BILL: We have a very exciting group of people
to talk to you this morning.
And the way we structured this, as Steve said, is I'm
going to give each person about 15 or 20 minutes
to make their presentation.
And we're going to reserve about 20 minutes
at the end for questions, so I'll
ask that you hold your questions until we finish.
But we will then be up here as a panel to answer the questions.
And the way we've got it structured is that--
I'm going to start off and I'm going
to talk about a few things that we're
doing at the University of Arkansas, and some of the holes
that we see that are out there that need to be filled.
And then we have Simon Langford from Walmart,
we have Terri Crawford from Publix,
and that's the retailer side of things.
Then we have Dick Cantwell from P&G, Gillette,
from the supplier perspective.
And we have [INAUDIBLE] from DHL from the logistics side.
So we've tried to cover the supply chain with as much
as possible with our panelists here.
And then we'll wrap up then with Brian Ceberano from MIT.
Again, we'll start with academic,
we'll end it with academic, and industry in between.
So let's go ahead and get started.
Again, welcome to our panelists.
And I'll keep myself--
my job is going to be timekeeper,
so I'll keep myself on time here.
I want to talk about what we're doing again
at the University of Arkansas, and then talk about some
of the research areas.
We have research in several areas.
I'm restricted because of our topic here
being a supply chain to those specific topics,
but we're heavily involved in, at this point, technology
deployment.
We've got some groups that are looking
at developing some technology, but for the most part,
we're very heavy in deploying that technology--
static versus mobile readers, Gen 2, those type of things.
We just-- our lab was just converted over.
And I was just telling Simon, we're now totally Gen 2.
No more Gen 1 testing for us at this point.
And that's really from the demands
that we're seeing from industry.
Data analytics, I'll talk more about that in-depth.
Making the business case, I'll talk more about that.
But we're doing projects in middleware, open source
development.
Lots of work around public policy, consumer reaction type
issues, animal ID.
We've got a group in our ag department,
and also with our close affiliation with our friends
at Tyson down the street doing a lot in animal ID, trailer
tracking, load status, trying to move more into the logistics
area there.
And then also as we move up the supply chain
into manufacturing as well.
Let me drill down into a couple of areas
here and start off with data analytics.
And that's one area that we've spent a great deal of time
in trying to look at what the data is really
trying to tell us.
And I was having a conversation with Giselle this morning
and a couple of conversations last night,
and that's an area that really needs a lot of work.
We're getting the technology in place.
The technology will come along.
We've got it we've got a lot of things we can do there,
but it's about creating that data,
and then turning that data into business value.
And so that data is a very, very, very important piece.
And we first look at this idea of the 100% read rates.
And we've heard all kinds of things
about we've got to see 100% of those read rates
for it to make sense.
And it really doesn't.
There's implicit read versus an explicit read.
Yeah, did you see it, or can you imply
that if it went from point A to point C
that it went past point B?
And Sanjay talked about yesterday
the idea of this phantom inventory.
If you were to miss it, that's extremely important obviously.
If you're not going to get 100% reads,
can you infer those 100% reads, or how can you get that?
And I think that's going to be very important as we go on.
That when we reach this 100% read-- again,
whether it's implicit or explicit--
you've got to be able to draw some inferences from where
you saw that.
The data at this point is very noisy.
And those of you in the room have seen the data,
there's a lot of noise in that data.
You may have hundreds of reads at a particular reader
[INAUDIBLE] sitting near the reader
and moving in and out of the field,
or maybe it passed back and forth.
Or as a forklift was pulling it down through by the dock doors,
it was reading at every dock door.
It's a lot of noise there.
And we've did early on quite a bit of work
in using such things as neural networks
to try to predict when something might be late,
or when it's outside of its normal schedule,
or using such things as genetic algorithms
to try to pull out those patterns in the data.
And the data is just very noisy.
And we can artificially take that data
and create some good models, but at this point,
we haven't been that successful in creating good models
with the data as it is.
The data has got to get cleaner.
We've got to find a way to clean that data up.
