Too Much Data, Too Little Information:
The Challenges of RFID Implementation
Brady, Mairead, Fellenz, Martin and Armstrong, Corrie
School of Business, Trinity College, College Green Dublin 2, Ireland
All Correspondence to: Mairead.Brady@tcd.ie
British Academy of Management 2007
This paper reports on findings from an exploratory study on the readiness of retailers
for Radio Frequency Identification Devices (RFID), an innovative data-capture
technology with the potential to substantially impact on national and international
business. The paper discusses reasons for the findings which indicate a substantial gap
between the potential of the technology and companies’ preparedness for its use. The
management and marketing implications of RFID are discussed and suggestions for
further research into the implementation challenges of this and similar
transformational technologies are posited.
Introduction
In the current strategic environment of data junkyards and information goldmines
(Kannan et al, 1998), success depends on firms’ ability to transform data into
information and ultimately into usable knowledge. Glazer (1991:2) argues that
winning companies are those that first install IT and then go “beyond the technology
to view the ‘management of information’ itself as an asset to gain competitive
advantage”. Indeed, Marchand et al. (2000:70) contend that “companies must do more
than excel at investing in and deploying IT. They must combine those capabilities with
excellence in collecting, organising and maintaining information and with getting
their people to embrace the right behaviours and values for working with
information”. The challenge of information management is exacerbated by the sheer
amount of data available from more advanced and in turn more complex informationgenerating data capture technologies such as RFID. Srivastava (2004:67) posits that
“with RFID technology generating a tremendous amount of data on a continuous
basis, there is a clear need to develop application software capable of fully exploiting
it”. But the challenge does not stop with technological solutions: firms adopting such
1
transformational technologies need to also adapt their internal structures and
processes as well as their strategic propositions and customer interactions.
Data from a set of case studies indicate a marked lack of readiness of retail firms to
adopt novel ICTs that may have such transformational potential for their business.
The evident lack of preparedness on the part of organisations to adopt RFID, and the
dearth of literature that could provide guidance on managing the challenges and
opportunities of the technology, RFID remains both overlooked and underexploited.
In practice companies are struggling to fully utilise their current ICTs, and lack both
appetite and ability to move further into more ICT assimilation.
This paper will begin by posing several fundamental questions such as
 What is information, as opposed to data?
 Are companies able to properly gather, analyse and handle the information they
currently collect?
 How familiar are they with their current ITs and do they use them to their
maximum potential?
 Will companies cope with the abundance of information created by advanced
technologies such as RFID?
In order to improve the management of information, companies must ensure that there
is a strategic fit between the implementation of ICTs and a customer focus. This
behoves both the technologist and the marketers to work closely together for
maximum return to the business but with a customer imperative.
From data to useful knowledge: Gathering, Analysing and Handling Information
A common misconceptions in business today is the assumption that data equals
intelligence. However, data is effectively worthless unless it is utilised properly, and
to its full potential (Myburg, 2000): “[O]nly when information is combined with
context and experience,[does] it becomes knowledge” (2000:2) Similarly Glazer
(1991:2) contends that “information can be defined as data that have been organised
or given structure- that is placed in context- and thus endowed with meaning”. After
all, as Sisodia (1995:2) argues, “knowledge represents the currency, as well as the
2
scorecard, of the information age. Only companies with deep knowledge about their
customers, competitors and operations will be winners in this age”.
Another common mistaken idea is that more information means better information.
As McGovern (2000) points out, in an age of extreme information-overload
companies must not be blinded by the sheer colossus of available data. The notion
that more data means more accurate information is empirically unsustainable. Glazer
(1991) suggests that information has potential value for firms at three different points:
Downstream information can be gained from the data collected between the firm and
its consumers. It typically arises from efforts by the marketing department and other
boundary spanners, and its value depends on how well they manage and utilise data.
Upstream information is processed between the firm and its suppliers, while
information within the firm is used to co-ordinate internal operations. The value firms
can generate from such data depends on the firms relevant information processing and
handling capabilities, which can be independent from their data gathering activities.
