We had a fun time putting together our recent story on the Wal-Mart RFID timeline (See Graphical Timeline of Wal-Mart's RFID Program.) It was even surprising to recognize that to some extent this has been a story for nearly six years now, though, in fairness, the first deadline for the first 100 suppliers was January 2005.

As one reader from a large consumer goods manufacturer wrote to us after reading the piece, “It is somewhat frustrating to read the list here and remember each thrill and subsequent disappointment I felt with each pushback.”

We sorted through a large number of articles from our own pages, as well as other sources to put the timeline together. One thing struck me: the RFID hype machine, even from journalists, has been incredibly strong. My question, given what has transpired: did all the hype actually help or, ultimately, hurt RFID adoption?

Let me be clear again, as I often repeat – I love RFID, and firmly believe, at some point, it will be almost ubiquitous and largely replace bar codes in most supply chain applications. The issue is simply timing.

But I was disappointed in some of the RFID coverage we saw over the last six years.

Let’s look at one example. In early 2007, the Wall Street Journal ran a negative story on Wal-Mart’s RFID efforts, claiming that “Wal-Mart Stores Inc.'s next leap forward in ultra-efficient distribution [RFID] is showing signs of fizzling."

Said one trade RFID trade magazine in response: “That couldn't be further from the truth, but there's a danger that stories like this—and we've seen many—can have a chilling effect on RFID adoption.”

But of course, the WSJ report was exactly the truth. By the end of 2007, Wal-Mart had totally revamped its RFID strategy and, for all intents and purposes, totally backed off its original program for Wal-Mart stores. An RFID director of one of Wal-Mart’s largest suppliers, for example, told me personally in the summer of 2007 that he thought Wal-Mart no longer cared whether his company tagged product or not at that point.

The Wall Street Journal story was spot on, and the trade press article wrong – I hope not intentionally so.

Around the same time, there was a consultant from a large IT company who, I am not kidding, told me in each of 2005, 2006 and 2007 that this “would be the year RFID really takes off” in consumer goods-to-retail. For some reason, people like that seem to believe that if they make statements like that with enough conviction, it will actually cause companies to make a move.

Is the reader/user well served by this type of trade press or vendor hype? Of course not. But does it actually, in the end, do more harm to the adoption of the technology itself than a more objective analysis of where things stand? That’s the interesting question.

I understand vendors being positive on a new technology, and the trade press being generally supportive. We often do some of the same ourselves.

But the RFID reporting and hype, especially in the consumer goods-to-retail supply chain was, in my opinion, just too far over the top. In the end, “the truth will out.” Or as John Adams said some 200 years ago, “Facts are stubborn things.”

Given all the hype, when the Wal-Mart juggernaut didn’t leave the station, the splash of cold water in the face was severe.

As the reader cited above also wrote, “I would say we are almost numb to the point of cynicism now.”

So, rather than a more gradual adoption path consistent with technical and value realities, we had a ‘bubble” that, when popped, caused many companies and vendors to snap back to positions less advanced than they might have been otherwise, with more realistic expectations. And now cynical about RFID when, in reality, maybe they shouldn’t be.

For the trade press, better reporting about what was really happening at Wal-Mart and what consumer goods vendors were really thinking and doing might have actually helped get Wal-Mart on a better path sooner, as it now finally seems to be doing.

If you have a comment or addition, we would love to hear it at the Feedback button below.