And one of those starts with business rules
for interpretation.
I really feel that we've got to have--
and there's going to be multiple levels of these--
there's going to be business rules that help us decipher
what was a good read, what was a bad read, how do we
make that implicit read then if it's not there?
And unfortunately, these business rules,
I think there's going to be some that are global in nature,
but then there's going to be some that vary by industry.
There's going to be some that are going
to be specific to companies, and we've
got to have some type of data architecture
that allows us to specify those business
rules all the way down, maybe even to a product level.
I'm not sure what that architecture looks like yet.
We're still trying to conceptualize
what that thing is.
But we've got to be able to do a better
job of interpreting that data.
Sanjay mentioned yesterday the idea of control charts,
and I think that's going to be important is once we can start
establishing these patterns, and establishing what
these products should be doing, then
we can use this to help us determine when things
aren't operating properly.
The idea of how much data will RFID generate,
there's been a lot of speculation about the terabytes
of data that will be generated.
And again, that goes back to once we
can get this data filtered, and cleansed, and worked on,
I don't think it's going to be that much.
And it's not the quantity so much
as it is the quality of the data that's going to matter.
Storage is cheap, but it's really extracting that quality.
And a couple of issues that were mentioned yesterday-- it's
going to be extremely important-- data consistency.
Walmart provides data via their retail link system.
And Target has their own system, and Kmart has their own system.
I know that--
I haven't talked to Simon yet, but I
know that I saw something in the news about Target and Walmart
working on a program where there might be some efforts to make
this data more consistent.
It has to be that way.
I mean, we can't have every retailer with their own data
format for this thing to work.
And the same thing goes for suppliers.
And then of course, data integration
into one's own organization, I think we've got a lot of work
there into pulling those into the enterprise systems
that we have in place.
And again, with those things, if you
pull in noisy or dirty data, it's very bad.
So along the bottom, you see there the idea of filtering,
cleanse, integrate, interpret, and understand.
We've got to move toward that model--
of filtering that data, cleansing that data,
integrating with what we have, interpreting what it means,
and understanding.
And that then will lead to action based upon that data.
Now making the business case, we could
spend the rest of the day talking
about this area and the opportunities that lay within.
We had some questions yesterday.
So in the interest of just keeping it brief,
what I've done is I want to throw out a couple of things
just for you to think about.
And again, this is necessarily very narrow
so that you can understand the scope at which we
could look at this.
When we look at RFID, we can view this
as an incremental technology.
We can go in, and we can tweak what's already there.
And I'm going to kind of look at primarily the store
level, maybe a little bit at the DC level.
But one thing we could do is say, we'll take RFID,
and it will just--
we'll just use it to make our process a little faster,
a little more efficient, or we'll
use it to make our process a little better.
Maybe our process isn't broke-- it's just bent a little bit,
and we'll use it to just tweak it.
Very incremental.
We're not we're not radically changing anything.
So I just gave some examples there
under the heading of process efficiencies, for example.
Promotions-- we may be good at promotions,
but if we don't get it out to the shelf in a timely manner,
it doesn't matter.
So we can use RFID there.
And I think there's been some-- you probably have all seen
this-- the early studies--
I know Gillette released some data
from a study they did work with MIT
on some opportunities for improvements just based
upon promotions.
Out of stocks is another one of those.
Again, getting it to the shelf when the customer wants it
in a timely manner.
So just speeding up that process that's already in place.
We can also use it incrementally to fix a process,
or make that process a little better.
Product rotation-- again, we know
how to do product rotation.
It's not a matter of timeliness, it's
a matter of are we doing it correctly.
Well, with RFID, we know what's coming in, what's going out.
We can maybe fix some of those problems.
Better use of merchandisers.
Instead of sending merchandisers to various stores
just at random, or better--
or worse yet just on a set schedule,
maybe target those merchandisers to where
we see product in the back room, or when
we see an out-of-stock event based upon the RFID data.
Target those merchandisers.
Again, improving that process.
