Walden University

COLLEGE OF MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY

This is to certify that the doctoral dissertation by

Bob Duhainy

has been found to be complete and satisfactory in all respects,

and that any and all revisions required by

the review committee have been made.

Review Committee

Dr. Danielle Wright-Babb, Committee Chairperson,

Applied Management and Decision Sciences Faculty

Dr. Louis Taylor, Committee Member,

Applied Management and Decision Sciences Faculty

Dr. Marion Smith, Committee Member,

Applied Management and Decision Sciences Faculty

Dr. Raghu Korrapati, University Reviewer

Applied Management and Decision Sciences Faculty

Chief Academic Officer

David Clinefelter, Ph.D.

Walden University

2010

PREVIEW

Abstract

Implications of RFID in Location-Aware Wi-Fi Networks

by

Robert Duhainy

M.S., Southern Methodist University, 2004

Dissertation Submitted in Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

Applied Management and Decision Sciences

November 2010

PREVIEW

Abstract

The use of radio frequency identification (RFID) technology is increasingly common. Its

use for specific applications has been mandated by a number of major retailers, as well as

by the U.S. government; however, core RFID technologies and networks lack consistent

approaches to maximize the efficiency and security of RFID applications. The purpose of

this research was to identify the most effective approach for deploying a context- and

location-aware network, which is particularly important to the U.S. government as it will

allow hands-off processing and the tracking of medical supplies and prescription drugs.

Based upon RFID theory of operation, research questions focused on identifying a set of

best practices as they apply to RFID deployment methods, minimizing the required

number of passive and active tags, and the power requirements needed to operate the

networks. The study employed a concurrent mixed methods design that triangulated

themes derived from a case study of 23 published analyses of RFID deployment, from 16

independent sources with descriptive survey data of RFID deployment factors and from

32 RFID users. Specific deployment priorities from the triangulated results were ranked

in order of importance; maximum read range, number of readers, tags, and antennas.

Specific recommendations for next steps to help ensure maximum efficiency of RFID

included use of open source middleware and improving interoperability. The results

from the study will contribute to the body of knowledge in context- and location-aware

networks, and will serve positive social change in the health care industry by informing

new practices that will increase the security and safety of patients and staff.

PREVIEW

PREVIEW

Implications of RFID in Location-Aware Wi-Fi Networks

by

Robert Duhainy

M.S., Southern Methodist University, 2004

Dissertation Submitted in Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

Applied Management and Decision Sciences

November 2010

PREVIEW

UMI Number: 3426940

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript

and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

UMI 3426940

Copyright 2010 by ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against

unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway

P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346

PREVIEW

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to the many people who have supported my doctoral study and

dissertation research for the past several years. Thank you to Dr. Danielle Babb, my

committee chair, advisor, and mentor. She played a valuable role in the completion of

this dissertation research. When I consulted her in matters regarding course work and

dissertation procedures, she always made herself available to me.

Thank you to my dissertation committee members: Dr. Marion Smith for her

support and for steering my research in the right direction, and Dr. Louis Taylor who

constantly provided valuable input and inspired my dissertation research project during a

discussion session at the New Hampshire Residency Meeting in 2006. He also made sure

that my dissertation complied with Walden University's mission of social change.

Thank you to Ms. Meaghan Barnett for her editorial assistance, and for putting up

with me and the many requested changes required for a scholarly paper. Moreover, I

consider her a friend and hope to work with her in the future.

A special thank you to all my family; especially my daughter, Xena, for her

support and for being extraordinarily patient while I worked on this doctorate degree.

Thank you to Avnet Electronics Incorporation, Core Security Corporation, Daniel

Webster College, and ITT-Technical Institute for their financial support and for providing

me with access to their virtual libraries and online database.

© 2010 by Robert Duhainy. All rights reserved.

