Dan Gilmore

Editor

The News: Procter & Gamble discusses its framework for RFID/EPC evaluation and deployment

The Impact: P&G’s framework may be useful for other manufacturers to consider

The Story: At the opening of Alien Technology’s RFID Solutions Center in Dayton, OH, Feb. 7, Procter & Gamble’s Jamshed Dubash outlined the consumer package goods giant’s current framework for RFID in the retail supply chain.

Dubash, Director of Auto ID Technology for the company, came to P&G through its recent acquisition of Gillette. Both companies were very active participants in the original Auto ID Lab at MIT and the subsequent EPC Global organization, and in the testing and advancement of EPC (electronic product code) technology and application.  

According to Dubash, P&G currently classifies its products in one of three categories:

• Advantaged: RFID/EPC works well with the product, and there is a clear business case for use of the technology with those products.
• Testable: Some issues remain with readability of business case, but work in one or both areas is being done to resolve the issues and move the product to the Advantaged category.
• Challenged: Significant issues exist with readability, due to the product make-up, very small form factors, etc.

“We are very anxious to find ways to move these challenged products into one of the first two categories,” Dubash said, implying they are looking for the continued support of technology providers to continue to overcome readability issues.

P&G is also focused on three primary benefits, Dubash said.

• Reduction of out-of-stocks
• Promotional compliance
• E-proof of delivery

As reported last year in SCDigest, Gillette had focused much of its testing improving execution of in-store promotions, with very successful results. The benefit comes from ensuring promotional product displays make it to the store floor consistent with the timing of the promotion. Improved sales from 19-28% have been cited by the company.

E-proof of delivery has the potential to really reduce the time and cost associated with chargebacks for discrepancies between what a vendor ships to the retailer and what the retailer says it received – though some wonder whether the retailers are really that interested in solving the problem. Broad use of EPC, however, would likely provide a solution that is unavoidable.

Do you like P&G’s framework? What else would you add or suggest? Let us know your thoughts.

Article key words: RFID, EPC