July 28, 2008
High-tech Struggles to Reach Dressing Rooms
By Tom Ryan
High-tech dressing rooms have generated lots of buzz in the past 18 months but no full-scale deployments. Moreover, some wonder how useful they’ll be. A recent report, New Future In Store from TNS showed that while 73 percent of shoppers expect to see touchscreens in dressing rooms in the near future, only 23 percent would likely use them.
One success, according to Self Service World, has been the rollout of Cisco’s “Intelligent Fitting Room” system at Japanese department store Mitsukoshi. As customers walk in the dressing room, an RFID reader detects the tags affixed to the products, triggering wall-mounted touchscreens to display product information and offer alternate sizes and compatible accessories. Pressing a button signals a sales staff to fetch another size or color. Apparel sales at Mitsukoshi have increased 15 percent since the technology was introduced while stockroom trips to check inventory were cut 25 percent.
A failure came from Prada, which pulled its RFID-driven “smart dressing rooms” only a few years after launching the concept to great fanfare at its Soho store in 2001. Business 2.0 called Prada’s attempt a “high-tech misstep,” citing faulty technology, too-high expectations and a surly attitude toward the machinery from the staff.
Indeed, most of these technologies remain in pilot mode, if that. Moreover, Patrick Moorhead, director of emerging media for Avenue A Razorfish, said the retailers most interested in his firm’s technologies are boutiques rather than big-boxes.
Yet many technologies are still garnering attention. Among those:
- Last September, German retailer Galeria Kaufhof outfitted the entire third floor of its Essen-based store with item-level RFID tags. Shoppers entering a dressing room are instantly shown product information, care instructions and price. Touchscreens mounted on shelves in the store allow shoppers to determine whether or not their size is in stock;
- The Social Retailing dressing room, introduced at the NRF convention from IconNicholson, includes a camera that sends a photo of the shopper in his/her new outfit to selected friends, who can reply with opinions and even suggest other items from the catalog;
- Smart Fitting Room, from 5stat, enables stores to learn what items are taken to the fitting room but never purchased, or what items customers take to dressing rooms but always ask for a larger size.
The article concludes that it’s unknown whether consumers want the technology. But Mr. Moorhead believes the technology will be adopted if it proves useful.
“That’s the story behind TiVo, that’s the story behind most of the Apple technologies, and we’re making bets that that’s going to be the case with most emerging retail technology,” said Mr. Moorhead. “It’s not that shopping sucks today, but the availability of technology to the consumer in the shopping experience is going to enhance it for them, and they’re going to crave it once they understand that it’s available to them.”
Discussion Questions: Do you think expectations have been too high around high-tech dressing room technologies? What’s holding back greater adoption of such technologies? Which dressing room technologies do you believe hold the most promise for adoption at retail?
BrainTrust
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Poll
As a retail chain associate who WORKS on the floor I have to ask, “Have you worked the floor lately?” As an “associate” not a “manager” or “owner”?
Picture this… A limited number of dressing rooms (usually two or three, if you’re lucky), one associate (or two, again if you’re lucky) covering the sales area, and ten customers with a arm full of merchandise to try on. And did I forget to mention the customer on the telephone who wants you to check for several items she found in the sales ad?
Okay, you say that’s my job; but I’m also a gatekeeper (I can’t even begin to tell you how many times I have to stop men from accompanying their spouses or significant others into the dressing room or being called in by their spouses or significant others), a baby sitter (do I really need to explain), anti-theft detector, merchandiser, housekeeping assistant, and NOW with the introduction of high tech dressing rooms, you want me to be a “Dressing Room Techie” too?
I think that any technology which replaces good customer service is a waste of time. A machine or computer cannot analyze how good or bad a customer looks in an outfit and make judgments about what the customer should or should not buy. They cannot offer advice as to what accessories would go wonderfully with the item they are trying on. And they cannot suggest other items that are on sale that the customer would really be interested in, noting their taste. A machine can be useful as a dumb light, which may be switched on to call for help. This research shows that what the customer says and what the customer does are miles apart.
As a guy, I’m intrinsically irritated by dressing rooms in general. Real guys don’t “try on” anything below the second layer of clothing, and even then it bugs us. We know our sizes in the three basic clothing groups: Denim, T-Shirts, and Beige. So this is about women, right?
But “high-tech” dressing rooms? Don’t women actually enjoy the back-and-forth and give-and-take of traditional changing facilities? The extended period of time spent goofing with the girls and posing in front of a mirror (every woman’s favorite thing)? The arm extended from behind the curtain with the accompanying request, “one size larger, please?” Isn’t this their version of drinking beer in a boat while pretending to fish? And for the guys, what about that stupid chair near the dressing room where you wait and try not to ogle (it’s not “oogle,” you Philistines) the comings and goings of the females prancing around in various stages of undress? Oh wait, there’s a copy of the French-language version of Vogue to keep you occupied. What a relief.