Marketing as an ‘information-handling problem’
The marketing function plays a central role in managing the transformation of data
into information and the utilisation of the value of this information. Conceptualising
marketing as essentially an ‘information-handling problem’ is not new. Indeed Piercy
contended in 1981 that “good information is a facilitator of successful marketing
action and indeed, seen in this light marketing management becomes first and
foremost an information processing activity” (Pg.1). In the seminal article ‘The
Metamorphosis of Marketing into an Information-Handling Problem’, Holland and
Naude (2004) claim that “the marketing task has moved beyond being transaction- or
relationship-driven”, and one now shaped by the handling of information (Pg.167).
They suggest that when marketing is seen in this light, it is easier to understand how
ICT can support more effective marketing strategies. It could be argued that
information-handling is for the digital age, what physical resources were for the
industrial age; in essence modern marketing’s foundation is built on the power of
information. They suggest that there are three eras of marketing progressing from
transactional, to relational, to information-driven (See Figure 1).
3
Figure 1: Three theoretical eras of marketing
Source: Holland and Naude, 2004
4
As Figure 1 shows, marketing tasks have gradually developed from the economical
focus of transaction marketing, to a relationship focus based on psychology, sociology
and mathematical network modelling, to finally an information focus involving
database theory and information science. Whereas transaction and relationship
marketing tasks were characterised by classical people-based organisational structure,
information marketing is in fact strongly driven by ICT abilities, which are supported
by people.
It must be noted that the extended focus on information not only affects the marketing
department, but the entire business system. Holland and Naude (2004) this is the “era
where marketing tasks are best analysed as information handling problems and the
analysis and communication of information takes place in advanced, networked
computerised business systems” (2004:175). Brady (2002) concurs and suggests that
IT is so important and integral to marketing that we should change the spelling to
‘markITing’. Kotler (2001), the father of marketing and the major proponent of
traditional tansactional marketing, also contends that marketing is increasingly based
more on information power than sales power.
Information Technology as a Substitute for Decision Making
Andal-Ancion et al. (2003:34) contend that “new technologies…have well-known but
often unrealised potential to transform businesses and industries”. In their empirical
study of twenty North-American and European companies, they found that one of the
major driving factors behind the digital transformation of traditional businesses was
information intensity. Glazer (1991) considers the level of ‘information intensity’
between companies, i.e. the level of profits attributable to information assets.
Information intensity is directly related to the information-handling ability of the firm,
but many marketers still struggle with both the quantity and content of the
information they are faced with. Bessen (2003) argues that ICTs can “cut through the
confusion and sort the most relevant data from the daily flood,…as despite the
obstacles, few marketers dispute the need to coordinate and integrate information”
(Pg.150), and Zaltman (2003) contends that advanced ICTs such as RFID are one sure
way of achieving such deeper knowledge. Yet while ICTs can provide such solutions,
their value is only realised if they are deployed and used successfully.
5
There has been some scepticism over the ability of technology to suitably decipher
information. Rayport and Jaworski (2004:6) note that “where humans excel in
judgement, pattern recognition, exception processing, insight and creativity, machines
excel in collecting, storing, transmitting and routine processing”. Piercy (1981) also
argued that “there is a danger that in applying new technology, the conformity and
uniformity of systems established will not merely fail to increase marketing decision
making effectiveness, but will detract from that effectiveness by blocking the use of
experience, intuition and creativity in handling information” (Pg.4).
Despite the widespread availability of automated decision technologies such as
workflow applications, statistical and numerical algorithms, and rule engines,
marketers along with many other organisational decision makers have been reluctant
to substitute such ICTs for their decision-making. For decades predictions painted a
picture in which some day computers would relieve managers and professionals from
the need to make decisions on their own or even altogether (see Davenport, 2001).
But many early artificial intelligence applications which were designed to relieve
managers of the need to make decisions were in fact “just solutions looking for
problems” (Davenport, 2005:83). He concedes that “in the business sector, even
when expert systems were directed at real issues, extracting the right kind of
specialised knowledge from seasoned decision makers and maintaining it over time
proved to be more difficult than anticipated” (2005:83).
In his article ‘Diamonds in the Data Mine’, Loveman (2003) outlines how marketers
should be gathering customer information, developing appropriate marketing
strategies and identifying core customers. He contends that traditional mass marketing
and the ‘if you build it they will come’ mentality must be replaced with a more
deliberate and customised approach to using sophisticated ICT to deeply mine an
accurate customer database. What is increasingly in question is whether marketers
have the skill or ability of marketers to drive ICT use in marketing (Brady and
O’Connor, 2006).
