-Risk Monitoring Agent manages RFID smart shelves: shelves equipped with RFID readers continuously monitor high-value products (razors, electronics, designer items). 2. Smart Shelf Agent detects product removal in real-time: customer removes 3 Gillette razor packs from smart shelf at 2:15pm, RFID readers detect removal instantly. 3. Agent correlates with POS transactions: checks if razors scanned at POS within 15 minutes, if not, generates theft alert. 4. Agent sends real-time alert to LP and store manager: 'Potential theft - 3 Gillette razors removed from shelf 2:15pm, not scanned at POS, customer in red jacket near Electronics aisle - see video'. 5. LP provides visible customer service: approaches customer offering assistance creating deterrent effect, customer proceeds to checkout and pays avoiding theft incident. 6. Agent tracks tagging compliance: 95%+ products on smart shelves have RFID tags vs 20-30% manual EAS tagging through source tagging or automated application. 7. 60-80% shrink reduction on high-risk items (<1% vs 2-5%) through real-time monitoring, instant alerts, and 95%+ tagging compliance vs manual EAS approach.
Characteristics
- • RFID smart shelf readers monitoring product presence in real-time
- • POS transaction data for product scan correlation (did customer pay?)
- • High-risk PIM with shrink rates and theft patterns
- • Video management system for visual confirmation of removal events
- • LP mobile devices for real-time alert delivery and response
- • RFID tag Inventory Management and compliance tracking (source tagging vs store application)
- • Historical shrink data by product showing reduction after smart shelf deployment
Benefits
- ✓ 60-80% high-risk item shrink reduction (<1% vs 2-5%)
- ✓ Real-time theft detection vs exit alarm or annual inventory delay
- ✓ 95%+ tagging compliance through RFID vs 20-30% manual EAS tagging
- ✓ Instant alerts enable LP intervention before exit (deterrence effect)
- ✓ Product availability improved (fewer out-of-stocks from undetected theft)
- ✓ $40,000-$120,000 annual shrink savings on high-risk categories per store
Is This Right for You?
This score is based on general applicability (industry fit, implementation complexity, and ROI potential). Use the Preferences button above to set your industry, role, and company profile for personalized matching.
Why this score:
- • Applicable across multiple industries
- • Higher complexity - requires more resources and planning
- • Moderate expected business value
- • Time to value: 3-6 months
- • (Score based on general applicability - set preferences for personalized matching)
You might benefit from High-Risk Item Protection & Monitoring if:
- You're experiencing: Heavy reliance on manual processes leading to errors and delays.
- You're experiencing: Siloed systems that hinder holistic risk oversight.
- You're experiencing: Limited personnel and budget for comprehensive monitoring.
This may not be right for you if:
- High implementation complexity - ensure adequate technical resources
- Requires human oversight for critical decision points - not fully autonomous
Parent Capability
Shrink & Loss Prevention
Reduces inventory loss through AI video analytics, real-time exception detection, and continuous monitoring achieving significantly lower shrink rates.
What to Do Next
Related Functions
Metadata
- Function ID
- function-high-risk-item-protection-monitoring