By Stephen Gross
Have you ever wondered who regulates the Universal
Product Code (UPC) and barcode industry? Probably not. Because of its
complexity, there must be a central authority that administers these product
identification numbers and the zebra-looking line segments on almost every
product sold around the world. Even products imported from tiny villages in
tiny countries have these identifying codes on them. There must be an
international authority that determines all of this for those producers, right?
Wrong.
But wait. Wasn’t there a
congressional hearing or presidential panel some years back that concluded it
was in the consumer’s best interest for businesses to come up with a system to
manage the inventory of almost every product sold? No!
Think for a moment about all
the items we see in grocery stores. There are thousands of them, all with their
own identification numbers and barcodes. Somehow, when we bring our baskets up
to the register and the products are swiped across the scanner, the system not
only identifies our products and their prices but also provides merchants with
inventory information. With some large retailers and superstores, inventory
information can also be sent directly to a supplier. Barcode technology also
gives sellers a reliable mechanism to reduce product and revenue loss by more
closely tracking inventory. This little innovation, which we consumers now take
for granted, has enabled merchants to achieve greater efficiency—that is, lower
costs. That in turn benefits the public through lower prices because when
producers reduce their costs, competition transfers the gain to consumers.
The spontaneous market process
guided adopting of the UPC system. It certainly was more rational for each
business owner to adopt a standard system that promotes coordination and
spreads the total cost across all industries than to bear the entire burden and
risk of designing, implementing, and managing an independent stock-keeping
system. Cooperation profited each competitor—as well as its customers. The UPC
system is a great example of how markets can make sense of what seems like
endless complexity. The barcode industry has arisen spontaneously due to the
needs and desires of grocery wholesalers. We should not be surprised by this
because this is what markets always do when government doesn’t get in the way.
Furthermore, many economists and philosophers, inspired by F. A. Hayek and his
mentor, Ludwig von Mises, believe this is the only way in which overall social
order should arise since it relies on voluntary
agreement among individuals, the stuff of true liberty.
Widespread acceptance of the
Universal Product Code was rooted in competing grocers’ desire to design and
implement inter-industry standards that would provide them with greater
organization. Under competitive pressure business owners looked for ways to
provide greater efficiency, speedier checkouts, and better tracking of
inventory. They hardly intended to revolutionize their industry. Rather, they
were individually looking for profits, and in the process, created positive
unintended consequences for us all. Deliberately pursuing improvement of
consumers’ welfare may have produced inferior results. As Adam Smith noted in
the eighteenth century,“[B]y pursuing his own interest [the business owner]
frequently promotes that of society more effectually than when he intends to
promote it.”
In 1932, long before the
current barcode system was invented, Wallace Flint, a Harvard business student,
wrote a thesis on how to automate the grocery system. Flint’s system used punch
cards and flow racks for inventory control and quicker movement of products
from storage to the customer. Barcode technology was developed in 1949 by
Norman Joseph Woodland, a graduate student and teacher at what is now Drexel
University. In 1974, a ten-pack of Wrigley’s chewing gum was the first product
scanned and sold; it happened at a Marsh Supermarket in Troy, Ohio. Since its development
barcode technology has been continuously improved. Technological innovation has
allowed more data to be consolidated into smaller scanning units. We can find
the UPC now on each individual banana instead of only on the storage crates.
Now, some 38 years later, UPC
and scanning technology is better than ever. Do you think the founders of this
system ever imagined their innovation would have grown so robust and spawned
complementary technology? Today our cell phones have barcode readers built into
them that are able to scan almost all the items found in almost every store in
many different industries. (The next step, QR code technology, which uses those
squiggly boxes, is already here.)
GS1, a global nonprofit
organization of private, competitive merchants, is now leading a charge to set
industry standards. GS1 has been around since the beginning (under a different
name) and has grown out of consolidations between North American and European
associations. In the United States alone it has 200,000 member companies. The
total international membership is over one million companies in 20 different
industries. It not only standardizes across industries; it also maintains
numerous systems to provide different industries, including the health care,
alcoholic beverage, floral, and publishing industries with the specific tools
they need to flourish.
We should appreciate the
implications of such an organization. What GS1 is doing through free exchange
and voluntary association generates immediate benefits for its members but also
generates ancillary effects, such as lower prices and consumer convenience. We
can only imagine how a government agency may have run this type of system.
Markets, when left free, allow
diversification and rapid adaptation to changing circumstances in a complex
world (as opposed to the turtle-paced adjustments found in bureaucracy).
Skeptics about free markets, who insist that order must be centrally designed,
should find this story instructive.
No comments:
Post a Comment