PREVIEW

i

Table of Contents

List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... iii

List of Figures ......................................................................................................................v

Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study ....................................................................................1

Problem Statement .......................................................................................................10

Purpose of the Study ....................................................................................................11

Nature of the Study ......................................................................................................12

Research Questions ......................................................................................................12

Conceptual Framework ................................................................................................12

Assumptions .................................................................................................................13

Limitations ...................................................................................................................14

Delimitations ................................................................................................................14

Significance of the Study .............................................................................................15

Definition of Terms......................................................................................................15

Summary and Transition ..............................................................................................19

Chapter 2: Literature Review .............................................................................................20

Background and Overview ..........................................................................................20

RFID Networks ............................................................................................................34

Smart Environments and Wireless Sensor Networks ..................................................36

Review of Related Methodologies ...............................................................................47

Summary ......................................................................................................................53

Chapter 3: Research Method ..............................................................................................54

Research Design...........................................................................................................54

Data-Gathering Method and Database of Study ..........................................................62

Setting and Sample ......................................................................................................68

Treatment .....................................................................................................................69

Context and Strategies .................................................................................................69

Qualitative Sequence ...................................................................................................69

Quantitative Sequence .................................................................................................70

Data Analysis and Validation ......................................................................................70

Measures for Ethical Protection of Participants...........................................................70

Summary and Transition ..............................................................................................70

Chapter 4: Results ..............................................................................................................72

Strategy ........................................................................................................................72

Findings........................................................................................................................73

Section one: Survey analysis .................................................................................73

Section two: Case studies of Walmart and Daisy Brand .......................................95

Section three: Guiding research questions and responsive data ..........................117

Summary ....................................................................................................................126

PREVIEW

ii

Chapter 5: Summary, Conclusion, and Recommendations .............................................128

Overview ....................................................................................................................128

Interpretation of Findings ..........................................................................................128

Implications for Social Change ..................................................................................134

Recommendations for Action ....................................................................................136

Reflection of Researcher‘s Experience ......................................................................137

Conclusion .................................................................................................................137

References ........................................................................................................................140

Appendix A: RFID Deployment Questionnaire and Disclaimer .....................................149 Curriculum Vitae .............................................................................................................154

PREVIEW

iii

List of Tables

Table 1. Categories of RFID Systems .............................................................................32

Table 2. Similarities and Differences Between Quantitative and

Qualitative Analysis ..........................................................................................55

Table 3. Steps to Research Survey Development and Administration ............................61

Table 4. Preliminary Review of Companies Available for RFID Case Studies ..............63

Table 5. Responses to Question 1, ―Please indicate the main reason your

company implemented RFID.‖ ..........................................................................73

Table 6. Responses to Question 2, ―What is your RFID infrastructure

installation budget?‖ ..........................................................................................75

Table 7. Responses to Question 3, ―What are the recurring costs budgeted for

the solution?‖ .....................................................................................................76

Table 8. Responses to Question 4, ―What location(s) utilize(s) the

RFID solution?‖ ................................................................................................78

Table 9. Responses to Question 5, ―Is your RFID system used by:‖ ..............................79

Table 10. Responses to Question 6, ―What will labels/tags be applied to?‖ .....................80

Table 11. Responses to Question 7, ―What processes do RFID help

you manage?" ....................................................................................................82

Table 12. Responses to Question 8, ―What is the maximum read-range?‖ .......................83

Table 13. Responses to Question 9, ―What type of tags do you use?‖ ..............................85

Table 14. Responses to Question10, ―How many readers does your

system require?‖ ................................................................................................86

Table 15. Responses to Question 11, ―How many tags does your system require

on a monthly basis?‖ .........................................................................................88

Table 16. Responses to Question 12, ―Do you use tags or labels?‖ ..................................89

Table 17. Responses to Question 13, ―How many antennas are required

in your RFID system? ........................................................................................91

PREVIEW

iv

Table 18. Responses to Question 14, ―What was your time frame for

Implementing your RFID system?‖ ..................................................................92

Table 19. Responses to Question 15, ―What square footage is covered by

your RFID system?‖ ..........................................................................................94