Well, if they do this, they better add a lot of extra dressing rooms. My wife has waited around forever for an available dressing room sometimes and if you start making them high-tech, people (notice I didn’t say “women,” although I wanted to) are going to stay in them even longer. Shopping trips have usually degenerated into fights, or me taking a long visit to go look at electronics or hardware. Even she complains about the long wait sometimes. So maybe they should have a few low-tech dressing rooms around, too, just to be on the safe side.
There is no doubt in my mind that this is a technology with upward potential. As in every other failure we may have seen, much of is due to the implementation. We have seen good technology maligned because it was poorly implemented.
I agree that the dressing-room technology may have a better initial opportunity for success in the boutiques than in the chains. Boutiques can have more control over their sales staff than chains, and almost force a success.
Picture a lady in the dressing room trying on a size 6 dress with an RFID tag attached. The dress is too small. She uses the touch screen (or mirror) provided to call for a size 8. A message is transmitted to a sales associate who either comes to the dressing room or talks to her via an intercom system and tells the customer that she’s going to bring her the size 8 (because she already knows she has one), and then brings it to the customer. Nifty, and possible.
I believe that trying to improve the customer experience in the dressing room is like trying to put lipstick on a pig. Why do people go to dressing rooms? Because the only way they can be sure the product fits is to try it on. Do people really want to spend their shopping time in a dressing room? No.
Making that experience “better” is solving the wrong problem. If we knew for sure that it would fit, we wouldn’t need dressing rooms to begin with. The retailer who solves the “fit” problem, not the one with the smart mirror, is the one who is going to create a truly differentiating customer experience.
But back to the dressing rooms of “today.” While product information, calling for service, etc, would all be great to have in the dressing room, what I as a consumer would prefer is that employees actually do the job they’re supposed to do with dressing rooms today – keeping them clean would be a great start. When we as an industry can get that right, then talk to me about “intelligent” dressing rooms.
As with any new technology, it takes time before consumers adapt them. In this economy, retailers should concentrate on the basics: great customer service and value for the money. I don’t see retailers investing in this technology while the economy continues to lag.
I haven’t seen anyone talk about fitting room call buttons in this discussion. This is technology that is working effectively in thousands of fitting rooms across several large chains–NOW. When teamed with a good service strategy, call buttons are highly effective for creating opportunities for KPI improvement and give customers push button access to that personal service experience they left home for.
Ms. Baird and Ms. Dorenkott are correct; we don’t go shopping to for the experience of spending a lot of time in the fitting room. We go into the fitting room to make a buying decision about item(s) we like. If it doesn’t fit, fitting room technology should give the customer easy access to an associate who will bring the right size or color of the item.
Retailers are attempting to jump over the problem of effective hiring and training by installing technology that they hope will up-sell and cross-sell for the associate. Notice, though, that each one of these technologies has a “call button” embedded in them – a pretty pricey call button I would say. If the customer wanted a self-service internet experience, they would stay home.
Dressing rooms have a couple of specific purposes. The first is to provide the customer with a comfortable, well lit environment to try apparel on for fit, style, look, comfort, etc. It should also be easy to reach a sales associate if the customer needs a different size or color. Do we really need them to do anything more?
In recent years we have seen a number of attempts to add technology to dressing rooms. Most have been failures, including the high-tech dressing rooms in the Prada store in the Soho area of New York City. The technology never worked. The changing walls in the Beverly Hills store are an interesting gimmick but don’t actually add to the shopping experience.
One of the most troubling issues retailers face is whether a new technology actually enhances the customer’s shopping experience. It appears most of the so-called enhancements to dressing rooms that we’ve seen do little for the retailer or the customer. Why not just make sure dressing rooms do exactly what customers want and expect them to do?
No, Dr. Banks, women do not like the “back and forth,” “give and take” associated with dressing rooms. We do not care to “prance” around the dressing rooms with strange men sitting in the chair at the entrance watching us. It is nothing like fishing on a boat. Most times, we are there with our kids, trying on school clothes and like most women my age, we have children, full time jobs, houses to clean, school events to attend, laundry to do and more. We are always in a hurry.
I think high-tech dressing rooms would work if they will save people time. If it will automatically have attendants bring me the correct size, that would be a valuable time saver. If they are trying to sell me accessories that I don’t want, that would be annoying (unless I request it). I think high-tech dressing rooms are a great idea, but I question the ROI a retailer would see. I also question the acceptance by employees. I think the employees will be less of a concern over time.
