December 3, 2007
Helping Consumers Discover RFID’s Benefits
Radio frequency identification (RFID) technology has the potential to transform consumers’ lives for the positive. That is the message of the Discover RFID website (www.discoverrfid.org) created by the GS1 subsidiary EPCglobal.
The site offers consumers insights into the various ways RFID is being used to improve daily living, from helping speed consumers through tollbooths to tracking food products and luggage lost by airlines.
Discover RFID’s tone is positive throughout but it is clear that it also intends to address obstacles to adoption such as the accusations that the technology will bring about a Big Brother-like intrusion into their lives.
On this question, Discover RFID offers the following response with links to resource websites: “Many groups, including EPCglobal, are working to protect the consumer’s right to privacy and to educate people about RFID and the EPC. For example, the European Union and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in the U.S. are also actively monitoring the progress of RFID technology and its impact on citizens. At national level, countries have various data protection laws in place. And non-profit organizations monitor the legal environment to make sure consumer rights are protected.”
Discussion Questions: How knowledgeable do you think American consumers are about RFID and its benefits? Do consumers need to be educated about RFID? What do you see as the questions that need to be answered for RFID to continue its progress? Are the answers that GS1 EPCglobal and others are offering convincing to consumers?
BrainTrust
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Poll
Consumers recognize the basic RFID technology. Many people are familiar with it from E-ZPass and IPass type units. GPS systems use similar technology. The common cell phone uses a radio signal.
While it may have great use at the industrial level, RFID continues to be a technology in search of applications for consumers. So far, the cost has proven to outweigh the benefits.
Furthermore, it has a “big brother” image for consumers that only adds to the general paranoia over privacy issues.
Consumer knowledge regarding RFID is minimal. Some applications may be familiar and welcome, like the easy checkout examples or tags for pets. However, the connection between the easy checkout cards and RFID is non-existent. Other applications, like tracking or monitoring employees, are perceived an invasive. One option for generating support is to talk about applications in a positive form and not use the RFID term; however, that continues the problem of lack of knowledge on the consumers’ part. Privacy criticisms will continue to be publicized and if they continue to be publicized as RFID criticisms the public may never make the connection between RFID and the variety of applications, some of which they like and some they don’t.
You know, just the way this particular question was phrased displays our fundamental problem. And the name and purpose of the web site is problematic.
How can we “educate consumers on the value of RFID?” How did CPG manufacturers feel when Wal-Mart kept suggested to them that they just needed “education on the benefits of RFID in the supply chain”? An unprintable answer, right? At that time, I wrote that after 2 years, one would think the benefits would have started to become evident. The same is true here.
No one has to educate consumers on the value of an iPod. No one has to educate consumers on the value of plasma TVs. Your first clue that benefits are dubious or a cause is hopeless is when you “have to educate.”
So as Mark suggested way back at the beginning of this thread–let the technology start to deliver value, and as Nikki suggested, let the acronym fade into the background. E-ZPass, SpeedPass, SunPass, are all brand names of ways we can get through toll booths more easily. The fact that there’s an RFID chip in there is irrelevant.
Those are my best thoughts. Let the results do the talking.
The use of “RFID” is about as meaningless as the use of “CRM.” The value is in what these technologies “enable.” We should stop talking about RFID in the context of it being a “solution” of any sort. RFID is another enabling technology that can advance the consumers’ experience in almost all interaction touchpoints in commerce. In retail, it will enable major advances towards a new retail ecosystem where customers are better informed during the shopping visit, where personalization exists, and where the shopping experience, in all facets, drives both loyalty and purchasing behavior that benefits both the customer and the retailer. The way RFID is too often positioned results in a consumer perception that it is a device for “big brother” inerference in privacy. It should be as ubiquitous as the mobile phone in its adoption and benefits. Let’s focus on solutions where RFID’s contribution is that of a technical building block within an infrastructure that delivers functional solutions of benefit to all constituents.
