More RFID Journal Sites: RFID Journal Espanol RFID Journal Brasil RFID Journal Events RFID Journal Awards
RFID EDITOR'S NOTE
Text size:
T
T
T
Why RFID Vendors and Users Speak Different Languages
The reality is that most end users don't know—or care—how a tag or sensor communicates, whether it has an onboard CPU and so forth. What they care about is what RFID does: Can it solve their problem?
I know some people will say end users don't care whether or not it's radio frequency identification, and some have the perception that the technology is bad or doesn't work, so they believe the term "RFID" should be jettisoned altogether. I don't advocate selling RFID solutions—I advocate selling solutions to people's specific problems. But it's important to have credibility when you claim you can solve a problem, and that means explaining, at some point, how you will do so. Not talking about RFID is like trying to sell someone an e-commerce solution in 1995 without talking about the Internet.
The other concern I have about jettisoning the term RFID just because it has negative connotations in some quarters is that doing so would make it more difficult for end users with problems to locate vendors not identified with RFID. If someone at a factory was having trouble tracking assets, they could search the Web and learn that RFID is being used for tracking assets. But upon searching for "RFID companies," they would find only those that identified themselves as such, so an end user might not locate the company with the right solution.
As an industry, we need to do a better job of explaining what RFID is, and of making it clear that there are many different types (30 are included in our report). They all do the same thing—identify objects remotely so they can be tracked and managed more efficiently (or charged, in the case of transactions)—but you have to choose the proper system for your particular application. Every vendor would be better off, because potential customers would have a much clearer idea of how RFID could solve their problems.
Mark Roberti is the founder and editor of RFID Journal. If you would like to comment on this article, click on the link below. To read more of Mark's opinions, visit the RFID Journal Blog or click here.
I know some people will say end users don't care whether or not it's radio frequency identification, and some have the perception that the technology is bad or doesn't work, so they believe the term "RFID" should be jettisoned altogether. I don't advocate selling RFID solutions—I advocate selling solutions to people's specific problems. But it's important to have credibility when you claim you can solve a problem, and that means explaining, at some point, how you will do so. Not talking about RFID is like trying to sell someone an e-commerce solution in 1995 without talking about the Internet.
As an industry, we need to do a better job of explaining what RFID is, and of making it clear that there are many different types (30 are included in our report). They all do the same thing—identify objects remotely so they can be tracked and managed more efficiently (or charged, in the case of transactions)—but you have to choose the proper system for your particular application. Every vendor would be better off, because potential customers would have a much clearer idea of how RFID could solve their problems.
Mark Roberti is the founder and editor of RFID Journal. If you would like to comment on this article, click on the link below. To read more of Mark's opinions, visit the RFID Journal Blog or click here.
READERS' COMMENTS
RFID Journal LIVE! 2010
Dear Mark, I'm a very recent member of RFID Journal. In my search fro a reliable source of information re RFID, I found myself atracted to your establishment. Found it to be very useful for someone like me who wants to start introducing the technology to our Egyptian Market. I also believe that participating in the upcoming 2010 Orlando event would be a great starting point for me. I'm trying to get the entry vise to the USA now. As soon as it is confirmed, I'll book my place in !Live 2010. If I'll be able to make it, I'll be glad if you can reserve sometime during the event so that we can have a talk together. Wish you a great success in Orlando, Alaa Toubar
Posted By: A. Toubar 3/24/2010 at 8:13:01 AM
See you at RFID JOurnal LIVE
Dear A. Toubar: I would be happy to meet you in Orlando. Hope you get the visa. Mark
Posted By: M. Roberti 3/24/2010 at 12:03:09 PM
Leader
Dear Mark: I am a newcomer I concur with those who say the RFID Journal is the best source for the real deal when it comes to RFID. I hold a patent on a RFID application process, service and product centered on real time physical asset tracking, tracing and authenticating. I want to explore the market place universe in pursuit of the top ten producer sand distributors of RFID product and services - focused on asset tracking. I believe that RFID has a great future in high value asset tracking. I believe that not less than four key stakeholders need to know a lot about their affected assets all the time - on demand. The stakeholder functions are FINANCE, SECURITY, OPERATIONS and CUSTODIANS to name a few. I like technical simplicity and process predictability. I like the signal deployment concept of "Green" which says I know exactly where my assets are - right now; YELLOW which indicates I know where the assets are right now but the asset is located in the wrong place. I control both places. Finally I like the use of the RED signal to indicate that the asset is out of my control right now. I am inviting conversation about this approach Let's talk more when time permits. Jim
Posted By: J. Kerr 9/30/2010 at 12:32:42 PM
Thank you
Thanks for the kind words. Everyone at RFID Journal works very hard to produce the high quality content that we put out every day. We never get tired of people telling us they appreciate all that we do. Feel free to email me at editor@rfidjournal.com. Mark
Posted By: M. Roberti 9/30/2010 at 1:59:28 PM
Why RFID Vendors and Users Speak Different Languages
RFID users and vendors speak different languages mainly because each of them desires a different outcome at the end of the day. Is this a rhetorical question? Maybe different language use is a good thing and not something undesirable. Think of the vendor as a perpetual concern - participating in lots of sales incentives in a very vibrant marketplace. In that same space the vendor has to appeal to a wide variety of potential buyers and so the vendor makes use of the "jargon" of the day. We all know about the bright young innovator who just came up with a great idea. He/she gives their work a brand name, i.e., Google. By comparison, the user is in pursuit of a product/service needed in order to attack a real world problem, e.g., track my assets in near real time. We all know there are hundreds of ways to accomplish that task. Hence we have the classic seller vs. buyer language stovepipe. I guess we might say that a sort of RFID language "middle ware" subject matter expert (SME) may prove to be a good arbitrage for all of the players in the RFID arena. We all are witnesses to the fast paced technology changes. Sometimes these things literally evolve overnight. The vendor is at a distinct disadvantage in this regard. The vendor has invested large resources and can not shift on a dime like the young entrepreneurs working from a makeshift lab. The vendor is likely to have longstanding contracts to deliver products and services that may be still 2nd and 3rd gen items. The vendor still has to nimble enough to compete. So most have an R&D arm. But where is the allegiance in the lab? The language is likely to be a bit stagnant. The R&D lab is likely to be resolving production and distribution challenges. There must be room at the Inn for all of the RFID stakeholders. Neither the user or the vendor is culpable here. They both have a role to play. James Kerr
Posted By: J. Kerr 10/03/2010 at 1:32:47 PM