There is apprehension among marketers as to how effective ICT can be in handling
information. Consumers are becoming ever more complex in their consumption
behaviour, and it will need more advanced technologies such as RFID to both capture
6
and make available real-time information. Davenport (2005) agrees with this
contention, arguing that “new interest in automated decision-making systems is being
fed not only by changes in technology but also by evolving business needs”. As
Friend and Walker (2001:11) posit, “given the industry’s myriad challenges, the time
is right for a technology that brings control to what was risky, rigor to what was
intuitive, and science to what was guesswork”. This contention is supported by Brady
(2004:2) who claims that, “marketing will no longer rely on intuition and guesswork
but on solid analytical support of IT systems monitoring every stage of the
product/service delivery through to consumption”.
The Challenge of legacy system: Can they use what they already have?
While O’Brien (1995) warns of the common problem of “too much information of the
wrong kind, in the wrong place at the wrong time and not enough information of the
right kind, in the right place, at the right time” (Pg.17), it could be argued that ICTs
are one plausible solution to sifting out the junk from the gems. In the article ‘Don’t
Get Buried in Customer Data- Use It’, Ayers (2003) contends that “marketers need a
good, thoughtful architecture to base their decisions on”, which can be aided by the
meticulous gathering of customer information and more importantly, the use of
relevant information in marketing operations. Although many companies’ current
marketing systems do allow for a good understanding of who the customer is and
what they think of the company, this data simply no longer suffices. Zaltman (2003:4)
urges that current practices such as CRM do not tell the marketer anything about “why
customers do what they do, think what they think, and why they like or don’t like
products”. “Getting that level of insight requires more intensive interactions with
customers. It requires that you develop a poetic insight into customers- a deep
knowledge that enables you to intuit their answers to questions you haven’t even
asked them”.
In a study of twenty eight small and medium-sized organisations, Levy et al.
(2001:134) found that “firms with more sophisticated information systems tend to
perform worse than those with more limited systems. This is primarily due to [the
company’s] limited IS knowledge and skills, thereby precluding them from taking
advantage of the strategic information available from the more sophisticated systems
in which they have invested” .
7
As an exemplar of an excellent but simple information system the Spanish
multinational Inditex’s (Zara) uses a system which in the words of their CEO Jose
Maria Castellano; “Link(s) customer demand to manufacturing, and link(s)
manufacturing to distribution. That is the idea we still live by”. By collecting and
responding to information in a very efficient manner, Zara is able to deliver products
to the store just two days after an order has been placed. Zara’s ever-increasing
success points to simple and useable information system as optimum; something that
many organisations struggle with. This challenge for companies with other ICT like
CRM is that ‘CRM performance lies in the organisation's ability to leverage and
exploit its knowledge toward innovating new products and service that benefit its
customers …Organisation wide information sharing … innovate and creative
thoughts of its people’(Chen and Ching, 2004:3). The real challenge is the absorptive
capacity – cumulative learning and transfer of knowledge which is needed to use and
exploit systems. In the case of many ICTs this has not been successful and the results
have been disappointing (Reichheld and Schefter, 2000; Payne 2001; Wilson et al.,
2000). To develop this point further the problem is not only what is traditionally
called “absorptive capacity”, which related to the organisation’s ability to take in
information from the outside (e.g., adoption of a new technology like RFID), but also
“internal absorptive capacity”, or the ability to transmit, transfer, and constructively
transform information between and among internal stakeholders.
Where to from here? A Customer-Centric Perspective of Marketers’ Use of
Information
It cannot be overemphasised that in order to collect and implement valuable
information, companies must be customer-centric. As Loveman (2003:32) points out,
“deep data mining and decision-science marketing would be worth little in driving
growth were it not for another simultaneously applied and extremely critical
ingredient- an absolute focus on [the] customer”. In the last decade few if any
technologies have been introduced with a dominant customer focus, and indeed the
high level of IT failures attest to the failure of the technological determinist model
rather than the customer focus model. It is a unique challenge for companies,
technologists and marketers to focus on the customer-level data and the skills that are
required for that type of input in comparison to the more operational efficiencies
8
(Fellenz and Brady, 2006) . Davenport and Harris (2001:64) contend that “even the
most successful firms seem unsure about how- or even whether – to integrate data
types into a comprehensive customer database”. Loveman (2003) contends that it is
only by keeping the customer as the central focus, that the real diamonds in the data
will be found. By identifying core customers and then ‘slicing and dicing’ the correct
data, companies should be able to coordinate the information they have, into
knowledge.
