AI exposure: Loss Prevention Managers
Plan and direct policies, procedures, or systems to prevent the loss of assets. Determine risk exposure or potential liability, and develop risk control measures.
Reading this score
computed33.6% of this occupation's weighted task load is exposed, which puts Loss Prevention Managers at the 58th percentile of 923 occupations. The capability is largely there. Its average task scores 2.5 out of 4 on what a current system can produce, and the frictions that hold other jobs in place are comparatively weak here.
What holds the line here is context. Across this occupation's 27 tasks it averages 2.19 out of 3, the highest of the five friction dimensions. In plain terms, the work depends on knowledge the model cannot hold. Much of this job runs on things that were never written down: what this particular organisation does, what happened last week, what the person across the table actually meant. That context is the barrier, and it erodes as systems are given more access.
The most exposed thing this job does is Maintain documentation of all loss prevention activity, at 73.3%. The least is Develop and maintain partnerships with federal, state, or local law enforcement agencies or..., at 11.7%. A gap of 61.7% between two parts of the same job is the reason this index publishes at task level. An occupation-wide number would have hidden both.
Within management occupations, this one is less exposed than the median of 41.4% across the group's 56 roles, with 52 scoring higher. Being in an exposed family does not make a particular job exposed, and the reverse holds too.
What would move this score. Of 27 tasks, 15 are currently banded exposed, 9 assisted and 3 untouched. For that distribution to shift materially would take cheaper ways to verify output, since the cost of checking is currently doing more to hold this work in place than the cost of producing it. The score is re-computed every quarter against a fresh capability reference, and the change is published rather than quietly applied.
Task by task
27 tasks, O*NET 31.0| Task | Exposed | Assisted | Untouched | Importance | Band |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maintain documentation of all loss prevention activity. | 73.3% | 26.7% | 0.0% | 3.86 | exposed |
| Analyze retail data to identify current or emerging trends in theft or fraud. | 73.3% | 26.7% | 0.0% | 3.79 | exposed |
| Assess security needs across locations to ensure proper deployment of loss prevention resources, such as staff and technology. | 55.0% | 20.0% | 25.0% | 3.85 | exposed |
| Maintain databases such as bad check logs, reports on multiple offenders, and alarm activation lists. | 50.0% | 25.0% | 25.0% | 2.84 | exposed |
| Identify potential for loss and develop strategies to eliminate it. | 47.5% | 27.5% | 25.0% | 4.05 | exposed |
| Review loss prevention exception reports and cash discrepancies to ensure adherence to guidelines. | 45.0% | 30.0% | 25.0% | 4.28 | exposed |
| Perform cash audits and deposit investigations to fully account for store cash. | 45.0% | 30.0% | 25.0% | 3.59 | exposed |
| Recommend improvements in loss prevention programs, staffing, scheduling, or training. | 45.0% | 30.0% | 25.0% | 3.52 | exposed |
| Advise retail establishments on development of loss-investigation procedures. | 45.0% | 30.0% | 25.0% | 3.06 | exposed |
| Provide recommendations and solutions in crisis situations such as workplace violence, protests, and demonstrations. | 40.0% | 35.0% | 25.0% | 4.05 | exposed |
| Monitor compliance to operational, safety, or inventory control procedures, including physical security standards. | 40.0% | 35.0% | 25.0% | 3.81 | exposed |
| Collaborate with law enforcement to investigate and solve external theft or fraud cases. | 40.0% | 35.0% | 25.0% | 3.71 | exposed |
| Advise retail managers on compliance with applicable codes, laws, regulations, or standards. | 35.0% | 40.0% | 25.0% | 3.94 | assisted |
| Visit stores to ensure compliance with company policies and procedures. | 35.0% | 40.0% | 25.0% | 3.80 | assisted |
| Monitor and review paperwork procedures and systems to prevent error-related shortages. | 30.0% | 20.0% | 50.0% | 3.30 | exposed |
| Train loss prevention staff, retail managers, or store employees on loss control and prevention measures. | 26.7% | 23.3% | 50.0% | 4.24 | exposed |
| Investigate or interview individuals suspected of shoplifting or internal theft. | 26.7% | 23.3% | 50.0% | 4.20 | exposed |
| Administer systems and programs to reduce loss, maintain inventory control, or increase safety. | 20.0% | 30.0% | 50.0% | 4.29 | assisted |
| Coordinate theft and fraud investigations involving career criminals or organized group activities. | 20.0% | 30.0% | 50.0% | 3.70 | assisted |
| Supervise surveillance, detection, or criminal processing related to theft and criminal cases. | 20.0% | 30.0% | 50.0% | 3.65 | assisted |
| Direct installation of covert surveillance equipment, such as security cameras. | 20.0% | 30.0% | 50.0% | 3.39 | assisted |
| Direct loss prevention audit programs including target store audits, maintenance audits, safety audits, or electronic article surveillance (EAS) audits. | 18.3% | 31.7% | 50.0% | 3.75 | assisted |
| Perform or direct inventory investigations in response to shrink results outside of acceptable ranges. | 16.7% | 33.3% | 50.0% | 3.89 | assisted |
| Hire or supervise loss prevention staff. | 16.2% | 21.2% | 62.5% | 3.95 | untouched |
| Verify correct use and maintenance of physical security systems, such as closed-circuit television, merchandise tags, and burglar alarms. | 13.3% | 11.7% | 75.0% | 3.81 | untouched |
| Coordinate or conduct internal investigations of problems such as employee theft and violations of corporate loss prevention policies. | 11.7% | 38.3% | 50.0% | 4.38 | assisted |
| Develop and maintain partnerships with federal, state, or local law enforcement agencies or members of the retail loss prevention community. | 11.7% | 13.3% | 75.0% | 3.90 | untouched |
Task text and importance ratings sourced from O*NET 31.0. Shares computed. The occupation score is the importance-weighted mean.
Where the score comes from
judgedEvery task is scored through the standardised work activities it maps to. These are this occupation’s averages on the six rubric dimensions. Capability is what AI can do; the other five are what stands in the way.
| Dimension | Mean | Scale |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | 2.50 | 0-4 |
| Embodiment | 0.57 | 0-3 |
| Presence | 1.07 | 0-3 |
| Accountability | 1.44 | 0-3 |
| Context | 2.19 | 0-3 |
| Verification cost | 1.91 | 0-3 |
What this means in practice
Where most of a role's weighted task load is exposed, the work that survives is usually the part of the job nobody wrote into the job description: deciding what should be produced rather than producing it, and being answerable for the result. The tasks lowest on this page are a better guide to where to spend your time than any general advice about the future of work.
Occupations either side of this one
The four closest scores in the same occupational family, then the four closest anywhere in the index.
Read this carefully. Exposure is not displacement. A high score means current AI systems can produce this work, not that anyone will stop paying a person to do it. Adoption depends on economics, regulation and inertia that this index deliberately does not model. How the score is built.