The Store Starts Here: Increasing Awareness of Events and Customer Perceptions in Parking Lots

Kevin Larson, Kroger Company Stephanie Lin, LPRC Presented by: Kevin Larson, Kroger Company Stephanie Lin, LPRC

Learning Lab 4 Polling Question: Please open the Impact App on your phone to participate now LIVE POLL Which of the following problem(s) most concern you in your highest risk/crime stores? (selected all that apply) Loitering Vagrancy Panhandling Overnight parking Question

LIVE POLL Q1 RESULTS POLL RESULTS View live poll results round 1 View live poll results round 2 View live poll results round 3

We don’t assess parking lots at all in our highest risk/crime stores LIVE POLL How frequent do you LP teams assess the parking lot at your highest risk/crime stores? Monthly or less Quarterly Bi-annually Annually More than a year We don’t assess parking lots at all in our highest risk/crime stores

LIVE POLL Q2 RESULTS POLL RESULTS View live poll results round 1 View live poll results round 2 View live poll results round 3

It’s just a parking lot…… Zone 4- 1st line of defense for criminal activity and customer perceptions ( social media ) Gathering place or Spill-over crimes Take the inside of the store….outside Start your store walks before the front doors (assessment) Small investment

It’s not just a parking lot Importance of Landscaped Parking Lots First interaction with your customers Create a positive impression for your customers brand image Discourage would-be criminals Intent Enhance the aesthetics Enhance perceived safety for your customers Thwart criminal activities

What Makes a Bad Parking Lot? Tie it in see, get, fear

Getting up to speed on parking lot safety A one-size fits-all approach will not work Security features depend on the vulnerability of locations to crime Design features matched to risk level

Increase parking lot safety Awareness Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design Landscaping Territorial reinforcement: trees and shrubs, speed bumps, fences, parking space perimeter Lighting Cleanliness Security officers Security cameras Placement of signs and graphics

Research Background Two big-box retailers participated in this study Four stores (two from each retailer) were selected Survey were conducted during the day and at night Sample size: 80

Measuring the effectiveness of the following security features: Survey question Measuring the effectiveness of the following security features: Lighting Use of security cameras Presence of signage Trees and shrubs coverage Visibility Presence of security officer Cleanliness Presence of employees

Goals & Objectives Research Goals To better understand awareness of different security features in the parking lots. The effectiveness of each security measure. Do the trees and shrubs make customers feel more or less safe?

Key Finding #1 Takeaways Customers felt safer in the parking lots during the day than at night Customers felt safer in parking lots with less tree coverage Time Safety Rating Day 6.2/7 Night 6.0/7 Time High Tree Coverage Low Tree Coverage Day 6.0/7 6.5/7 Night 5.6/7 6.4/7

Key Finding #2 Takeaways The perceived effectiveness of almost all security measures decreased at night.

Key Finding #3 Takeaways The perceived effectiveness of each security measure decreased in parking lots with high tree coverage.

Conduct customer interviews in high risk/crime stores stores in same risk category Ensure difference in tree coverage is more pronounce

Live poll Please rate how much R&D effort LPRC should put into enhancing Zone 4 awareness and action (1=very low, and 5=very high)? 1=very low 2 3 4 5=very high