Writing in ‘The Quest for Customer Focus’ in the Harvard Business Review, Gulati
and Oldroyd (2005) outline the four major steps involved in the ‘customer focus
journey’ and the role that information plays, namely; communal coordination, serial
coordination, symbiotic coordination and integral coordination . Stage 1 involves the
collation of information about the customer involving the communal coordination
between the sources of information and a neutral information owner. In Stage 2
analytic experts and ITs are used to study the consumer’s past transactions to gain
insight into the consumer’s wants and needs. Known as serial coordination, the
neutral information collectors work with analytics and technologies. In Stage 3 the
focus is not on past transactions, but rather on developing an understanding of future
purchases, by implementing information throughout the organisation, known as
symbiotic coordination. As Gulati and Oldroyd (2005) point out, “getting close to
customers is not so much a problem the IT or marketing department needs to solve as
a journey the whole organisation needs to make” (Pg.4). Lastly, at Stage 4 integral
coordination occurs where real-time responses to customer needs are made possible
by coordinating all information among employees and the entire organisation at
corporate level.
According to Fellenz and Brady, (2006) a customer centric ICT deployment model that
is more fully aligned with the service logic is needed. They suggest that technologist,
marketers and business managers must unite towards a customer centric focus.
Recognising the challenge of integrating these three orientations is only the first step
towards a more customer-centric deployment of ICT. A second step is to recognise and
address the challenge of enabling marketers to successfully fill the arbitration role and
coordinate the three different perspectives outlined below. There are a number of
aspects to this, including the difficulty of equipping marketers with the relevant skill9
set, and the challenge of enabling them through appropriate organisational
arrangements.
1) Technologists’
Perspective:
Technologist
drive
towards
what
is
technologically possible
2) Economic Perspective: Managers’ drive towards what is profitable
3) Marketing/Customer
Centric
Perspective;
Marketers
drive
towards
maximising the value for the customer and the company.
In fact, the challenge for the most appropriate deployment of ICT must be integrated into
a holistic understanding of at least three fundamentally different orientations.
Specifically, the technologists’ drive to apply cutting edge knowledge, to push the
boundaries of what is technologically possible, must be checked both by the business
logic that requires short-term profitability and longer term economic viability and
sustainability. This must be aligned to the marketing logic that places customer needs and
customer value at the heart of matters. These three different orientations all require
attention, but none can on its own deliver the full value required . Thus, the three sets of
objectives require an arbitrator that can integrate technological potential with customer
requirements to maximise the business value of the firm’s market offerings. Fellenz and
Brady (2006) believe that marketers are uniquely placed to fill this important role (see
Figure 3 below).
Figure 3 Deploying ICT within the Service Logic
Marketing
Perspective
Technologist
Perspective
Economic
Perspective
10
The three sets of objectives require marketers to act as arbitrators that (a) can
understand the individual perspectives and can constructively relate to the respective
sets of specialists; (b) can integrate technological potential with customer and
marketing requirements to maximise the business value of the firm’s market offerings;
and (c) can achieve both strong and sustainable relationships with customers that help
differentiation, add value and provide a conduit that integrates customers directly into
marketing. The tripartite view proposed places the joint maximisation of the value to
the customer and the value to the company at the centre of the marketers’ task, which
must guide the deployment of ICT. Technology cannot be the tail that wags the dog
(Fellenz and Brady, 2006).
The Case of RFID
RFID is the generic name for auto-identification technology that uses radio waves to
identify objects. “RFID tags have both a microchip and an antenna. The microchip is
used to store object information such as a unique serial number. The antenna enables
the microchip to transmit object information onto the RFID tag, which transforms the
information into a format understandable by computers” (Angeles, 2005:52). RFID
is considered a significant improvement on existing barcode capabilities, as tags do
not need to be ‘seen’ and can be read remotely, with a much higher information
amount that can be stored and transmitted. RFID tags are also read in real-time,
allowing the information gathered to be extremely accurate. Barcodes inhibited “‘any
where, any time’ access to data and applications, and prevented human agents within
an organisation from responding in real time to supply chain events” (White et al,
2005:1) RFID mitigates these structural deficiencies. Indeed White et al (2005:2)
contend that “no longer are assets such as plasma televisions, pallets or shipping
containers ‘dumb’, unable to understand who they are or where they are, and lacking
the ability to communicate this information to a third party. Instead when they pass
into (for example) a retail store or distribution centre, they can communicate their
identity and history…to the systems into which the readers are integrated”.