Table 20. RFID Implementation and Significant Events Timeline

for Walmart .......................................................................................................98

Table 21. RFID Implementation and Significant Events Timeline for

Daisy Brand .....................................................................................................109

Table 22. What are the Current Approaches to Achieving Optimum Coverage

for a Given Premises Using RFID Technologies and Which of Them

are the Most Efficient? ....................................................................................117

Table 23. How Can Various Deployment Techniques be Used to Minimize the

Number of Passive and Active Tags Required to Ensure Complete

Coverage of a Given Premises? .......................................................................120

Table 24. How Can the Specific Attributes of RFID Technologies be Exploited to

Improve Premises Coverage? ..........................................................................122

Table 25. How Can Power-Saving Techniques be Used to Minimize the Power

Requirements Needed to Operate a Location-Aware Network? .....................124

Table 26. What are the Most Important Factors That Comprise a Set

of Best Practices Based on Real-World Applications

and Empirical Observations From the Field? ..................................................126

PREVIEW

v

List of Figures

Figure 1. Responses to Question 1, ―Please indicate the main reason your

company implemented RFID.‖ ........................................................................74

Figure 2. Responses to Question 2, ―What is your RFID infrastructure

installation budget?‖ ........................................................................................75

Figure 3. Responses to Question 3, ―What are the recurring costs budgeted

for the solution?‖..............................................................................................77

Figure 4. Responses to Question 4, ―What location(s) utilize(s) the

RFID solution?‖ ...............................................................................................78

Figure 5. Responses to Question 5, ―Is your RFID system used by:‖ .............................79

Figure 6. Responses to Question 6, ―What will labels/tags be applied to?‖ ...................81

Figure 7. Responses to Question 7, ―What processes does RFID help

you manage?‖...................................................................................................82

Figure 8. Responses to Question 8, ―What is the maximum read-range?‖ .....................84

Figure 9. Responses to Question 9, ―What type of tags do you use?‖ ............................85

Figure 10. Responses to Question 10, ―How many readers does your system

require?‖ ...........................................................................................................87

Figure 11. Responses to Question 11, ―How many tags does your system

require on a monthly basis?‖............................................................................88

Figure 12. Responses to Question 12, ―Do you use tags or labels?‖ ................................90

Figure 13. Responses to Question 13, ―How many antennas are required

in your RFID system?‖ ....................................................................................91

Figure 14. Responses to Question 14, ―What was your time frame

for implementing your RFID system?‖............................................................93

Figure 15. Responses to Question 15, ―What square footage is covered by

your RFID system?‖ ........................................................................................94

PREVIEW

1

Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study

Radio frequency identification (RFID), although still in the developmental phases,

is one new information-sharing technology that is increasingly being used in the supply

chain. In an effort to improve the efficiencies of their supply chain management

operations, companies of all types and sizes are investing in this emerging technology to

satisfy demands for compliance by major customers who utilize similar technologies.

The fact is RFID is coming. It doesn't matter how many people stand out

in front of Safeway bemoaning the Club Card tracking their potato-chip-

buying habits. These tags will become so cheap and track their products

so well that they will replace bar codes, by and large, by the end of the

decade. (Schuyler, 2004)

There remains a paucity of timely and relevant studies concerning how best to deploy

these technologies in various physical environments. Ross, Twede, Clarke, and Ryan

(2009) noted that, ―RFID is thought to hold the promise of closing some of the gaps in

supply chain logistics, but there are several unknowns in the minds of managers and scant

research at the operations level to provide new insights‖ (p. 158). The focus of this study

is both timely and relevant, given the mixed experiences and successes with barcode

applications over the past several decades.

International companies also have invested in barcode technologies since the mid-

20th

century, only to find that the technologies in which they invested either have been

made obsolete by technological innovations in RFID, or are being phased out in favor of

RFID approaches. While the price of RFID technologies continues to decrease, replacing

an existing supply chain management system that relies on barcode technologies with an

RFID-based application will involve time and effort (Visich, Li & Khumawala, 2007).

