C-Store Loss Prevention Shifts From Theft to Proactive Operations

Effective loss prevention tactics include hands-on training and making loss prevention part of the everyday operation.

Loss prevention (LP) is about more than theft; it depends on understanding operational processes, from inventory accuracy to store-level execution. To learn more, CStore Decisions reached out to Kelsey Smith, inventory loss control specialist for Wallis Cos., operator of 67 stores in Missouri and Illinois.

CStore Decisions (CSD): What operational process changes have had the biggest impact on reducing loss at Wallis Cos.?

Kelsey Smith (KS): The biggest impact I’ve seen has been less about introducing one specific process and more about changing how we approach the processes we already have. We’ve worked to make LP part of the everyday operation instead of something we focus on after a loss has already occurred. Daily shift walks, receiving verification, lottery, inventory and cash controls are all important, but they’re only effective when managers understand what those processes are designed to identify. Otherwise, even a good internal control can eventually become just another box to check.

That’s why I’ve put more emphasis on hands-on training and building ownership at the store level. I want managers to understand not just what they’re supposed to do, but why they’re doing it, what a discrepancy might be telling them and when something deserves a deeper look. To me, the real shift is moving from “Did we complete the process?” to “What did the process tell us?” When managers start thinking that way, we’re not just improving compliance — we’re developing better operators who can recognize and address potential loss before it becomes a larger problem.

(CSD): If a retailer could make only one investment to strengthen LP this year, where would you recommend they focus?

(KS): I would invest in actionable data and exception reporting that gives managers and LP a clear picture of where risk is developing.

Most retailers already have an enormous amount of information in their point of sale (POS), inventory, audit results and incident systems. The problem is turning that information into something actually useful. I would rather have a simple dashboard that reliably tells me which stores, transactions, employees or inventory categories need attention than another system generating hundreds of reports nobody has time to read.

The investment also has to include training people how to use that information. Technology should help us ask better questions and prioritize our time, not create dashboards and reports that take more time to understand than to act on. Start with a small number of meaningful key performance indicators, automate as much of the data collection as possible, establish what normal looks like and build from there. If I can identify risk earlier, I have a chance to correct the process before I’m explaining the loss afterward.

(KS): I think the future of LP will be much more proactive, data driven and integrated into operations. We will always have investigations, theft and traditional LP responsibilities, but I think the biggest shift will be using technology and information to recognize risk before it becomes a significant loss.

We already collect an enormous amount of data through POS systems, inventory counts, audits, cameras, incident reporting and other operational systems. The future isn’t just having more data. It’s connecting it and knowing what questions to ask. Artificial intelligence (AI) and better analytics will help identify patterns and anomalies much faster than we can manually, but technology still needs someone who understands the operation well enough to know what those patterns actually mean.

I also think that makes training more important, not less. As LP gets better tools, we have to make sure we’re developing better people alongside them. I’ve been focusing more on training with store teams because I don’t want LP knowledge to stop with the LP department. If we can give store managers the ability to recognize warning signs, understand the data in front of them and ask better questions, we’re multiplying what LP can accomplish.

I don’t see the future of LP as replacing people with technology. I see it as using technology to make people more effective. The strongest LP professionals will be the ones who can combine analytics, AI technology, operational knowledge, investigations and teaching.

Ultimately, I think our value will be measured less by how much loss we catch after it happens and more by how much we help the organization prevent in the first place.