Self-service checkout posts with kiosk-terminals have become common in many food stores, and to a lesser degree in stores of other areas of commerce. Shoppers can meet them frequently especially in the larger stores (e.g., supermarkets and hyper stores). The self-checkout kiosks are intended to offer shoppers a convenient and time-saving option for executing their own checkout procedure instead of turning to traditional cashier counters. Retailers relied on the self-checkout kiosks in reducing labour and other logistics costs, and in relieving employees or assigning them to other tasks. It turns out that both shoppers and retailers became disappointed with the outcomes of using them. In recent months large retailers are rethinking their utilisation of a self-checkout facility overall, or at least how it is utilised.

The self-checkout kiosks are usually located within an enclosed court near the exit to the store and next to the traditional cashier manned counters that remain. Shoppers might save time by using the self-checkout option at two levels. First, shoppers may avoid waiting in long lines for a traditional counter, where packed shopping carts can take longer to process for checkout by the cashier. In practice, it emerged that in rush hours long queues can be created also for the self-checkout kiosks.

Second, efficient and digital-proficient shoppers may be able to complete the checkout procedure fast enough self-sufficiently, without interruption by interaction with the cashier and relying on his or her skills. However, many shoppers are not fluent enough in interaction with a kiosk’s features and software, taking more time to add each item to the bill. Frictions can happen in scanning an item (e.g., finding the barcode on a packaged item), weighing fresh produce which usually includes retrieving the product through the software interface, and payment (e.g., credit card, cash, payment app) [1]. With larger shopping baskets (20+ different items), even the more skilled shoppers may find the task too time consuming, possibly daunting. Reasonably, shoppers can learn and improve their skills with experience. Still, they may realise that cashier employees oftentimes keep an advantage over shoppers, particularly when the number of items increases beyond ten.

The degree of convenience when self-checking out can vary. Scanning a product item is relatively simple and can be done faster as one remembers where the barcode is placed on each package. Adding fresh produce selected from bulk displays can require more effort, mainly in finding the correct product (e.g., tomatoes, apples) through the software interface, and especially if there are several varieties of the produce, and weighing on a touch scale — this is the more frequent source of trouble, error, and time-wasting. Sometimes the shopper may be requested to input the number of units taken of the same product (e.g., containers of dairy products) so as not to scan each unit separately.

The greater disruption to convenience may arise nonetheless from the need to pack the items purchased after adding them to the bill into the shopper’s bags. One of the problems is that the counter next to each kiosk is commonly rather small: do you load the counter with items and eventually pack, or put every item into a bag after ‘clearing’ it? This is not a trivial matter if one purchases more than ten items. It is the combination of adding products to the bill and packing them that may subtract most from the convenience for shoppers of checking out by self-service.

Customers complain about tackling problems even when performing apparently simple actions such as accessing and scanning a barcode. Their complaints are about repeated glitches which result in particular in products incorrectly scanned and hence misidentified [2, 3]. Some kiosk machines employ AI technology to facilitate the identification of bulk products, instead of requiring the shopper to select the relevant product from the software display, yet this method is also not error-free (more on the use of AI later). Furthermore, customers complain about inadequate presence of store staff to assist them in resolving any difficulties and technical issues they face with the kiosks [2, 3]. Even when the checkout process is intended to be self-service, retailers need to reckon that staff assistants should always be available nearby to help resolve problems of shoppers [1] (e.g., a failed scan, finding bulk products in software listings). We should recognise that errors may be made by shoppers as well as by the kiosk-machines [4], but in either case shoppers deserve to be helped out for resuming the checkout process.

Retailers were dismayed on their part to find out that their expectations from the utilisation of self-checkout kiosks were not fulfilled. They have raised expectations especially about reducing the operational costs in stores and the number of employees required in each store. Some retailers have gone so far as to eliminate almost or fully all their traditional cashier counters. Retailers may have counted too much on promises of technology providers about advancements in their kiosks or misunderstood the behaviour of shoppers at the stage of checkout. They have come to some flawed assumptions and conclusions that resulted in their disappointment, leading them lately to back-down, eliminate or reduce their reliance on self-checkout kiosks (e.g., Walmart in US, Boots in UK), or modify their policy of operation (e.g., Target, Costco) [4, 5, 6]. Retailers may moderate the use of self-checkout kiosks according to traffic load or limiting the number of items permissible for self-checkout [1].

