Sed quis custodiet ? Employee theft in UK retailing

Purpose – Employee theft is a significant part of retail losses from shrinkage, yet has been comparatively underexplored compared with shoplifting. The purpose of this paper is to assess the impacts of different forms of staff theft and fraud upon retail crime losses and analyse the characteristics of offenders. Design/methodology/approach – The approach is based on a statistical analysis of the details (from retail records) of all staff offenders apprehended for theft by four major UK retailers over a two‐year period. The results are then compared with shrinkage losses for these retailers to discuss the implications of the findings. Findings – Retailer concentration upon customer theft is difficult to explain given the significance of perceived staff theft on losses from crime. Only a small percentage of staff offenders were caught by retailers, but estimation problems were caused by the fact it was difficult to value the exact amount stolen over time by serial offenders. The majority of people apprehended were young and were believed to have stolen comparatively small amounts of cash or goods. In contrast, a small number of large‐scale offenders were responsible for 47 per cent of total known staff theft. Only a relatively small proportion of known staff crime involved collusion, the major losses were caused by theft of cash, major fraud losses, merchandise and refund fraud. Practical implications – The implications of this study are significant for retailers. They suggest that retailers may concentrate on smaller‐scale wrongdoers rather than major frauds and that retailers may benefit from switching part of their loss‐prevention resources from shoplifting and minor staff offending to more considerable in‐house frauds. Originality/value – The paper presents original data based on the characteristics of actual apprehended thieves rather than a discussion based primarily on shrinkage estimates). It presents new information for the academic community concerning the impact of different types of theft and fraud and challenges part at least of retailing conventional wisdom about “Who steals?” and “How?” It is valuable both to the academic community and to retail practitioners.