Many companies lack the expertise to replace their existing system and such deployments

PREVIEW

2

and, therefore, will require the use of outside consultants, who will add to the costs

involved (Visich et al., 2007). In order to remain competitive, these companies are being

compelled to adopt RFID technologies in much the same way as they were forced to

adopt barcode technologies (Visich et al., 2007). At the time of their inception, barcodes

represented a fundamental leap forward in stock management technology because they

provided companies with the ability to scan virtually any type of product that contained a

barcode, and then use that information to keep track of inventory and pricing levels and

location (Deal, 2004).

Barcodes have some major flaws that make their use cumbersome and limited in

application and usefulness. They can become damaged simply by being scratched or

disfigured (Deal, 2004). It is a common experience to wait while a cashier repeatedly

attempts to scan a barcoded item, and ultimately enters the product code number

manually into the point-of-purchase system (Deal, 2004). These same constraints also

have adversely affected the usefulness of barcodes in supply chain management

applications.

Barcodes are the same in terms of appearance and function as they were when

they were introduced in the mid-1950s. By 1966, their use was given a large push

forward with the addition of supporting technologies, such as static and handheld

scanners, that made their use for a wide range of applications more feasible (Deal, 2004).

The growth in the use of barcodes also was facilitated by improvements in the

technology‘s supporting software. For example, the Universal Grocery Products

Identification Code (UGPIC) standard was developed in 1970 by Logicon, Inc., and

helped to standardize the application and its administration (Deal, 2004). Nevertheless,

PREVIEW

3

the use of barcodes remained relatively limited until a greater number of various

companies recognized the inherent advantages of using this type of stock-management

approach. Eventually, barcodes became the technology of choice and appeared on a

range of items (Deal, 2004).

Subsequently, the UGPIC was refined into the familiar Universal Product Code

(UPC), which remains the technology of choice (Deal, 2004). The importance of the

transition from manual stock management techniques to the automatic techniques was

enormous. According to Cortada (2004), the introduction of the UPC was important for

both industries, as well as the larger economy in which they compete, because of the

advantages it provided for streamlined supply chain management. Although the

technology originally was introduced during the 1970s for use in the grocery industry, the

use of UPCs was virtually ubiquitous by the year 2000, including applications in

manufacturing settings, as well as retail and wholesale industries, and on print media

(Cortada, 2004).

Some people have even opted for barcodes as tattoos or on their clothing. It is

reasonable to suggest that, given the time and resources invested in this technology,

barcodes will remain in widespread use for the foreseeable future (Deal, 2004).

Nevertheless, anyone who has experienced a cashier‘s frustration at a barcode‘s failure to

scan can readily testify that barcodes have constraints. The most important theme to

emerge from Deal‘s (2004) analysis of barcode technologies concerned their fundamental

limitations. For example, Deal emphasized, ―Barcodes are an optical ‗line-of-sight‘

technology where the scanning device must see the barcode to be read and interpreted.

Barcode labels may be scuffed, damaged, or wrinkled, which makes it difficult to obtain

PREVIEW

4

a valid scan‖ (p. 23). Deal cited other constraints involving the use of barcodes as

compared to RFID technologies, ―Additionally, barcodes are not really ‗automatic

identification technology,‘ as they are usually read just a few times. It is at the time of

the reading that you know anything about the product, such as at a checkout counter‖

(p. 23).

Despite these constraints, the positive side of barcode technologies was the fact

that they were far superior to what they replaced. Like the punch tickets and other

manual stock management techniques that barcodes replaced, though, some superior

alternatives are already in use that will inevitably replace barcodes in much the same

fashion as the tsunami-like way that barcodes replaced earlier technologies. In this

regard, Deal (2004) made the point that barcode technology was introduced at a

particularly propitious point in history, since it largely paralleled the introduction of

computer-based applications that could use barcode technologies to their maximum

advantage, introducing a wide range of cost savings and fundamentally altering the

relationship between suppliers and buyers. Indeed, Deal (2004) suggested that barcodes

were responsible for making ―retailing one of the most computer-intensive industries by

the end of the century‖ (p. 23).