The revelations of retailers in reality have several aspects. It emerged that labour costs did not decline, and that stores actually needed to increase the number of employees per store; an explanation to this outcome is that staff is required to help shoppers yet also for supervision to stop shoppers from misconduct [5,6]. Furthermore, hidden costs incurred by retailers include unexpected costs in technological upkeep and rampant checkout theft [2]. While the number of employees working as cashiers in stores has declined [3], and some of them could be re-assigned (e.g., for organising merchandise), more employees were needed thereby in other jobs of customer support and assistance, security, and technical support (i.e., fixing kiosk & software malfunctions).

The general rule is that two kiosks can be placed in a space once used by a single counter with a cashier employee. It has encouraged store managers to replace more traditional cashier counters with self-checkout kiosks (e.g., install 8 kiosks in place of 4 manned counters). However, dedicating a single staff member to assist shoppers is often not sufficient, and in busy hours even two staff members may face work overload in attempt to reach every shopper when help is needed (and supervise as well). Retailers did not take proper account, as evident on ground, of the implications and tasks required of employees when operating a facility of self-checkout. Peter Cohan, associate professor of practice at Babson College, argues that retailers were not testing and evaluating sufficiently the outcomes in using self-checkout kiosks, more so as retailers have rushed to install many of those kiosks in recent years [2].

It has not escaped the notion of consumers that the customer is functioning de facto as the cashier for his or her own shopping purchases. Many consumers actually feel that they deserve to be served, thus being rewarded for patronizing the store (recent research by Nusrat & Huang indicates that shoppers served by a cashier tend to feel more loyal than those who self-checkout [7]). Consider, for instance, that while the cashier is ‘clearing’ the products purchased, the shopper is free to organise and pack them in his or her bags. However, if shoppers are checking out by self-service, perhaps a compensation is in order? A shopper, Julia Domina from Wyoming, suggested to USA Today: “If I’m going to be checking myself out, I want to get a discount because that means you’re not paying an employee to check me out” [5]. Another shopper, Cindy Whittington from Virginia, reasoned likewise: “You’re paying more. You’re working harder to pay for merchandise at their store. And it’s become an ordeal to check out. I should get a 5% discount” [4]. Notably, most consumers like the convenience of self-checking out, but they complain about long queuing lines, technical problems and inadequate assistance from staff, finding themselves thereby more often disappointed and frustrated [6].

Retailers are acting in different ways to overcome their obstacles in using self-checkout kiosks. Target is adopting an “express” self-checkout model where the customer is limited to up to 10 items. In addition, the retailer intends to increase the staffing of traditional cashier counters and shut down some self-checkout posts, coordinated according to traffic load in stores [8]. It seems most sensible to offer the “express” self-checkout option as substitute to the “express” lane to a traditional cashier checkout with a similar 10-item limit we have once known. Walmart considers flexible adjustments to balance between staffed checkouts and self-checkouts through the day [8]. Another US retailer (Five Below) is planning to reduce the number of self-checkout posts, assign to them associate assistants for aiding shoppers, and overall relying more on traditional cashier counters [8]. Boots in UK is removing most of its self-checkout kiosks due to disappointing performance [3, 6]. Another avenue retailers pursue is pushing ahead with stores that are completely automated, AI-powered, cashier-less and checkout-free (checkout is seamless) for their convenience or express stores (e.g., AmazonGo, ALDIgo, Carrefour Flash).