The manual orders that, for example, that Walmart
is doing with RFID.
Trying to restrict those overrides
or those manual orders when we know that something's
in the back room.
Electronic proof of delivery at the DC, for example.
Trying to fix that process where we really
see what's coming into the DC.
And then also I'll put out-of-stocks
under the idea of effectiveness of not only getting out
there as an efficiency-- getting out there in a timely manner--
but also improving that process.
There was some data released earlier in 2005 from Walmart
that suggested that 1 out of 12 products
was actually making it from the pick list to the shelf.
And somebody might have to correct that stat
if it's not entirely correct.
But something on a busy Saturday,
by the time it got on the pick list and then got to a shelf,
1 out of 12.
Well, that that process can be helped with RFID.
Now again-- so if you view it as an incremental technology--
and some companies are doing that.
They look at it and they say, OK, RFID
is just going to help us improve the speed of our process,
or help us tweak or process a little bit.
Others are viewing it more as a radical or disruptive
technology.
And that is giving us an opportunity
to use RFID as a process enabler.
Let's go in and create new ways of doing business
that were never before possible using
RFID as that technology that drives that.
And just give you some examples there.
It may be that we could use RFID to radically change
the way that retail stores stock their sales.
I don't know what that process might look like,
but that might be a possibility.
Obviously, as we move on down the line,
the idea of the contactless checkout.
That would radically change that process
of going up and handing your stuff off
to a cashier that swipes your items
and puts it back in the cart.
It radically changes that.
Sanjay mentioned yesterday the idea
that paper scanners radically changing
that relationship between suppliers and retailers,
changing that supply chain, where we get direct store
deliveries, and the retailer simply
acts as a facilitator or a broker of those goods
until they're sold.
That's a radical change.
But what I think that we're seeing--
and if you start looking at the case studies
closely, what you'll find is that some companies
are treating it as an incremental,
and necessarily so.
There are many companies-- and I've
worked with several the suppliers that
are very, very, very good at what they do.
All the low hanging fruit has already been picked.
So you have to look hard to find that incremental value.
Now that doesn't mean they can't use it as a radical technology,
but they first look for that incremental change.
Other companies, however, have actually
purposely used RFID as a way to radically change
their business.
They weren't very good at what they were doing,
and RFID then actually becomes an excuse to really change
what they're doing.
And as with most things, the higher
the risk, the higher the return.
So with those following that radical or disruptive path,
the opportunity for return is greater,
but the risk is higher that it won't work.
Now the third element that we have to keep in mind
here is who are the beneficiaries of these changes?
It could be the retailer, it could be the supplier,
it could be the logistics provider,
it could be the consumer.
Now we did an out-of-stock study working with Walmart,
and we necessarily looked at one particular area that would
provide benefit to several beneficiaries--
look at a fairly constrained or fairly narrow area--
and that was how we kind of tweak
that out-of-stock process to make it just
a little bit better using RFID.
And in this case, creating those automatic pick
lists for them to go to the back room and find that product,
and take it to the shelf.
So we tweaked it just a little bit.
And so I wanted to put it in context of what we studied.
And many of you I know have seen the white paper
that was released.
Because it's important that you put this thing in perspective.
Keep in mind that what we looked at
was an incremental use of the technology
in a very narrow domain.
It did help.
I mean, out-of-stocks can help the supplier,
it can help the retailer, it can help the consumer.
So the beneficiary side was great,
but the fact that we found changes
that we could attribute to RFID tells us
a lot, because we were looking at a very narrow thing.
Now to me, that's extremely encouraging because if you've
narrowed it down to this much, and you still
found a fairly big difference, then what
if we expand it on out?
I think the possibilities--
I think we've only set a very, very small bar to clear,
and we cleared it easily, but there's a lot more
there that we can get at.
And also keep in mind that this idea of incremental
versus radical, it's going to vary by the company.
We're looking at a very abbreviated supply
chain at this point.
This is from the DC basically to the back room of the store.
And so far, the logistics segment
has been largely overlooked.
