With autonomous cars and factories already a reality, it seems that unstaffed stores will inevitably be a part of Taiwan’s future. This week, President Chain Store Corp, which runs 7-Eleven, announced that it would be opening cashier-free stores as early as the first half of next year.
The process is not as easy as it sounds — mention unstaffed stores and shoplifting immediately comes to mind. Banking on people’s honesty can only be conducted as a social experiment and not a corporate venture, as evidenced by the case of an “honesty store” in Taipei that suffered major losses earlier this year due to theft.
This is where technology comes into play to track items and ensure people pay before they leave. However, Amazon.com’s cashier-free venture in Seattle is more than 10 months past its scheduled opening due to technical issues. There have been successful cases in China, but most are still in the experimental phase and are not without glitches.
President Chain Store cited the stores as a way to deal with a projected labor shortage. This does not mean eliminating all staff — there will still need to be people to stock shelves, clean up messes, identify damaged or expired goods and deal with unruly customers. How much money it can save remains to be determined, but will the firm lower the cost of its products or raise the pay of its remaining employees, or will it gobble up all the extra profits? Maybe that should not be a question at all.
Some like to cite increasing wages and labor laws for the creation of unstaffed stores — but that really is not valid, because Taiwanese salaries are still painfully low in relation to the cost of living in big cities. More money means more purchasing power, which benefits the stores in the long run — it just seems that nobody thinks this way here.
One benefit for employees is that instead of performing mostly mindless work, they get to learn and operate a new system and use technology that could be the norm in the future. They will have to think about the bigger picture instead of their individual tasks, and learn how to balance human and machine tasks even further than what they are doing today. However, this is only if the company is willing to train those willing to learn. Perhaps those in traditional shops who want to learn can swap places with those in automated stores who do not — but there will inevitably be some who fall through the cracks.
For customers, the appeal of these stores is likely to be the elimination of waiting for cashiers. At a time when everything needs to be instantaneous, this is sure to be a hit with the extremely impatient crowd. Some might lament the loss of face-to-face service — but these days, who stops to chat with the cashier? Most are reduced to item-scanning robots when they operate the cash register. With staff freed from cashier duty, they might even have more opportunities to find other ways to interact with customers.
It really depends on the technology and how firms plan to make this work — perhaps it will have to be a Costco-type establishment where only verified members are allowed inside. Potential hassles will be having to sign in and needing to have a smartphone at all times. What about older people who do not know how to use smartphones? Even if shoplifting is eliminated, people might vandalize the store or mess with shelves. There seem to be more questions than answers.
However, it is a worthwhile experiment. With the sheer density of convenience stores, grocery stores and mom-and-pop shops in Taiwan, it would not hurt to convert some to give people different options and experiences. After all, if a consumer does not like an unstaffed store, they can most likely find another store within walking distance. This is still a novelty and who knows if automated stores will become the norm?
Do not panic just yet — unstaffed stores are not taking over any time soon, and when they do, you might be used to them already.
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS