Smartphone displayed openly in an electronics retail store under a visible security camera, with a hand reaching towards it; headline reads “An open door may even tempt a saint.”

An Open Door May Even Tempt a Saint!

Inventory losses in Germany 2024 have reached a new dimension.

The EHI Retail Institute (1) reports total inventory losses in Germany 2024 of €4.95 billion for brick-and-mortar retail, broken down as follows:

  • Customer theft: €2.95 billion
  • Employee theft: €0.89 billion
  • Theft by service staff and suppliers: €0.37 billion

Even more concerning than the absolute level is the dynamic.

Since 2017, customer related losses have increased by nearly 30 percent, while overall turnover and internal losses grew far more moderately. Also, there is an increase of almost 13 percent in reported shoplifting cases over the same period according to German police crime statistics.


Infographic showing inventory losses in Germany 2024 totalling €4.95 billion, equal to 1 percent of gross turnover, with breakdown into theft by customers, employees, and service providers and suppliers.
EHI Study on inventory losses at German brick-and-mortar retail stores for 2024

Inventory Losses in Germany 2024 compared with other European Countries

Inventory losses in Germany 2024 must be seen in a broader European context: In the United Kingdom, the British Retail Consortium reports in its Retail Crime Survey 2025 (2) more than 20 million shoplifting incidents between September 2023 and August 2024. The direct cost of customer theft is estimated at approximately £2.2 billion, while retailers are simultaneously investing over £1.8 billion per year in prevention.

In parallel, the UK Office for National Statistics reports that for the period October 2024 to September 2025, more than 519,381 police recorded shoplifting offences were registered in England and Wales. This represents a new peak and a further 5 percent increase compared with 2023 / 2024 (3).

A similar pattern can be observed in Ireland. Theft and related offences reached 77,260 recorded incidents in the year to Q3 2024, an increase of 7 percent and the highest level since the current time series began. Fifty seven percent of the increase was attributable to shop theft (4).

These figures show two things.

  • The rise in shoplifting is not a German only phenomenon.
  • Retailers across Europe are responding with significantly higher investments in security and prevention.

Although no harmonised EU statistic on inventory losses exists, the parallel developments in major European retail markets confirm one thing.

The structural challenge is European, not national.

At the same time, the share of self checkout systems in countries such as the UK, France or the Netherlands is significantly higher than in Germany. This suggests a potentially greater relative impact of SCO systems on inventory losses in those markets. According to EHI, loss rates at self checkouts are 15 to 30 percent higher than at staffed tills. As early as 1965, Swiss retailer Migros experienced that self service systems can lower behavioural thresholds. Surprisingly many people are regarding increased shoplifting figures for SCOs to be a new phenomenon. However, when looking at my previous blog (https://dr-rainer-eckert.de/en/self-checkout-migros-1965/) you will find out that this ‘phenomenon’ is 60 years old.

Who Steals and Why?

Thomas Zeiss, Security Manager at Lekkerland SE, once formulated a deliberately simplified three group model.

  • 25 percent of people are fundamentally honest.
  • 25 percent are generally willing to offend.
  • 50 percent are situationally susceptible.

The exact percentages are open to debate. The principle is not.

Working hypothesis: Around 50 percent of customers and employees are situationally influenceable when it comes to theft. This group largely determines the level of inventory losses.

Strategic Consequence: Focus on the Situationally Susceptible


Infographic showing three behavioural groups affecting retail inventory losses: 25 percent fundamentally honest, 25 percent prone to steal, and 50 percent susceptible to temptation.
3-group behavioural model explaining retail shrinkage.

From this 3-group model, a clear strategy emerges:

  • The 25 percent who are honest require no deterrence.
  • The 25 percent who are professional offenders are difficult to influence.
  • The 50 percent who are situationally susceptible represent the economic leverage point.

Three central areas of action:

  • Minimise opportunities
  • Increase perceived detection risk
  • Demonstrate presence

Minimising Favourable Opportunities
Today, the technical spectrum ranges from classic EAS systems and exit gates to checkout barriers, weight verification systems and AI supported video analytics.
But technology alone is not enough.

Increasing the Perceived Risk of Detection
Prevention is always psychology. Situationally susceptible individuals must feel that rule violations are likely to be detected. Visible cameras, self view monitors or clear signage regarding control measures can have a measurable deterrent effect.

Staff Presence Remains Decisive
Despite all technological advancements, well trained and attentive staff remain the strongest factor. The moment a customer has to be addressed, it becomes clear that technology is only effective in combination with people. Friendly but clear interaction prevents escalation and reduces losses.

Conclusion: The Real Issue Is Opportunity!

‘An open door may even tempt a saint’ is not a moral accusation.
It is an economic principle of human behaviour.

If systems create unobserved, low risk opportunities, rising inventory losses should not come as a surprise.

The key question is not:
‘How many thieves do we have?’

But:
‘How many favourable opportunities have we created?’ and
‘How can we reduce them?’.

Maybe it is also time to communicate transparently to honest customers that every stolen item is ultimately paid for by everyone through higher prices, reduced service quality or fewer staff.

Opportunity is manageable – reducing it is a management decision.


Sources:

1.          EHI-Study “Inventurdifferenzen 2025”
Empirical data and analysis of inventory losses for 2024 (Author: Frank Horst)
https://www.ehi.org/produkt/studie-inventurdifferenzen-2025-pdf/

2.          BRC Retail Crime Survey 2025
Report by Tom Ironside, published on the British Retail Consortium website (www.brc.org.uk)
https://brc.org.uk/news-and-events/news/operations/2025/ungated/brc-retail-crime-survey-2025/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

3.          Crime in England and Wales: Year ending September 2025
Statistic bulletin published by the Office for National Statistics (ONS)
Crime in England and Wales: year ending September 2025

4.          Theft And Related Offences Reached Highest Levels In 2024 – CSO (Ireland)
Report by Sarah O’Sullivan, published on the webpage www.checkout.ie
https://www.checkout.ie/retail/theft-related-offences-reached-highest-level-in-2024-cso-216853

How can inventory losses be contained? I would be pleased to discuss this with you…