However, with any new technology application comes a price; namely excess
information. Bearing in mind that many companies struggle with the current level of
11
data that they possess (Armstrong et al, 2006). It is likely that any additional
information produced by advanced technologies will be met with considerable
apprehension and confusion. In the case of RFID, Levinson (2003) points out, “RFID
technology is going to generate mountains of data about the location of pallets, cases
and cartons. It is going to produce oceans of information about when and where
merchandise is manufactured, picked, packed and shipped. It is going to create rivers
of numbers,…which will have to be stored, transmitted in real-time and shared with
warehouse management and others” (2003:1). Twist (2005:238) urges that when it is
used properly, “the value proposition will make RFID a must for firms to remain
competitive”. After all as Frohlich (2002) simply states, RFID allows “real-time
information to travel immediately backwards so that inventory flows swiftly
forwards”. These optimistic expectations recognise the immense data capture and
gathering abilities of current RFID solutions, but fail to fully appreciate the
difficulties of exploiting this data for constructive and responsive business activities.
A historical review of RFID as an Information-Handling Technology
Acceptance and in turn adoption of RFID as an information-handling tool has
occurred on a varied level over the last ten years. As Figure 2 shows, the actual
benefits and hype of RFID adoption have traditionally existed on diverging paths.
Quite often, as with most new technologies a lot of hype surrounds the product, which
either succeeds if implemented properly, or fails as is the case with a lot of new
wonder technologies.
12
Figure 2; Comparing Nolan’s Stage Theory with the Hype and Reality of RFID
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
ORGANISATIONAL
LEARNING
TECHNOLOGY TRIGGER
PEAK OF INFLATED EXPECTATIONS
TROUGH OF DISILLUSIONMENT
SLOPE OF ENLIGHTENMENT
PLATEAU OF PRODUCTIVITY
BENEFITS HYPE
BUSINESS BENEFITS
2
TRANSFORMATION
Network Era
5
INFORMATION
Micro Processing Era
AUTOMATION
Data Processing Era
4
3
1
TIME
1960
1980
2000
2006
2020
Adapted from Nolan (1973) and White (2005)
We can assume that RFID adoption will follow Nolan’s stage theory of IT
assimilation. As ICT assimilation has developed from automation, to information, and
finally to transformation, technologies have become increasingly competent at
carrying out more complex tasks. In the transformation era, which it could be argued
we are experiencing with network technologies, there has been limited focus on
RFID. The initial trigger of RFID occurred around 2000 when several IT vendors
such as IBM and Cisco carried out empirical studies into how RFID could aid
operations in the pharmaceutical and IT sector. A peak of inflated expectations
followed due to many organisations believing that adoption would be relatively easy,
not realising that business objectives and company capabilities must be synchronised
in order to fully exploit the technology. As with many new technologies, a trough of
disillusionment surrounded RFID due to reasons such as failure rates, the expense of
tages and readers and the general lack of academic literature. However at the end of
2005 many major companies such as Wal Mart, Metro, Carrefour and Gillette carried
out trial runs and implemented RFID, realising operational and informational benefits
of a supply chain that was supported by real-time information. If there are increasing
13
success stories from companies, along with the heightened level of academic
attention, the result could be the slope of enlightenment leading to a current plateau of
productivity.
While Angeles (2005:51) contends that “RFID hold the promise of closing the
information gaps in the supply chain”, Keen and Mackintosh (2001) go further to say
that RFID technologies introduce ‘process freedoms’; “that is, the ability to add value
along the entire supply chain….and business relationships” by enabling the mobility
of information, people and business activities. In short, information allows complete
transparency along the supply chain- the crucial path leading from marketing to the
customer. Twist (2005) argues that while the Internet simply connected computers to
computers, advanced technologies such as RFID have the informational capabilities to
connect computers with people. The editor of RFID Journal, Roberti proposes that
“RFID will be bigger than the internet”, which will “lead to an entirely new
relationship between people and things” (www.rfidjournal.com). This notion of
object-to-object communications is supported by Auto-ID research carried out at
MIT, which contends that an ‘internet of things’ will result when information from
remote technologies such as RFID interact with other smart technologies.