Consumers do not know much about RFID today. I concur that what they know is coming at them from consumer Advocacy Groups, and it’s not positive. I support such groups except when they don’t get it right. RFID will affect the consumer positively, albeit indirectly, when retailers begin implementing the technology at the item level, and retailers can provide a better in-stock position and can get the customer out of the store faster.
As to whether the technology can be used malevolently to invade people’s privacy, such as tracking their whereabouts, this is not going to be done by Big Brother through an RFID tag in your dress, it will be accomplished covertly by a government-led spying organization using the technology.
Bill’s right, it’s all about control. I don’t think there’s any imperative to publicize the benefits of RFID. Publicize the applications and consumers will decide if the pros outweigh the cons. EZ-Pass is great, and you can decide if you want to use it or not every time you pass a toll-booth. If you’re paranoid, keep it in a shielded bag or leave it at home if you’re not going to use it. Same with gas station payment keys, shopper cards, or other means of tracking.
The common thread is that they are optional and within the control of the consumer.
The American public doesn’t know squat about RFID. Probably the lunatic fringe thinks it’s code for Radioactive Food Inducing Death. Let the protests begin. But most people won’t really care one way or the other, or take the time to learn about it. (Much in the same way that we elect presidents.) Perhaps the best thing to do is keep changing its name. I was listening in on a Wal-Mart conference call last month, and was surprised to hear one of their executives make reference to “electronic product codes, formerly known as RFID.” Hey, “electronic product codes” sounds a lot friendlier than RFID. I’m with Wal-Mart. Anything to keep the lunatic fringe a little quieter, I say.
No question RFID can make life simpler, but how? So far we have seen E-ZPass (toll collection), keyless automobiles and SpeedPass (gas payment). Increasing consumer security and reduction in things one has to carry or keep track of should make life easier. At this point most consumers don’t even know that RFID technology is being used. The future will likely be along the lines of the keyless car. One RFID card in your wallet opens your car, eliminated frequent shopper cards (like the 15 I have in my car) and maybe a central payment center. The user could then direct payments to which credit or debit card they want. This could be another step in the elimination of paper checks. Home security could also be linked to a card in your wallet. Eliminating keys should increase security.
Everyone likes E-ZPass, so that gets RFID some appreciation. For more effective publicity, GS1 EPCglobal might consider dropping publicity for RFID applications that aren’t appreciated, like airport luggage sorting. Airline lost luggage statistics are getting worse, not better, so claiming that RFID is a great consumer-driven tool for this function probably isn’t an easy way to gain credibility. The best publicity is inspired by what excites the public, not what gets them furious.
Warren has nailed this one. Americans don’t know much about RFID (including that it’s behind E-ZPass). Those that do think it’s a way of sending signals to Martians so they can invade. Change the name to something more consumer friendly and let the games begin.
And I agree with Warren on all counts–consumers don’t know anything about RFID, and what they do “know” comes either from Hollywood’s imagination or the “lunatic fringe”–neither version of which contains much in the way of facts.
I think it’s good that someone is out there trying to counter a lot of the misinformation about RFID, but it’s going to be discredited coming from EPCGlobal. They need to co-opt a consumer advocacy group, sprinkle in a couple of other technology firms, and maybe a couple of former senators or something before anyone can really take the site seriously.
But again, I agree with Warren–ultimately the future of this technology is not going to lay with the name “RFID.” It’ll penetrate consumers’ lives, but the term “RFID” is so tainted that we’ll end up calling it something else.
There’s a lot of privacy and security concerns around this topic that I’m not sure the public is accurately aware of. Frankly, I feel that a strong consumer education push could be very helpful if done right. Folks could better understand what it is, the data that is shared, risks/concerns, protecting themselves and “opt-in” and “opt-out” options. If you want to read an interesting article about the hacking concerns with this technology, Wired ran an intriguing article on it earlier this year.
Mark is right. We need to get them excited BUT we also need to empower them with knowledge and avoid any potential PR disasters.