The fundamentals of the technological innovations that made barcodes efficient,

such as static and mobile scanners and a standardized inventory stock number that

automated stock management requirements, were readily discernible by all types of

companies as being desirable additions to their supply chain management applications

(Deal, 2004). Besides being useful for facilitating purchases in retail environments,

barcodes also have proven their worth in a wide range of manufacturing settings. By

PREVIEW

5

placing barcodes on the various parts required for assembly, manufacturers are able to

better manage inventories and achieve increased efficiency and productivity (Deal, 2004).

More important, perhaps, is that the enormity of the UPC infrastructure is

reflective of the widespread recognition of its advantages, and points to the ongoing need

for even more efficient ways of achieving these goals. Cortada (2004) agreed with Deal

(2004) concerning not only the limitations involved in barcode technology, but also the

superiority of the UPC to the technologies that it replaced. Cortada (2004) emphasized

that the emergence of UPC technologies reflects the ability to persuade vendors to

provide them with the standardized technology ways that the originators of these

technologies probably did not envision (Cortada, 2004). This collaborative effort has not

been confined to barcodes and the UPC (Cortada, 2004). Barcodes and the UPC appear

to represent a paradigm shift in thought concerning the ways that industries can use the

same technologies to help achieve their respective organizational goals in UPCs in a wide

range of enterprises. The fact remains that barcodes have limitations and disadvantages

that are not easily overcome by the use of existing technologies that rely on line-of-sight

scanning techniques (Deal, 2004).

In contrast, RFID tags provide the same advantages as barcodes, but eliminate

many of the constraints that are inherent in the supporting technologies. For example,

RFID tags can be read while they are in motion and do not require line-of-sight scanning

devices to keep track of them (Deal, 2004). In addition, RFID tags are capable of storing

vastly more information than barcodes. RFID tags are very small and continue to be

miniaturized even further, to the point of being undetectable, and can be placed on

virtually anything (Deal, 2004). Even the tiniest of these devices can provide data

PREVIEW

6

concerning the item on which it is placed, such as information about its distribution, price

and/or its one-of-a-kind identification number (Deal, 2004).

These attributes of RFID technology allow companies to monitor their inventory

more effectively by using a transceiver to read the RFID information (Deal, 2004).

Similar to the approach used by Deal (2004), Cortada (2004), and Landt (as cited in

Visich et al., 2007) explained that the origins of RFID technology date back to the 1940s,

when laboratory research was conducted on reflected power communication, much

earlier than many observers might realize. By the 1980s, commercial applications of

RFID were aimed mostly at the railroad and trucking industries. According to Dinning

and Schuster (as cited in Visich et al., 2007), these earlier applications of RFID

technologies used active battery-powered RFID tags and proprietary systems (i.e., cargo

ship containers and rail cars) to accomplish the tasks of managing capital assets in the

same fashion as barcodes were used (Dinning & Schuster, 2003).

The extension of RFID technologies into supply chain management is attributable

to the decrease in costs associated with RFID technology. These cost decreases have

been achieved by using passive RFID tags that do not require battery power, and are

readily applied to the same applications as barcodes in supply chain management (Visich

et al., 2007). Because they do not rely on line-of-sight scanners to provide information

about the product on which they are placed, RFID tags, whether passive or active, can be

used in a wider range of settings than barcodes because adverse environmental conditions

will not inhibit their use. In addition, multiple RFID tags can be read simultaneously and

the tags are simple to program with the requisite information (Visich et al., 2007).