Retailers are concerned about increased rates of inventory shrinkage, that is items missing from inventory, which they link to the use of self-checkout; they specifically attribute this to self-checkout theft [4, 5, 6]. In other words, items seem to go missing when shoppers reach the self-checkout kiosk, where certain shoppers “trick” the kiosk, its scanner or software (e.g., replace a product with a less expensive one). Retailers raise inventory loss as a key driver to backtracking on self-checkout. Without denying that some shoppers develop techniques to cheat [3], shoppers could err in selecting a product or omit an item from scanning by honest mistake [5] — consumers under pressure are more prone to make errors. Somewhat disturbingly, upon realising they omitted a product, shoppers may fail to correct their mistake [3].

Some self-checkout kiosks are already equipped with AI-enabled devices and methods, employing primarily computer vision. They are used for three main purposes: (1) shopper identification during payment (when using an app); (2) product identification (e.g., for produce in bulk); and (3) theft detection (e.g., cross-checking items scanned, verifying that produce is weighed, and detecting other mischievous actions by shoppers), These technologies, using cameras and computer vision, are similar to those employed in the automated checkout-free stores. Cameras are not immune, nevertheless, to attempts of fooling them (e.g., ‘confusing’ the camera when identifying a bulky produce item for weighing) [3].

Retailers employing self-checkout kiosks have reached an important understanding: Self-checkout kiosks should be provided as an option to customers, not as a single mandatory method for checkout [1, 5]; moreover, the self-checkout option should be a secondary and not primary solution for checking out of stores [6]. Retailers that relied on self-checkout almost exclusively were the most affected by drawbacks of the method. Dollar General, for example, decided to backtrack as its management realised that self-checkout should be used in stores as a secondary channel and not primary [3]. With these insights comes also the understanding that shoppers using self-checkout kiosks need support and assistance from staff, and therefore employees cannot be relieved as expected [1, 2, 6].

In all likelihood, self-checkout kiosks are here to stay. There are advantages to shoppers in utilising a self-checkout kiosk by working out the process at their own pace and independently. Although the solution is not accommodating for everyone (e.g., the less digital-oriented, elderly), and improvements may be appreciated, the technology is not the central issue. The crucial matter is the policy or strategy applied by retailers in using self-checkout kiosks. The problems more often arose from a flawed, not quite realistic policy, which had to be changed. Retailers should be able to improve the experience of customers, and the outcomes for both, from utilisiing self-checkout kiosks by flexibly tuning a balance between self-checkout and traditional cashier-checkout options, gaining better understanding of shopping behaviour at checkout, and employing the kiosks according to when and how they would be most beneficial.

Ron Ventura, Ph.D. (Marketing)

Sources:

[1] “Self-Checkout Promises Ultimate Convenience. Is It Doing Its Job?“, Bryan Wasell, CX Dive, 20 February 2024/

[2] “Retailers Rethink Self-Checkout After Hidden Costs“; Babson College: Thought & Action, 6 February 2024 (with contribution from Peter Cohan, associate professor of practice).

[3] “Is Self-Checkout a Failed Experiment?“, Santiago Gallino, Knowledge @Wharton (University of Pennsylvania), 30 January 2024 (In a survey by LendingTree, 15% admitted stealing, 21% said they omitted a product but majority of them admitted not correcting their mistake).

[4] “What is Happening to Self-Checkout?“, Canadian Grocer /Associated Press, 18 December 2023

[5] “The Downsides of Self-Checkout, and Why Retailers Aren’t Expected to Pull Them Out Anytime Soon“, Bailey Schulz, USA Today, 24 October 2023

[6] “‘It Hasn’t Delivered’: The Spectacular Failure of Self-Checkout Technology“, Sam Becker, BBC Online, 15 January 2024

[7] Feeling Rewarded and Entitled to Be Served: Understanding the Influence of Self- Versus Regular Checkout on Customer Loyalty; Farhana Nusrat & Yanliu Huang, 2024; Journal of Business Research, 170 (January). (Note: abstract and introduction available at ScienceDirect.)

[8] Reports in VMSD.com on changes in self-checkout strategy at Target, Walmart (18 March 2024) and Five Below (21 March 2024)