I will keep saying it until I am blue in the face. While there are some unique potential privacy threats from RFID, they are simply trivial compared to what consumers are already giving up now in terms of credit and debit card data and a whole lot more.
With cash transactions rapidly disappearing–the postal service, for example, appears it is getting away from cash completely–basically everything you ever do and buy will be in Visa, Master Card, or American Express’s databases.
And oh, by the way, any email you send from your corporate account the company is required to keep for 7 years, whether you delete it or not, just in case someone in a civil or criminal suit needs to get access to it later.
RFID and privacy?–it’s a drop in the bucket. To badly mix metaphors, the horse has left the barn a long time ago, and no one cares.
RFID has huge benefits for the public with practical implementations. Safety is one. If children had a chip embedded that could be updated with vital information, just think about the number of kidnapped or missing children we could locate with public readers in buildings and store fronts. The database could cross reference the mising individuals and send out alerts automatically. Criminals could be embedded with chips and their whereabouts would always be known.
Another benefit of embedding a chip would be addressing health concerns. If there is an accident and the individual has no identification, health authorities cannot proceed with medical care until they know allergies, history etc. If there were a chip, they could scan, get identification and learn about all medical allergies and information. No more medical bracelets needed.
Now the public rights groups would say that this is an invasion of privacy. If a life is saved, I’m okay with that kind of invasion. Or if a child snatched at a mall is recovered quickly, I’m okay with that too! There is a lot more invasion of privacy on the internet than with RFID.
If you look at a lot of the benefits on the EPCglobal site it becomes confusing how many depend on RFID and how many depend on “serialization.” Almost all the benefits discussed are available with the “Databar” barcode (formerly the RSS or Reduced Space Symbology) that has been available for years but manufacturers and retailers have not seen the cause to implement. This barcode standard allows for package barcodes that include a unique serial number. All the projected benefits derived from knowing the specific instance of a product can be obtained by simply using the Databar as a means of identification. (I say “simply,” while appreciating this is no small change for the label printing process.)
Barcodes have the outstanding characteristic that they must be scanned. This “security feature” is what I think will always make them preferable to EPC in the consumer’s mind. As we’ve seen with the Facebook discussion today and many times over with other consumer privacy issues, it is the surreptitious capture of data which enrages people. People have pretty much come to grips with the fact that their online activity, credit card transactions, and toll booth passage are all being tracked. But tell them that tag readers are going to be randomly placed around town or that products will now be identifiable when they walk through a doorway and I think you cross a line.
More Discussions
Has Same-Day Delivery Become an Expectation Across Retail?
Are expectations around retail delivery speed in flux?OpenAI Names the Infrastructure Standard for Agentic Commerce
Will OpenAI or Google (or another entity) set the gold standard for agentic commerce?Is Five Below Poised For Even Greater Growth?
Five Below is hitting serious growth numbers. Can this trend continue?
Consumers recognize the basic RFID technology. Many people are familiar with it from E-ZPass and IPass type units. GPS systems use similar technology. The common cell phone uses a radio signal.
While it may have great use at the industrial level, RFID continues to be a technology in search of applications for consumers. So far, the cost has proven to outweigh the benefits.
Furthermore, it has a “big brother” image for consumers that only adds to the general paranoia over privacy issues.
Consumer knowledge regarding RFID is minimal. Some applications may be familiar and welcome, like the easy checkout examples or tags for pets. However, the connection between the easy checkout cards and RFID is non-existent. Other applications, like tracking or monitoring employees, are perceived an invasive. One option for generating support is to talk about applications in a positive form and not use the RFID term; however, that continues the problem of lack of knowledge on the consumers’ part. Privacy criticisms will continue to be publicized and if they continue to be publicized as RFID criticisms the public may never make the connection between RFID and the variety of applications, some of which they like and some they don’t.
You know, just the way this particular question was phrased displays our fundamental problem. And the name and purpose of the web site is problematic.
