Shrink and cameras

[SIW Editor]

Some interesting study data (http://www.securityinfowatch.com/onl...nk/11601SIW379) came out recently related to LP/shrink.

One of the things noted was that:
"More than one-fifth (21.4 percent) of those with CCTV systems say in-store personnel rarely monitor cameras."

Keep in mind this study probably measured businesses with active LP departments -- I think if it was expanded 'retail' to include things like mom-n-pop stores, convenience stores and more, then the percentage of stores that regularly monitor their cameras would be even lower. Am I off base, or are cameras really just used for "after the fact" investigations?

[HotelSecurity]

I'm not LP but in hotels you are almost 100% correct.

[Curtis Baillie]

Some interesting study data (http://www.securityinfowatch.com/onl...nk/11601SIW379) came out recently related to LP/shrink.

One of the things noted was that:
"More than one-fifth (21.4 percent) of those with CCTV systems say in-store personnel rarely monitor cameras."

Keep in mind this study probably measured businesses with active LP departments -- I think if it was expanded 'retail' to include things like mom-n-pop stores, convenience stores and more, then the percentage of stores that regularly monitor their cameras would be even lower. Am I off base, or are cameras really just used for "after the fact" investigations?

You're 110% right most business do not monitor their cameras. Sorry I haven't yet finished that article for you.

[Nauticus]

It's true. Unless you have additional LPO on duty who can watch the cameras, while you watch on foot...

My most recent loss prevention employment had four cameras. They weren't real, though, so we used them exclusively for deterring theft.

[panther10758]

If your not going to staff your LP department then cameras are a waste of time and money. In order for cameras to be useful you need an LP manning camera to document everything and at least one LP on floor for direct observation and to make stop.

[Nauticus]

If your not going to staff your LP department then cameras are a waste of time and money. In order for cameras to be useful you need an LP manning camera to document everything and at least one LP on floor for direct observation and to make stop.

Thats not completely accurate. Cameras are also visible deterrants, and just the existence of such a camera is very effective in reducing theft.

[panther10758]

Where I agree with that. Deterring theft alone will not pay for this equitment which takes us back to staffing enough people to make use of cameras

[Nauticus]

Where I agree with that. Deterring theft alone will not pay for this equitment which takes us back to staffing enough people to make use of cameras

Loss prevention = reduce shrink. Thats our job, not apprehending people. If we have to make arrests, we do, but preventing loss is our job.

[panther10758]

Again no arguement there but I fail to see where unmanned cameras alone will reduce shrink enough to pay for themselves. I am a big prevention supporter so any prevention methods I am for but high visibilty will do the same as cameras in plain view if not better and cost less and can do much more

[John H. Christman]

Dummy (prefer word "drone") cameras are very inexpensive, and many can be mounted simply with double backed tape.