And you notice that they're listed there,
but there's not a lot going on when
we talk about the supply chain and how
it's involving logistics arm.
And just very quickly on the out-of-stocks,
keeping in perspective of where that was on that chart--
the fact that we were able to find improvements between pre
and post RFID, and then and in between the pilot and control
stores, we found those differences
even though we were constraining ourselves
to an incremental change in a very small area.
That just gives you some things to think about there.
I want to very quickly run through--
also it's important we're doing the research,
but we're also teaching students and others about RFID.
We're trying to turn out people.
[INAUDIBLE] said last year--
the CIO of Kimberly Clark said that there's
such a dearth of experience out there
that if somebody walks by a reader
and says RFID and not RI-FID, that makes them an RFID expert.
Well, we're trying to stamp out some of that ignorance
by training people.
And so we've got dedicated courses in the business
school, which I personally teach,
where we have students from across the college
and graduate students as well-- so it's
undergraduate and graduate.
They're doing live projects for companies.
We've got dedicated courses in computer science and computer
engineering, and then interwoven into a lot
of different courses.
So we've got about, this semester--
our last semester, we had about 80 students
involved in RFID in some form or fashion.
It's over 100 this semester.
We also provide testing and training services
to the industry.
One of the things that we do is we help companies
determine tag and tag placement on their products
so that it's ready to go through an RFID enabled supply chain.
And we started coupling our testing with training.
One of the things we found out was that people would just
send us a box of their product or a pallet of their product,
and say here, help me figure this out,
but they didn't understand RFID.
And our most successful projects were when they actually came
in and spent time with us going through the testing
and understanding RFID.
So we've actually started coupling that now formally
where we bring the companies in-- they
spend a couple of days with us learning about RFID as we
test their products.
Our lab facility there at the University of Arkansas,
we're actually off campus a few miles in a working warehouse
and manufacturing environment.
We have about 8,000 square feet in Hanna's Candle company,
which they manufacture, and then their distribution center
is there as well.
And that's-- unfortunately, it is in the distribution center
part, so there is no control over the temperature,
so the temperature inside is plus or minus 10 degrees what
it is outside.
So we also have--
when we have to test stuff in the cold chain,
we've got about a 4,500 square foot facility
in Zero Mountain, which is a cold storage facility.
And we've got two labs there-- one
at 36 degrees, and one at minus 10 so we can test stuff there.
Our lab is set up to replicate really everything
that a box sees at this point through the previous supply
chain.
And we are one of only four labs at this point
that's accredited by EPCglobal as a testing facility,
and the only academic lab in the world.
And just to give you some quick pictures here of our lab--
and I've got 2 minutes to wrap up--
that's the outside of our lab-- a truck backed up to our dock.
That's the inside of the lab looking out that that same dock
door view from our lab the conveyor
system that we have in there.
We actually are fortunate to have a conveyor system that
was custom designed and built for our lab that replicates
sorting, and merging, and up to 700 feet per minute,
the whole works.
And then pallet rack and back room storage facilities,
forklifts, et cetera.
At this point, I believe the next on the agenda
is Simon, so I'll turn it over to you Simon.
And let me--
SIMON LANGFORD: Thanks, Bill, and good morning, everybody.
I want to touch on the opportunities and issues
that we see in the retail supply chain.
Before I do that, just to step back a little bit and see what
we've all accomplished in the last few years.
So in 2001, 2002, we had the auto-ID center field trials,
and installation points around the dock door, for instance,
took hours to install, and probably
minutes to destroy, or simply to go move those things.
So it wasn't scalable, wasn't deployable,
and certainly wasn't supportable.
But a lot of learning came out of that for us
all then to focus on what we needed
for deployable solutions.
And the one key message that we were putting out at the time
is that they should be future proofed as far as possible,
knowing that Gen 2 was on the horizon--
that we wanted to deploy things that were software upgradeable.
And in 2004, then we really stepped up a notch
to drive for mobile solutions, whether that be
handheld solutions, and particularly
solutions, which is important both to the retailer and a lot
of suppliers.