How can we “educate consumers on the value of RFID?” How did CPG manufacturers feel when Wal-Mart kept suggested to them that they just needed “education on the benefits of RFID in the supply chain”? An unprintable answer, right? At that time, I wrote that after 2 years, one would think the benefits would have started to become evident. The same is true here.
No one has to educate consumers on the value of an iPod. No one has to educate consumers on the value of plasma TVs. Your first clue that benefits are dubious or a cause is hopeless is when you “have to educate.”
So as Mark suggested way back at the beginning of this thread–let the technology start to deliver value, and as Nikki suggested, let the acronym fade into the background. E-ZPass, SpeedPass, SunPass, are all brand names of ways we can get through toll booths more easily. The fact that there’s an RFID chip in there is irrelevant.
Those are my best thoughts. Let the results do the talking.
The use of “RFID” is about as meaningless as the use of “CRM.” The value is in what these technologies “enable.” We should stop talking about RFID in the context of it being a “solution” of any sort. RFID is another enabling technology that can advance the consumers’ experience in almost all interaction touchpoints in commerce. In retail, it will enable major advances towards a new retail ecosystem where customers are better informed during the shopping visit, where personalization exists, and where the shopping experience, in all facets, drives both loyalty and purchasing behavior that benefits both the customer and the retailer. The way RFID is too often positioned results in a consumer perception that it is a device for “big brother” inerference in privacy. It should be as ubiquitous as the mobile phone in its adoption and benefits. Let’s focus on solutions where RFID’s contribution is that of a technical building block within an infrastructure that delivers functional solutions of benefit to all constituents.
Consumers do not know much about RFID today. I concur that what they know is coming at them from consumer Advocacy Groups, and it’s not positive. I support such groups except when they don’t get it right. RFID will affect the consumer positively, albeit indirectly, when retailers begin implementing the technology at the item level, and retailers can provide a better in-stock position and can get the customer out of the store faster.
As to whether the technology can be used malevolently to invade people’s privacy, such as tracking their whereabouts, this is not going to be done by Big Brother through an RFID tag in your dress, it will be accomplished covertly by a government-led spying organization using the technology.
Bill’s right, it’s all about control. I don’t think there’s any imperative to publicize the benefits of RFID. Publicize the applications and consumers will decide if the pros outweigh the cons. EZ-Pass is great, and you can decide if you want to use it or not every time you pass a toll-booth. If you’re paranoid, keep it in a shielded bag or leave it at home if you’re not going to use it. Same with gas station payment keys, shopper cards, or other means of tracking.
The common thread is that they are optional and within the control of the consumer.
The American public doesn’t know squat about RFID. Probably the lunatic fringe thinks it’s code for Radioactive Food Inducing Death. Let the protests begin. But most people won’t really care one way or the other, or take the time to learn about it. (Much in the same way that we elect presidents.) Perhaps the best thing to do is keep changing its name. I was listening in on a Wal-Mart conference call last month, and was surprised to hear one of their executives make reference to “electronic product codes, formerly known as RFID.” Hey, “electronic product codes” sounds a lot friendlier than RFID. I’m with Wal-Mart. Anything to keep the lunatic fringe a little quieter, I say.
No question RFID can make life simpler, but how? So far we have seen E-ZPass (toll collection), keyless automobiles and SpeedPass (gas payment). Increasing consumer security and reduction in things one has to carry or keep track of should make life easier. At this point most consumers don’t even know that RFID technology is being used. The future will likely be along the lines of the keyless car. One RFID card in your wallet opens your car, eliminated frequent shopper cards (like the 15 I have in my car) and maybe a central payment center. The user could then direct payments to which credit or debit card they want. This could be another step in the elimination of paper checks. Home security could also be linked to a card in your wallet. Eliminating keys should increase security.
Everyone likes E-ZPass, so that gets RFID some appreciation. For more effective publicity, GS1 EPCglobal might consider dropping publicity for RFID applications that aren’t appreciated, like airport luggage sorting. Airline lost luggage statistics are getting worse, not better, so claiming that RFID is a great consumer-driven tool for this function probably isn’t an easy way to gain credibility. The best publicity is inspired by what excites the public, not what gets them furious.
