K
Key Control
Locks—and keys to open them—have been used for hundreds of years as a means of controlling physical access. In the retail environment, keys are used to provide access to the store itself and, in many instances, also to provide working access to cash registers, display cases, stockrooms and secured areas within stockrooms, fitting rooms, management offices, cash boxes, supply cabinets, dock doors, roof hatches, and other spaces and/or devices which require controlled access and security.
It is not unusual for retail facilities to use locking systems which rely on a hierarchy system of keying commonly referred to as a “master-keyed system.” Such systems utilize a master key which operates any lock in the system, with subcategories of keys which may operate one or more (but not all) locks or simply one lock in particular in that system. Such systems provide owners or others who have broad access needs a convenient way to gain access without requiring a large number of individual keys. The downside of master-keyed systems is that the loss or compromise of the master key compromises all the locks in that system. If a master-keyed system is employed, strict accountability and control of the master key must be maintained.
We will not attempt to provide the technical aspects of the various types of locks, of which there are many. For example, locks can by classified in broad categories as mechanical, electrical, or a combination of both. Mechanical locks can be classified as warded locks, lever locks, pin tumbler locks, wafer tumbler locks, changeable core locks, or dial combination locks. Each of these lock types varies in its mechanical complexity, from simple, inexpensive warded construction utilized primarily in padlocks to the more complex cylinder pin tumbler found on the average home’s front door. Similarly, electrical locks can be classified as electromagnetic, electric deadbolt, electric strikes, and electric latches.
Combination mechanical/electrical may be opened only by use of a mechanical key in combination with an electronic key or electronic biometric device (such as a retinal scan or fingerprint reader).
Locks can be attacked by pure force (use of a hammer or crowbar), by picking (use of tools which, in skilled hands, substitutes for a key), by unauthorized keys (made by wax impression of the original key), by a new phenomenon called “lock bumping” (a relatively simple strategy, once understood, of tapping on the lock while force is applied in the keyway), or by sophisticated devices to simulate electronic keys.
If an electronic locking device is used, it is important that the loss of electrical power does not automatically cause an unlocked condition. Likewise, care must be exercised that all systems controlling building emergency exits, whether mechanical or electronic, provide egress during an emergency, irrespective of any other consideration or condition.
There are numerous methods of key control, the most elementary being simply numbering each key and keeping a paper record identifying the key holder and periodically verifying his or her possession of that key. Electronic systems not only keep lists of key holders assigned electronically numbered keys, but on command will “deactivate” keys, thus making them useless. The important lesson is that regardless of the system used, key control is a must.
A final note: Many authorities warn that locks are only a delaying device, and given the right circumstances (time, talent, and tools), any lock can be breached.
Kleptomania
The dictionary defines kleptomania as “An obsessive impulse to steal in spite of the absence of economic necessity or personal desire.” It is deemed a mental disorder. A person suffering from kleptomania is known as a “kleptomaniac.” In the retail world, kleptomaniacs are encountered, but very rarely. As the definition states, a kleptomaniac has no economic or personal reason to steal; he or she simply has a psychological abnormality which results in stealing compulsively. Bottom line: So-called kleptomaniacs do not constitute a significant threat to the retail community.
But kleptomaniacs do steal and from time to time are detected shoplifting. How should persons who are legitimate kleptomaniacs be dealt with? While some claim that a kleptomaniac’s stealing is a call for help, the definition belies this. Kleptomaniacs are mentally disturbed individuals and should be treated as such. Interestingly, it is legally questionable if kleptomaniacs can form the necessary specific intent required for committing a crime of theft (shoplifting), or, if they can, that they can be held responsible for it.
When a kleptomaniac is apprehended, his or her condition more often than not will surface during the interview in the loss prevention office with an admission of the problem. Verification with that person’s mental health provider can confirm the detainee is under care or has been under care and or treatment. The kleptomaniac’s family should be notified, and they will normally arrange to be billed and pay for the stolen items. Appropriate records should be kept on kleptomaniacs, including the dates they are in the store, items stolen, which family member was notified, and date payment received. This method of handling kleptomaniacs avoids embarrassing them and their families and also protects the store from losses.
Known Loss Reports
Loss reports, most commonly called known loss reports, are those reports which retailers and loss prevention use to document losses from theft which justify the loss being written off financially, thus removing it from being reported as shortage or shrink. “Written-off financially” means removed from the book inventory.
The basis for a known loss report is often a document which is known by various names but most commonly as a “missing merchandise report” or MMR.
Figures K-1 and K-2 show examples of missing merchandise reports.
As part of a loss prevention awareness program, sales associates should be instructed to report situations in which merchandise appears to be missing. For example, a sales associate puts an expensive leather jacket on display at store opening. At 11:30 a.m. it is gone from the display rack, and no one remembers selling it. Examination of the journal tape (or other media or electronic record) fails to reflect its sale. The evidence indicates the jacket was stolen.
Another example: Ten bubble packs of walkie-talkie radios were displayed when a count was taken at 10 a.m., and at 2:30 p.m. an opened but empty bubble pack that contained a set of walkie-talkie radios identical to those counted at 10:00 a.m. is discovered hidden under a rack of RTW in an adjacent department. A check shows six packs of radios on the shelf, and the POS terminal verifies that three were sold; one empty pack is found, leading to the reasonable conclusion that the actual radios are missing and probably stolen.
A final example: Loss prevention believes a female stole a dress while in the fitting room. The fitting room was thoroughly checked at the start of the day and was clean of merchandise and any price tickets. After the suspected theft, a search of the fitting room reveals a price ticket matching the suspected stolen dress hidden in a crack in the corner of the room.
Each of these examples should be the basis for immediately preparing a missing merchandise report, which will provide the justification for entering the value of the merchandise on those reports into the known loss journal maintained by the Accounting department. Before the report is processed by the financial division for “mark out” purposes, it should be forwarded to and approved by the approved ranking loss prevention employee in the store or the district.
In addition to accounting financially for the merchandise that the evidence points to as having been stolen, the MMR fulfills another important function. When reviewed by loss prevention, all aspects of the circumstances surrounding the display and disappearance of the merchandise reported on should be carefully scrutinized to determine whether any measures can be taken to prevent further similar thefts. Perhaps the merchandise is displayed in an area lacking easy observation by sales associates; perhaps the merchandise should be physically secured by locked case or a metal cable; perhaps all fitting rooms should be checked for places where illegally removed tickets can be hidden and these defects repaired; perhaps loss prevention should patrol the area more frequently. Whatever may be the appropriate solution, the MMRs provide a timely heads-up to theft activity to which all hands can be alerted and preventive measures undertaken.
The procedure itself ensures an ongoing awareness on the part of all store associates that merchandise is important and valuable, and when it’s missing, some action is triggered rather than just being shrugged off and forgotten.
Known losses, by department or category, should be tallied, displayed, and compared this year versus last year to indicate possible trends and, therefore, increased alertness to the problem of theft.