This technology falls into the category of “just because you can build it doesn’t mean the customer desires it.”
However, there will come a time when we are buying more clothes online rather than in a store. This technology provides a platform for a universal measuring system enabling online retailers to better serve their clients. The technology will be redefined as a facilitator for fitting clothes that you can’t try-on. Then you have a reason for its existence.
Nikki Baird nailed this one. Retailers have a much more significant issue to tackle before they worry about how high tech their dressing rooms are. If they could persuade manufacturers to affix meaningful sizes to clothes (why can a 6, a 0, and an 8 all fit the same woman?) clothing sales would be significantly stronger. This would be particularly true online.
Most of the RFID-equipped dressing room functions could be installed today, at much lower cost, using bar code readers. As for help from the staff, the shopping experience at a mass merchant (Kohl’s) or mass specialty store (Old Navy) can’t be the same as Saks. Saks can afford personal service. So can Prada. Prada went high-tech as a marketing and publicity gimmick. Prada shoppers get great personal service. Kohl’s and Old Navy will always be self-service.
More Discussions
As Boomers ‘Age Out of Peak Purchasing,’ How Can National Brands Retain Interest With Gen Z?
According to a recent First Insight study titled “Is Gen Z Still Choosing Your Brand,” while…Is Supply Chain Volatility Here To Stay?
Can we expect an ongoing volatility to remain in terms of retail supply chain?Has Same-Day Delivery Become an Expectation Across Retail?
Are expectations around retail delivery speed in flux?
As a retail chain associate who WORKS on the floor I have to ask, “Have you worked the floor lately?” As an “associate” not a “manager” or “owner”?
Picture this… A limited number of dressing rooms (usually two or three, if you’re lucky), one associate (or two, again if you’re lucky) covering the sales area, and ten customers with a arm full of merchandise to try on. And did I forget to mention the customer on the telephone who wants you to check for several items she found in the sales ad?
Okay, you say that’s my job; but I’m also a gatekeeper (I can’t even begin to tell you how many times I have to stop men from accompanying their spouses or significant others into the dressing room or being called in by their spouses or significant others), a baby sitter (do I really need to explain), anti-theft detector, merchandiser, housekeeping assistant, and NOW with the introduction of high tech dressing rooms, you want me to be a “Dressing Room Techie” too?
I think that any technology which replaces good customer service is a waste of time. A machine or computer cannot analyze how good or bad a customer looks in an outfit and make judgments about what the customer should or should not buy. They cannot offer advice as to what accessories would go wonderfully with the item they are trying on. And they cannot suggest other items that are on sale that the customer would really be interested in, noting their taste. A machine can be useful as a dumb light, which may be switched on to call for help. This research shows that what the customer says and what the customer does are miles apart.
As a guy, I’m intrinsically irritated by dressing rooms in general. Real guys don’t “try on” anything below the second layer of clothing, and even then it bugs us. We know our sizes in the three basic clothing groups: Denim, T-Shirts, and Beige. So this is about women, right?
But “high-tech” dressing rooms? Don’t women actually enjoy the back-and-forth and give-and-take of traditional changing facilities? The extended period of time spent goofing with the girls and posing in front of a mirror (every woman’s favorite thing)? The arm extended from behind the curtain with the accompanying request, “one size larger, please?” Isn’t this their version of drinking beer in a boat while pretending to fish? And for the guys, what about that stupid chair near the dressing room where you wait and try not to ogle (it’s not “oogle,” you Philistines) the comings and goings of the females prancing around in various stages of undress? Oh wait, there’s a copy of the French-language version of Vogue to keep you occupied. What a relief.
Well, if they do this, they better add a lot of extra dressing rooms. My wife has waited around forever for an available dressing room sometimes and if you start making them high-tech, people (notice I didn’t say “women,” although I wanted to) are going to stay in them even longer. Shopping trips have usually degenerated into fights, or me taking a long visit to go look at electronics or hardware. Even she complains about the long wait sometimes. So maybe they should have a few low-tech dressing rooms around, too, just to be on the safe side.
There is no doubt in my mind that this is a technology with upward potential. As in every other failure we may have seen, much of is due to the implementation. We have seen good technology maligned because it was poorly implemented.
I agree that the dressing-room technology may have a better initial opportunity for success in the boutiques than in the chains. Boutiques can have more control over their sales staff than chains, and almost force a success.