Warren has nailed this one. Americans don’t know much about RFID (including that it’s behind E-ZPass). Those that do think it’s a way of sending signals to Martians so they can invade. Change the name to something more consumer friendly and let the games begin.
And I agree with Warren on all counts–consumers don’t know anything about RFID, and what they do “know” comes either from Hollywood’s imagination or the “lunatic fringe”–neither version of which contains much in the way of facts.
I think it’s good that someone is out there trying to counter a lot of the misinformation about RFID, but it’s going to be discredited coming from EPCGlobal. They need to co-opt a consumer advocacy group, sprinkle in a couple of other technology firms, and maybe a couple of former senators or something before anyone can really take the site seriously.
But again, I agree with Warren–ultimately the future of this technology is not going to lay with the name “RFID.” It’ll penetrate consumers’ lives, but the term “RFID” is so tainted that we’ll end up calling it something else.
There’s a lot of privacy and security concerns around this topic that I’m not sure the public is accurately aware of. Frankly, I feel that a strong consumer education push could be very helpful if done right. Folks could better understand what it is, the data that is shared, risks/concerns, protecting themselves and “opt-in” and “opt-out” options. If you want to read an interesting article about the hacking concerns with this technology, Wired ran an intriguing article on it earlier this year.
Mark is right. We need to get them excited BUT we also need to empower them with knowledge and avoid any potential PR disasters.
I will keep saying it until I am blue in the face. While there are some unique potential privacy threats from RFID, they are simply trivial compared to what consumers are already giving up now in terms of credit and debit card data and a whole lot more.
With cash transactions rapidly disappearing–the postal service, for example, appears it is getting away from cash completely–basically everything you ever do and buy will be in Visa, Master Card, or American Express’s databases.
And oh, by the way, any email you send from your corporate account the company is required to keep for 7 years, whether you delete it or not, just in case someone in a civil or criminal suit needs to get access to it later.
RFID and privacy?–it’s a drop in the bucket. To badly mix metaphors, the horse has left the barn a long time ago, and no one cares.
RFID has huge benefits for the public with practical implementations. Safety is one. If children had a chip embedded that could be updated with vital information, just think about the number of kidnapped or missing children we could locate with public readers in buildings and store fronts. The database could cross reference the mising individuals and send out alerts automatically. Criminals could be embedded with chips and their whereabouts would always be known.
Another benefit of embedding a chip would be addressing health concerns. If there is an accident and the individual has no identification, health authorities cannot proceed with medical care until they know allergies, history etc. If there were a chip, they could scan, get identification and learn about all medical allergies and information. No more medical bracelets needed.
Now the public rights groups would say that this is an invasion of privacy. If a life is saved, I’m okay with that kind of invasion. Or if a child snatched at a mall is recovered quickly, I’m okay with that too! There is a lot more invasion of privacy on the internet than with RFID.
If you look at a lot of the benefits on the EPCglobal site it becomes confusing how many depend on RFID and how many depend on “serialization.” Almost all the benefits discussed are available with the “Databar” barcode (formerly the RSS or Reduced Space Symbology) that has been available for years but manufacturers and retailers have not seen the cause to implement. This barcode standard allows for package barcodes that include a unique serial number. All the projected benefits derived from knowing the specific instance of a product can be obtained by simply using the Databar as a means of identification. (I say “simply,” while appreciating this is no small change for the label printing process.)
Barcodes have the outstanding characteristic that they must be scanned. This “security feature” is what I think will always make them preferable to EPC in the consumer’s mind. As we’ve seen with the Facebook discussion today and many times over with other consumer privacy issues, it is the surreptitious capture of data which enrages people. People have pretty much come to grips with the fact that their online activity, credit card transactions, and toll booth passage are all being tracked. But tell them that tag readers are going to be randomly placed around town or that products will now be identifiable when they walk through a doorway and I think you cross a line.