A lot of those things are still in the early stages,
especially around mobile solutions.
So our current situation is we have robust fixed reader
solutions allowing us to deploy up
to 20 read points in a store in a matter of hours--
in a couple of hours.
So taking that time down from days to hours,
that reduces the cost of deployment.
So the cost of deployment isn't just
around readers and antenna.
A lot of the cost is in cabling and actual installation
of the equipment.
So it's a little bit like tags.
It's not just the IC chip that we can take cost out of,
it's the whole process.
Driving for common operating systems
so that we can support it centrally--
maintain the robustness of that system.
We're starting to deploy handhelds
in the next few months.
So getting the first mobile devices out there.
And I think that's when our store associates will start
to see some of those transformational changes
rather than just the iterative process changes
that we've had out there in the store so far.
Things that they can actually touch and feel and see
the difference with RFID.
So our fixed rate points are collecting
data in the background, and suggesting items to pick.
But really, to a store associate today, what is RFID doing?
They don't know.
They don't see that as visible.
Sure, they're picking more product
and moving it out to the floor quicker,
but once we get these mobile devices in their hands,
then that will help them home in on where
that product is, and really start
to streamline their process.
We're very close to deploying the first forklift solution
in our enterprise to read pallet tags and location tags,
so we can have a pallet locating system in our Sam's Club
operation, for example.
Taking that learning then, we can then
take that to our distribution centers
to see how we can use location tracking, and putting pallets
away and dropping them down, and start to streamline processes
there as we move forward in the future.
But even those forklift solutions
are still at the early stages.
So we can read a pallet today.
In the future, we need to be able to read cases--
or the same amount of cases we do today
on a dock door from that pallet read on the forklift.
That way, we can start to eliminate deploying readers
around dock doors, and reduce our overall costs,
and just have those readers on forklifts.
But at the very early stages--
the infant stages of wearable solutions.
So whether that be something that an associate would wear
on the belt or within a vest, and the system is
reading in the background, and talking back to them,
and giving them work to do.
And as Bill mentioned, Gen 2 is starting to roll out.
We're enabled in our supply chain
and starting to receive product on Gen 2 tags.
And prices are falling.
Tag prices are falling through the floor.
So what does all that technology deliver so far?
What are the benefits of that?
So it's allowed the first sort of automation
of tasks around picklists and manual order controls,
and associates to work more efficiently.
That's improved our customer service
and our offering of product on the shelf at the right time.
It's really taken the theory out of the lab environment
into the real world.
And I think once you take that step, that's
when a lot of the real learning comes about.
And Bill mentioned the study that they performed
on our first changes, where out-of-stocks
were reduced by 16%.
So you can see from a non-RFID environment
and the different store formats here.
To a partial implementation that we did,
we had some caps on the number of auto-picks
that we've actually suggested to our associates.
And then to a full-blown RFID solution on those products
that were enabled at the time.
Measuring the out-of-stocks in the control stores versus--
the pallet stores versus control stores, those RFID stocks
performed 63% better in stocking the shelves than the control
stores did.
And within the same store, within the pilot store,
looking at tagged product versus non-tagged product,
we saw those replaced three times faster--
those products with RFID tags.
So as Bill said, those first iterative process changes
were starting to deliver dramatic results on the tag
product we had in those stores.
So what about the issues and opportunities?
Well, the issues remain the same as they did four years ago,
10 years ago.
It's all about data accuracy and real time data.
Data accuracy drives both availability of product
in the whole supply chain.
The speed of that merchandise flowing through the supply
chain, and the amount of inventory we have to hold,
it has a direct relation to cost.
And as Bill said, it's important to see how we use that data.
That we don't get swamped with data.
We're using it-- it's actionable for store associates,
for replenishment associates, and for our suppliers.
But it opens up a new world of granularity, new windows
that we can see into the supply chain
that we just didn't realize before.
We're starting to drive efficiencies
around manual processes, but lots of inefficiencies
still exist today.
