Of more than 3100 items randomly selected in three large hardware stores, 6.8 per cent could not be properly scanned at the point of sale because of bar code quality problems. The most common problem was bar codes printed with insufficient light margins, or clear spaces, around the bars.
GS1 New Zealand Chief Executive Peter Stevens said the study results sent a critical message to the hardware sector and, indeed, all other areas of retailing. “When bar codes are not scannable and accurate product information not readily available, retailers ease being efficient and the door is open to all manner of problems from the mis-ordering of new stock to incorrect pricing,” said Stevens.
The five major New Zealand hardware chains asked GS1 New Zealand to undertake the study after preliminary analysis in late 2004 indicated the sector might have significant problems with bar code quality. Products selected at random from three stores (a Placemakers, a Mitre 10 and a Bunnings store) and scanned at point of sale in the usual manner under the watchful eye of GS1 New Zealand observers.
The Hardware Action Group members (Placemakers, Mitre 10, Carters, Bunnings/Benchmark, ITM) have agreed a collective action plan of education and targeted supplier interaction to improve scan rates and bar code penetration. They have signalled a move to introduce progressively verification from February 2006, similar to that used in the grocery sector.
Stephen Pye, Group Marketing and Merchandising Manager for Placemakers said: “This is an important initiative for Placemakers and the sector as a whole. Product scanning at point of sale is not a nice to have … it is a must have!
“Scan failure hurts the retailer, the customer and the supplier. It’s great to see all five major retailers working together to solve this,” said Pye.
Commenting on the study, Stevens said the scanning performance of each product selected at random was graded either “scan”, “difficult” or “no scan’’.
“Any product that didn’t scan was then subject to our standard bar code analysis to see exactly what the problem was. The 4.1 per cent total failure rate, combined with a further 2.7 per cent ‘difficult scan’ is significantly higher than levels in other retail sectors in similar studies previously done and was consistent across all three stores.
“It has certainly caused alarm among the hardware retailers and all five chains are moving immediately to raise standards, with support from GS1 New Zealand,” Stevens said.
Of products that would not scan, 24 per cent had bar codes with insufficient light margins while a further 21 per cent had bar codes that were not printed to the specified height. Decodability, where elements of a bar code are so much at variance from the ideal that no decoding is possible, was the issue with 18 per cent of products that failed to scan.
Stevens said the study found that bar codes printed in-store by the retailer were those most likely to fail, followed by bar codes printed by other New Zealand sources and after them, Australian sources. Products sourced from the United States had the most reliable bar code printing.