Picture a lady in the dressing room trying on a size 6 dress with an RFID tag attached. The dress is too small. She uses the touch screen (or mirror) provided to call for a size 8. A message is transmitted to a sales associate who either comes to the dressing room or talks to her via an intercom system and tells the customer that she’s going to bring her the size 8 (because she already knows she has one), and then brings it to the customer. Nifty, and possible.
I believe that trying to improve the customer experience in the dressing room is like trying to put lipstick on a pig. Why do people go to dressing rooms? Because the only way they can be sure the product fits is to try it on. Do people really want to spend their shopping time in a dressing room? No.
Making that experience “better” is solving the wrong problem. If we knew for sure that it would fit, we wouldn’t need dressing rooms to begin with. The retailer who solves the “fit” problem, not the one with the smart mirror, is the one who is going to create a truly differentiating customer experience.
But back to the dressing rooms of “today.” While product information, calling for service, etc, would all be great to have in the dressing room, what I as a consumer would prefer is that employees actually do the job they’re supposed to do with dressing rooms today – keeping them clean would be a great start. When we as an industry can get that right, then talk to me about “intelligent” dressing rooms.
As with any new technology, it takes time before consumers adapt them. In this economy, retailers should concentrate on the basics: great customer service and value for the money. I don’t see retailers investing in this technology while the economy continues to lag.
I haven’t seen anyone talk about fitting room call buttons in this discussion. This is technology that is working effectively in thousands of fitting rooms across several large chains–NOW. When teamed with a good service strategy, call buttons are highly effective for creating opportunities for KPI improvement and give customers push button access to that personal service experience they left home for.
Ms. Baird and Ms. Dorenkott are correct; we don’t go shopping to for the experience of spending a lot of time in the fitting room. We go into the fitting room to make a buying decision about item(s) we like. If it doesn’t fit, fitting room technology should give the customer easy access to an associate who will bring the right size or color of the item.
Retailers are attempting to jump over the problem of effective hiring and training by installing technology that they hope will up-sell and cross-sell for the associate. Notice, though, that each one of these technologies has a “call button” embedded in them – a pretty pricey call button I would say. If the customer wanted a self-service internet experience, they would stay home.
Dressing rooms have a couple of specific purposes. The first is to provide the customer with a comfortable, well lit environment to try apparel on for fit, style, look, comfort, etc. It should also be easy to reach a sales associate if the customer needs a different size or color. Do we really need them to do anything more?
In recent years we have seen a number of attempts to add technology to dressing rooms. Most have been failures, including the high-tech dressing rooms in the Prada store in the Soho area of New York City. The technology never worked. The changing walls in the Beverly Hills store are an interesting gimmick but don’t actually add to the shopping experience.
One of the most troubling issues retailers face is whether a new technology actually enhances the customer’s shopping experience. It appears most of the so-called enhancements to dressing rooms that we’ve seen do little for the retailer or the customer. Why not just make sure dressing rooms do exactly what customers want and expect them to do?
No, Dr. Banks, women do not like the “back and forth,” “give and take” associated with dressing rooms. We do not care to “prance” around the dressing rooms with strange men sitting in the chair at the entrance watching us. It is nothing like fishing on a boat. Most times, we are there with our kids, trying on school clothes and like most women my age, we have children, full time jobs, houses to clean, school events to attend, laundry to do and more. We are always in a hurry.
I think high-tech dressing rooms would work if they will save people time. If it will automatically have attendants bring me the correct size, that would be a valuable time saver. If they are trying to sell me accessories that I don’t want, that would be annoying (unless I request it). I think high-tech dressing rooms are a great idea, but I question the ROI a retailer would see. I also question the acceptance by employees. I think the employees will be less of a concern over time.
This technology falls into the category of “just because you can build it doesn’t mean the customer desires it.”
However, there will come a time when we are buying more clothes online rather than in a store. This technology provides a platform for a universal measuring system enabling online retailers to better serve their clients. The technology will be redefined as a facilitator for fitting clothes that you can’t try-on. Then you have a reason for its existence.
Nikki Baird nailed this one. Retailers have a much more significant issue to tackle before they worry about how high tech their dressing rooms are. If they could persuade manufacturers to affix meaningful sizes to clothes (why can a 6, a 0, and an 8 all fit the same woman?) clothing sales would be significantly stronger. This would be particularly true online.
Most of the RFID-equipped dressing room functions could be installed today, at much lower cost, using bar code readers. As for help from the staff, the shopping experience at a mass merchant (Kohl’s) or mass specialty store (Old Navy) can’t be the same as Saks. Saks can afford personal service. So can Prada. Prada went high-tech as a marketing and publicity gimmick. Prada shoppers get great personal service. Kohl’s and Old Navy will always be self-service.