Methodology
To investigate the preparedness of marketers to deploy an advanced ICT such as
RFID we conducted a small number of case studies using self-administered online
surveys and face-to-face interviews as the main data collection methods. We included
four companies from the retail industry whose identities will remain anonymous
(companies A, B, C and D). In order to optimise the validity and reliability of the
study, we sought to study a variety of different companies within the retail sector,
including fashion and FMCG. By using three highly successful multinational
companies, we attempted to uncover the various complex interplays which would
exist between head office and branches.
Two main questions guided our investigation: (1) “To what degree do marketers in
these retail companies use and understand ICT?” and (2) “How ready are marketers in
these retail companies to adopt innovative ICT such as RFID?” We collected data on
ICT use, data collection and management techniques, organisational arrangements
linked to customer information management and ICT use in marketing, along with
14
skills and capabilities perceived as relevant for ICT deployment and use. As part of
the data collection, informants were also asked to evaluate the role and available level
of ICT expertise in their companies. Finally, we asked them specific questions about
their readiness to adopt advanced technologies such as RFID. The collected data was
analysed to address the original research questions.
Data Analysis
In short, the data revealed three main findings. Firstly, the study showed that
marketers feel that they cannot keep up with their current information systems, let
alone are prepared to adopt anything more advanced such as RFID. In three out of
four cases, marketers actually admitted to ignoring the data that they felt was
unnecessary, failing to meticulously evaluate what was crucial. “To be honest I am
still trying to keep up with our current system…more data may prove difficult”
(Company B).
Secondly, the study confirmed that marketers continue to misunderstand how
technologies such as RFID could be of assistance to them. Indeed three of the
companies failed to recognise the potentially vital importance of ICT in marketing,
and when technologies were utilised it was usually for purely operational purposes.
“IT is not a huge part of our marketing. We usually leave that to the IT department”
(Company C).
15
COMPANY
A (MKT)
COMPANY
B (MKT)
COMPANY
C (MKT)
COMPANY
D (MKT)
COMPANY
D (IT)
RESPONDENT /
INTERVIEWEE
HEAD OF
MARKETING
HEAD OF
MARKETING
MARKETING
EXECUTIVE
HEAD OF
MARKETING
HEAD OF I.T
WHO CARRIES
OUT
MARKETING
MARKETING,
EXTERNAL PR,
MEDIA & DM
AGENCIES
MARKETING
DEPT
MARKETING
DEPT
MARKETING
DEPARTMENT
SOME
MARKETING
APPLICATIONS
WHO ANALYSES
DATA?
MARKETERS/
DM AGENCY
MARKETING
DEPT
Sales Data; M.I.S
Customer Data;
MARKETING
DEPT
MARKETERS
I.T,
MARKETERS,
AUDIT DEPT
HAVE YOU
HEARD OF RFID?
YES
NO
NO
NO
YES
DO YOU THINK
THE
APPLICATION
OF RFID WOULD
BENEFIT YOUR
FIRM?
YES
YES*
YES*
NOT SURE*
YES
ESTIMATED
DATE FOR
IMPLEMENTING
RFID?
2007
NOT SURE
NOT SURE
NOT SURE
2010 / 2011
IMPORTANCE
OF ICT IN
MARKETING?
“ICT and
marketing are now
inextricably
linked”
“ICT is
becoming
more central in
our marketing
operations”
“ICT is not a huge
part of our
marketing”
“More an issue
for I.T than the
marketing
department”
“ICT is the nexus
that binds the
company”
8/10
6/10
7/10
7/10
9/10
SYSTEM
CAPABLE OF
DEALING WITH
MORE COMPLEX
DATA
TRYING TO
KEEP UP
WITH
CURRENT
SYSTEM
WOULD COPE
OK
TOO MUCH
DATA COULD
BE DIFFICULT
VERY WELL
HOW WELL YOU
COPE WITH
CURRENT
INFORMATION
SYSTEM?