And a lot of changes will only occur [INAUDIBLE]
distribution center once we start
to get a critical mass of product flowing
through those facilities.
We've got a big opportunity to reduce lead times
in the whole supply chain.
So in the short-term, as I've mentioned,
we're rolling out handhelds.
But the choice of handhelds today is limited.
The functionality of those handhelds is limited.
We need to move to wearable mobile devices, systems
that help us fast track product to the sales floor.
It's always that least 50 yards in the store
where we're most inefficient.
So how do we get [INAUDIBLE] one-way stock?
It comes in, goes straight to the sales floor to the shelf,
it's put on the shelf, and the box is thrown away.
We don't get this double, triple, quadruple handling
back and forth from the back room to the sales floor.
Bill mentioned about execution tools
for promotions, new item launches.
So how can we work more efficiently in that respect?
And that's not just a supplier's responsibility
or a retailer's responsibility.
It's how do we collaborate together and make that work?
So driving execution.
As I mentioned, the new windows and the new data
streams that RFID gives us.
How do we use that to drive that execution?
So in the real world today, people
tick boxes and make reports look pretty,
and say they've done tasks when they may not
have done that task.
RFID gives us that ability to see whether that task has
been done.
Whether that new modular has been laid out
on the shelf, whether those new items
have made it out to the shelf without anybody
having to go in and take a check sheet.
Bill mentioned electronic proof of delivery.
Big efficiency gain for both the supplier and retailer.
So how do we make that happen across all retailers,
all suppliers, with a common understanding?
I mentioned about a pilot locator system for Sam's.
The benefits we're starting to see today, as Bill mentioned,
it's a very small sort of subset of products and area
that we've started to change.
So that is truly the tip of the iceberg.
But many benefits are reliant on the technology continuing
to develop and mature, and reducing the cost of deployment
so we start to get that critical mass of product
flowing through.
Gen 2 is showing step change in performance.
A real step change.
And all us end users, when we came together,
we all said, well, we need a global tag.
But there's no point in developing this tag if it's
just an iterative process.
We need a real step change.
I'm pleased to say Gen 2 is delivering that today.
But we still need to drive for cheaper, faster, better,
and added features.
So what are some of the barriers to continued adoption
and accelerating adoption?
I think if you ask most suppliers,
tag cost is the primary barrier.
Many process efficiencies require that critical mass
I've spoken about.
And we need to be smart of how we introduce RFID into areas
so we're not running dual processes,
and turning people's worlds upside down.
That's what we started to do with our picking list.
So it's behind the scenes, and it's just dovetailing
with the current process.
And as we move forward, we need to minimize impact
on associates throughout the supply chain
to enable us to execute and to get buy-in.
So what are the kind of things that we're looking--
that we need to work on and we need to collaborate on?
And it's those transformational changes that Bill spoke about.
So sensor tags.
Seems like we've been talking about culture and compliance,
and sensor tags since the year dot.
And it's not really becoming a reality yet.
So you look at semi-passive tags,
and they're far too expensive currently
to put into a deployable solution.
So we need to move that up a notch.
We'll start piloting some proof of concepts
this year, again, just to show everybody
what the benefit would be.
But looking at passive temperature sensing.
So what is a true real business case?
Is that we want to, with a passive sensor tag,
read that temperature as it passes certain read points?
Or in a trailer that may have RF equipment
on board already for things like GPS that we can tie into.
Theft prevention systems.
A lot of work was done on this through the [INAUDIBLE] center
in the labs probably four or five years ago.
But how do we really replace AIS systems,
because that will start to reduce costs in that aspect.
We can't have AIS and RFID tags on the same product,
because that's just increasing costs.
So how do we get down to 1 solution
that will achieve both?
True sortation at high speeds.
So we're close to 600 feet a minute
on our sortation systems.
How do we singulate tag reads to know it's that case that
needs to go to store 50?
I spoke quite a bit about mobile devices--
about robust, deployable mobile devices.
And international-- we need true global tags.