PREVIEW

7

Because RFID tags are capable of storing more information than barcodes, they

also can maintain information concerning move history, shifting locations, intermittent

and ultimate destinations, expiration dates, and such current environmental conditions as

temperature and moisture levels (Visich et al., 2007). In an increasingly global and

competitive marketplace, the advantages of using RFID technologies are apparent to

those supply chain managers who seek more efficient ways to achieve their

organizational goals while eliminating cumbersome processes (Visich et al., 2007). Such

processes detract from value-added activities and promote more efficient and, ultimately,

more profitable procedures in their supply chain management function (Visich et al.,

2007). Indeed, Tucker (2006) reported that RFID network deployment is becoming

increasingly commonplace, with in excess of one billion tags having been manufactured

by 2005, a figure that is projected to increase to 33 billion by the end of 2010 based on

their supply chain management value (Visich et al., 2007).

Barcodes must be scanned physically at every point of movement to capture

relevant information. If a barcode becomes scratched or damaged and cannot be scanned,

the inventory management system simply will fail to track that piece of merchandise, and

its whereabouts will be unknown (Deal, 2004). It is in this area, in particular, that RFID

technologies can contribute to improvements in the supply chain management function

(Deal, 2004). According to Dennis, Fenech, and Merrilees (2004), ―The solution is to

have the stock speak up and identify itself to the retailer‘s electronic inventory

management system. The stock speak? How? By adding to, or replacing the barcode

with a miniature RFID tag‖ (p. 254). The size and cost of RFID tags have made their

deployment cost-effective in a wide range of settings for many companies. While it may

PREVIEW

8

be advantageous for some organizations to add an RFID tag to their existing barcode

techniques to avoid some of the expense involved in a complete overhaul of an inventory

management system, the costs associated with deploying RFID networks are dropping

rapidly as the technology becomes more pervasive. More companies are opting to take

advantage of these cost efficiencies by completely replacing their existing barcode

system with an RFID network.

RFID technology resembles barcode technology in that it is also a data acquisition

and storage method. However, RFID technology promises to provide, across the entire

supply chain, a variety of supply chain management benefits that are not possible using

barcode technology (i.e., improved speed, accuracy, efficiency, and security of

information sharing) (Visich et al., 2007). Complementing the use of RFID technologies

are recent advances in location-aware technologies, including the global positioning

system (GPS), that make RFID technologies the foundation of context- and location-

aware networks (Welbourne, Balazinska, Borriello, & Brunette, 2007). These networks

provide the ability for companies to track their inventory in real-time, including location

as well as the condition of the products (Visich et al., 2007).

From a big picture perspective, these state-of-the-art technologies are merely

interim steps in the inexorable march toward pervasive computing. Use of RFIDs will

continue to increase among organizations seeking superior solutions to their supply chain

management problems.

Some of the primary benefits of RFID technologies include:

1. Reduced storage, handling, and distribution expenses.

PREVIEW

9

2. Improved speed, accuracy, efficiency, and security of information sharing

across supply chains.

3. Increased sales through reduced stock outs.

4. Improved cash flow through increased inventory turns and improved

utilization of assets (Visich et al., 2007, p. 437).

Given the rapid adoption of RFID technologies by European firms, this is a

particularly important issue for U.S. companies. In an increasingly globalized

marketplace, it is vital to embrace technologies that will provide a competitive advantage

(Visich et al., 2007). Firms not doing so, risk being left behind while others model the

way forward (Visich et al., 2007).

Some of the major organizations that are currently fueling interest and growing

application in the use of RFID implementations are giant retailers such as Walmart, and

the massive procurement needs of the U.S. government. For example, following a 2003

announcement by Walmart, its top 100 suppliers were required to tag all pallets and cases

shipped to Walmart distribution centers by January 2005 (Passmore, 2004). The next top

200 suppliers were required to tag all of their pallets and cases by January 2006, and all

suppliers to Walmart were required to have the RFID technologies in place by the end of

2006 (Visich et al., 2007). ―In June 2003, Wal-Mart made the announcement that

everyone in the retail world was expecting to hear: by January 1, 2005, radio frequency

identification (RFID) technology will be a requirement for doing business with the

world‘s largest retailer‖ (Watershed moment, 2006, p. 2). Given the enormity of the

contracts associated with doing business with Walmart, domestically and abroad, this

announcement served as a warning for companies across the country that the move to

PREVIEW

10

incorporate RFID technologies was on, and that it would be to the detriment of the

companies to ignore this trend. Other early retail adopters of RFID technology included

The Gap, Woolworth‘s, Prada, Benetton, and Marks & Spencer (Visich et al., 2007). In

addition, companies with governmental contracts have been forced to sit up and take

notice as they, too, will be required to become RFID-compliant if they want to do

business with the U.S. government (Visich et al., 2007).

