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

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

4. 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

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

6. 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

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

8. 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

9. 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

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

11. 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

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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

15. 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?

18. 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

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

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

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

23. 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