(OUT OF 10)
HOW WELL YOU
WOULD COPE
WITH EXTRA
INFO CREATED
FROM RFID USE?
16
Summary of Research Findings
Thirdly, the study highlighted the general ignorance of marketers with regard to
RFID, with three out of the four companies admitting to have never even heard of it.
Most worrying was the fact that in the case of two of these companies, RFID trial runs
had already been carried out in some of their stores.
These findings thus support some of the central tenets of current thinking in the
literature, namely that marketers are fundamentally challenged by both opportunities
and difficulties associated with ICT deployment. Among the marketers studied it
appears that not only is their awareness of and capabilities for deploying advanced
ICT low, but there is little understanding of the substantial opportunities inherent in
such novel technologies. Marketers appear to take a very reactive attitude to ICT use
which tends to be either prompted internally by other organisational functions (first
and foremost the technologists), or externally by competitive actions. In either case,
the marketers studied appear to be missing the strategic significance of early and
proactive ICT deployment. Moreover, we noted the presence of a distinct threshold
for even considering the engagement with novel ICT such as RFID.
In summary, our exploratory study indicates a surprisingly low level of sophistication
in the use of currently deployed ICT. In line with this, marketers in the studied
companies appeared to have very little knowledge, and limited proactive interest in
learning, about RFID and other innovative ICT solutions. Thus RFID appears to be
another technology which links to the Brady et al (2004) contention that most ICTs in
marketing are both overlooked, and in turn underexploited.
Limitations & Further Research
This paper explores some of the barriers to the adoption of novel ICTs. They include a
lack of constructive marketing engagement by innovating companies. More active
marketing involvement with ICT during both development and deployment is a
necessary requirement. More immediately in the studies context there appears to be
the need to build the required information management capabilities within the
company, and particularly in the marketing function. Finally, marketers need to
recognise the importance of public perception for the successful deployment of
innovative ICT. Based on our study all of these areas can benefit from substantial
17
additional attention, but without additional understanding of how these barriers play
out in particular contexts this is difficult.
From a research perspective it is necessary to understand determinants for ICT
deployment among marketers better. More research into first movers in ICT
deployment, for example, may provide important insights into reasons for and
enablers of early technology adoption. A related issue is a better understanding of the
information dissemination patterns regarding innovative ICTs. Finally, we believe
that better understanding of the organisational arrangements that enable better
absorption of external and better transfer of internal ICT relevant knowledge (see
Fellenz & Brady, 2006) would provide useful insights into the factors ultimately
driving the success and failure of ICT innovations.
From a practice perspective, we believe that a useful first step in addressing the above
barriers would be for marketers to learn to more fully exploit already available data
from current ICT use. In addition to adding value based on current technology
deployment this would increase their abilities for better information management. In
addition, their threshold for considering additional ICT deployment will likely
become lower over time. For sophisticated users of ICT in business there needs to be
research that comprehensively addresses the enablers and barriers to RFID
deployment, including the role of particular contextual factors, which could be of
immense value.