Beginning January 1, 2005, the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) required its

43,000 suppliers to place RFID tags on pallets and cases, and on any single items with a

cost of more than $5,000 in order to provide for hands-off processing of its inventory

(Visich et al., 2007). In addition, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) called

for the implementation of RFID technology to help keep track of the distribution of

prescription medicine in order to protect the medical supply chain from counterfeit drugs

(Visich et al., 2007). Companies in the health care industry had to tag pallets and cases

by 2007 to meet the FDA‘s goal (Visich et al., 2007). Together, these trends suggest that

RFID is here to stay, at least for the foreseeable future, and time is of the essence in

deploying these technologies in efficient ways.

Problem Statement

The use of RFID technology is becoming increasingly commonplace, and its use

for specific applications has been mandated by a number of major retailers, as well as by

the U.S. government. However, context- and location-aware technologies and networks

lack consistent approaches to identifying the domains in which they operate

(Satyanarayanan, 2000). The problem that was addressed in this study was to identify the

PREVIEW

11

most effective approach to developing a context- and location-aware network, an

enterprise that represents a timely and valuable endeavor.

Approaches vary from caching authentication parameters, to defining Application

Programming Interfaces (APIs) that require multiple levels of verification each time a

network is accessed, to developing cyber foraging algorithms (Lin, Dillon, & Wong,

2008). Authentication algorithms extract high levels of network resources, slowing down

network latency and performance (Lin et al., 2008). There are some techniques available,

however, that can maximize coverage while minimizing power requirements (Nofsinger,

2009). Ross et al. (2009) emphasized, though, there remains a specific gap in the existing

body of knowledge concerning best practices for complete RFID deployment for

warehousing applications. Therefore, the problem that was addressed in the study was to

identify the most effective approach to developing a context- and location-aware

network, an enterprise that represents a timely and valuable endeavor that is congruent

with the school’s Mission of Positive Social Change.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to identify the optimal approach to the deployment

of RFID technologies in order to ensure that adequate coverage is achieved in a given

premises, such as a warehouse, while minimizing the number of passive and active tags

required, and the power requirements needed to operate the location-aware network.

Although there is guidance available concerning the underlying techniques involved in

achieving this optimum coverage, less attention has been paid to identifying best

practices and formulae that can be used to determine where tags and sensors should be

placed in physical environments.

PREVIEW

12

Nature of the Study

This study was an exploratory qualitative investigation into RFID technologies in

general, and the optimum manner for deployment to ensure adequate coverage in a given

premises. Some quantitative analytical techniques also were used to achieve the above-

stated purpose. The use of both qualitative and quantitative methodologies were based on

the need to use a literature review and case study approach in tandem with a custom

survey in order to collect theoretical, as well as empirical-based findings concerning

optimum deployment of RFID network systems.

Research Questions

This study was guided by the following research questions:

1. What are the current approaches to achieving optimum coverage for a given

premises using RFID technologies, and which of them are the most efficient?

2. How can various deployment techniques be used to minimize the number of

passive and active tags required to ensure complete coverage of a given premises?

3. How can power-saving techniques be used to minimize the power

requirements needed to operate a location-aware network?

4. How can the specific attributes of RFID technologies be exploited to improve

premises coverage?

5. What are the most important factors that comprise a set of best practices,

based on real-world applications and empirical observations from the field?

Conceptual Framework

It is the conceptual framework of this study that there is a best way of doing

anything, and it is possible to identify a set of best practices as they apply to RFID

PREVIEW