I mentioned about Gen 2 being a global solution.
But I think what you'll see out there today with Gen 2
is those tags attuned to each geographic area.
So the tags that we're testing here
are sure attuned to the US.
The tags that we're testing in Europe are attuned to Europe.
That's not going to work.
That wasn't the idea of Gen 2.
So we need to tune the tags to one sort of format that
will work around the world.
And we need to move the EPC network from theory
and PowerPoints into reality.
I'll just about pharma, and I think
there was a separate session yesterday
on pharma which I wasn't able to make.
But in the UHS space, there's been
a lot of focus on case and pallet,
and large form factors of tags.
Little emphasis on the small form factors.
But we need to work on that.
There's initiatives happening right now showing
some good results in labs.
But again, we need to move this out to the field
to get real world learning.
And then have a proper debate whether HF or UHF
is a correct method to move forward with.
And a big need not just for pharma, but other areas
as well for security.
So what are the security measures
that we would want and need on such products?
Mentioned about international on the EPC network.
And direction.
This is probably my number one objective for this year
is through RFID to sense direction.
So Bill mentioned about read rates not 100%,
and we don't need them to be 100% today.
But having direction-- knowing that something is either
leaving this room or coming into this room then
actually gives us a much more accurate data
than we have today.
The last thing I want to do is tell an associate
to go and pick a case that's sat in the background of a store,
and then go there, and it's not there-- can't be found.
That discredits the whole system.
So the cleaner data we can get, then the better position
we are, the better execution we'll get.
And direction will give us that.
And there's various theories and solutions thrown out there
from using RFID and complimentary
technologies such as sensors that we could use,
or things like the Doppler effect
that we could use through readers.
But we really need to get out there and try for a four
or five of these different methods
to see which is most appropriate and cost effective.
And then some of the Holy Grails.
Reading all cases on a pallet--
not possible today.
But how can we achieve that in the future?
And how do we get to the sub $0.05 tag
so that the automated checkout becomes
a reality in the future?
What do we need to keep doing?
We need to keep educating.
We need to keep educating governing bodies
around the world so that Gen 2 is endorsed
in every region, every country so that global tag can be used.
We need to educate end users.
What are the benefits of RFID?
How best to deploy it, where to start?
There's some great work being done in this area already.
And as Bill mentioned, developing and nurturing people
today to help in the future build these systems
and manage these systems.
And quality improvements.
The cost isn't just about this tags costed me $0.12.
Yield rates are important too because that cost gets passed
on somewhere down the line.
And testing for true interoperability.
Testing for what is the best tag or the intended
design for that product that you're shipping?
And Bill shared with me a while ago an interesting story
from a supplier where it was two cases of a product--
one of our suppliers, and it was the same product,
except a different flavor.
And they were getting good read rates on one
and poor read rates on the other,
and couldn't understand why that was.
And went along to Bill and said, can you help us with this?
And after some trial and error, and swapping
the product between the two boxes,
found out that one of the flavors
had some metallic paint within the packaging.
It was that that was causing the poor read
rate on that second product.
So to a supplier, it was the same product, same packaging
as they thought, same density of product inside,
but two different results.
So how can we test and get best practice out there
so every supplier doesn't have to go through that learning
process?
Because that reduces costs overall.
And we should all be mindful that as we move forward
to the sales floor, to items, to theft prevention,
that we need to ensure that privacy concerns are taken
into account and addressed.
This should only equal lowering the cost of implementation.
So just to wrap up, we're just scratching the surface today.
We need to get mobile devices out
there so that people can go about their everyday job,
and the system is just talking to them,
and giving them work to do in a prioritized way.
We need to lower the cost of deployment.
And then finally, we should never
lose sight of why we're using this technology, why
we're pushing this technology and driving forward.
It's all about the customer at the end of the day.
So whether you're a supplier or a retailer,
at the end of the day, we need to service our customers
better.
And whether that's working more efficiently
and taking cost out of the supply chain
that then can be passed on to the customer,
that's our end goal.
Thank you.