REFERENCES
Andal-Ancion, A., Cartwright, P.A and Yip, G.S., (2003) ‘The Digital Transformation
of Traditional Businesses’, MIT Sloan Management Review, Summer 2003, Pg.34-41
Angeles, R., (2005) ‘RFID Technologies; Supply-Chain Applications and
Implementation Issues’, Information Systems Management, Vol.22, Issue 1, Pg.51-61
Ayers, J., (2003) ‘Don’t Get Buried in Customer Data- Use It’, Harvard Business
School Working Knowledge, July 21st 2003
Bannick, T., (2000) ‘The Enigma of Marketing Information’, Journal of the Irish
Academy of Management, Vol.21 Issue 2
Besson, J., (1993) ‘Riding the Marketing Information Wave’, Harvard Business
Review, Sept-Oct, Pg.150-160
18
Bolisani, E., and Gottardi, G., (2005) ‘Online technology markets and suitable
marketing strategies’, International Journal of Technology Marketing, Vol.1, Issue 1,
Pg.37-61
Brady, M., Saren, M., and Tzokas, N., (2002) ‘Integrating Information Technology
into Marketing Practice- The IT Reality of Contemporary Marketing Practice’,
Journal of Marketing Management, Vol.18 No.5-6, Pg.555-578
Brady, M., (2003) ‘Managing Information Technology Assimilation; A Marketing
Perspective’, Irish Journal of Management, Vol.24 Issue 1
Capon, N. and Glazer, R., (1987) ‘Marketing and Technology; A Strategic
Coalignment’, Journal of Marketing, Vol.51, Issue 3, Pg.1-14
Choo, C.W., (2005) ‘Information Failures and Organisational Disasters’, MIT Sloan
Management Review, Spring 2005, Pg.8-12
Davenport, T.H., Harris, J.G., and Kohli, A.K., (2001) ‘How Do They Know Their
Customers So Well?’, MIT Sloan Management Review, Winter 2001, Pg.63-73
Davenport, T.H., and Grover, V., (2001) ‘Special Issue; Knowledge Management’,
Journal of Management Information Systems, Summer 2001, Vol.18, Issue 1, Pg.3-4
Davenport, T.H., and Harris, J.G., (2005) ‘Automated Decision Making Comes of
Age’, MIT Sloan Management Review, Summer,Vol.46, No.4, Pg.83-89
Del Conte, N.T., (2006) ‘HP Unveils RFID’s Future Competitor’, www.pcmag.com
Glazer, R., (1991) ‘Marketing in an Information-Intensive Environment; Strategic
Implications of Knowledge as an Asset’, Journal of Marketing, Vol.55 Issue 4, Pg.119
Gulati, R. and Oldroyd, J.B., (2005) ‘The Quest for Customer Focus’, Harvard
Business Review, April 2005
Hirschheim, R., Schwartz, A. and Todd, P., (2006) ‚A marketing maturity model for
IT; Building a customer-centric IT organisation’, IBM Systems Journal, Vol.15, Issue
1, Pg.181-199
Holland, C.P & Naude, P., (2004) ‘The metamorphosis of marketing into an
Information-handling problem’, Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing,
Santa Barbara, Vol.19, Issue 3, Pg.167-177
Jones, P., (2004) ‘Radio frequency identification in the UK; opportunities and
challenges’, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management,
Vol.32, Issue 2/3, Pg.164-174
Levy, M., Powell, P & Tetton, P. (2001) ‘SMEs: aligning IS and the strategic
context’, Journal of Information Technology, 16, Pg.133-144
19
Loveman, G., (2003) ‘Diamonds in the Data Mine’, Harvard Business Review, May
2003
McGovern,G., (2000) ‘Managing Information in the Digital Age; How the Reader is
King’, Irish Marketing Review, Vol.13, Issue 2
Marchand, D.A., Kettinger, W.J., and Rollins, J.D., (2000) ‘Information Orientation;
People, Technology and the Bottom Line’, Sloan Management Review, Summer
2000, Pg.69-79
Martin, V.A., Hatzais, T., Lycett, M., & Macredie, R., (2004) ‘Building the
Business/IT Relationship through Knowledge Management’, Journal of Information
Technology Cases and Applications, Vol.6 Issue 2
Myburgh, S., (2000) ‘The convergence of information technology and information
Management’, Information Management Journal, Vol.34 Issue 2 Pg.4-16
O’Brien, T.V., Schoenbachler, D.D & Gordon, G.L., (1995) ‘Marketing Information
systems for consumer products companies: a management overview’,
Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol.12, Issue 5, Pg.16-36
Piercy, N., (1981) “Marketing Information bridging the quicksand between
technology and decision-making’, The Quarterly Review of Marketing, Autumn,
Pg.1-15
Reinartz, W. and Kumar, V., (2002) ‚The Mismanagement of Customer Loyalty’,
Harvard Business Review, July 2002
Twist, D.C., (2005) ‘The impact of radio frequency identification on supply chain
facilities’, Journal of Facilities Management, Vol.3, Issue 3, Pg.226-236
Weill, P., and Aral, S., (2006) ‘Generating Premium Returns on Your IT
Investments’, MIT Sloan Management Review, Winter 2006, Pg.39-49
Wallendorf, M., and Belk R., (1989) Assessing Trustworthiness in Naturalistic
Consumer Research in Interpretive Consumer Reseearch, Elizabeth Hirschman(Ed)
Provo, UT Association for Consumer Research, 69-84)
20