Crime At Work pp 156-174 | Cite as

Electronic Article Surveillance: management learning in curbing theft

  • Joshua Bamfield


Electronic article surveillance (EAS) — colloquially known as ‘tagging’ — involves the use of a relatively simple group of radio frequency technologies by retailers to prevent merchandise from being stolen from shops. The use of EAS is growing rapidly in the UK, especially amongst department stores and shops selling clothing, do-it-yourself (DIY) products, and recorded music, although a 1991 EAS survey showed that use of EAS in British clothing and department stores lagged behind that of comparable retailers in France and northern Europe (Bamfield, 1992). Thirty per cent of respondents to the National Survey of Retail Theft and Security (Bamfield, 1994) claimed to use EAS systems in their stores. Although EAS is relatively expensive, it has been taken up quickly by smaller retailers, particularly in clothing and fashion stores. This is very different from the spread of electronic point of sale devices (EPoS) which were first used by large companies and later trickled down to smaller ones (Jones, 1992).


Crime Prevention Security Guard Electromagnetic System Total Shrinkage Recorded Music 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bamfield, J. (1992) Beating the thief: a retailer’s guide to Electronic Article Surveillance. Brighton: RMDP.Google Scholar
  2. Clark, P. and Staunton, N. (1989) Innovation in technology and organisation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Clark, P. and Mayhew, P. (eds) (1980) Designing out crime. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  4. Cornish, D. and Clarke, R. (eds) (1986) The reasoning criminal: rational choice perspectives on offending. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  5. Dyson, R.G. and Berry, R.H. (1984) Capital investment appraisal. In R. Eglese and G. Rand (eds) Developments in operational research. Oxford: Operational Research Society Ltd/Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  6. Ernst and Young (1992) The Ernst and Young/IMRA survey of retail loss prevention trends: thirteenth annual survey of loss prevention executives. New York: Chain Store Age Executive edition, January, Section 2.Google Scholar
  7. Jones, G. (1992) Introduction to computers in shops. Brighton: RMDP.Google Scholar
  8. Lindblom, C. (1959) The science of muddling through. Public Administration Review, volume 19, pp. 79–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Loveridge, R. (1990) Incremental innovation and appropriative learning styles. In R. Pitt and M. Pitt (eds) The strategic management of technological innovation. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  10. Mintzberg, H. D., Raisinghani, D. and Theoret, A. (1976) The structure of ‘unstructured decision’ processes. Administrative Science Quarterly, volume 21, number 2, pp. 246–275.Google Scholar
  11. Quinn, J. (1980) Strategies for change: logical incrementalism. New York: Irwin.Google Scholar
  12. Rogers, E.M. (1987) Progress, problems and prospects for network research: investigating relationships in the age of electronic communication technologies. Proceedings of the Sunbelt Networks conference. Florida, USA.Google Scholar
  13. Stalk, G. and Hout, J. (1991) Competing against time: to sustain competitive advantage. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  14. Touche Ross (1989) Retail shrinkage: the drain on profits 1989 survey results. London: Touche Ross on behalf of the Association for the Prevention of Theft from Shops.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Limited 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joshua Bamfield

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations