{"id":4253,"date":"2026-04-13T16:13:24","date_gmt":"2026-04-13T16:13:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/4253\/"},"modified":"2026-04-13T16:13:24","modified_gmt":"2026-04-13T16:13:24","slug":"agentic-ai-in-retail-balancing-innovation-consumer-trust","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/4253\/","title":{"rendered":"Agentic AI in Retail: Balancing Innovation, Consumer Trust"},"content":{"rendered":"

\n\tEarlier this year at the National Retail Federation (NRF) Big Show in New York, everything was about AI\u2014from the exhibit hall to the breakout sessions, and conversations at the coffee break areas. One couldn\u2019t get away from it. And it wasn\u2019t just about predictive AI and generative AI. The show was flooded with a newer version of the technology<\/a>: agentic AI.<\/p>\n

\n\tAgentic AI refers to autonomous systems that can reason, plan, and take multi-step actions to achieve goals without constant human oversight. Sounds scary? It is. But the implications for retail are boundless.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tAside from work force automation and intelligent support (think of an AI agent working on its own to find solutions to a retailer\u2019s problems), agentic AI can also be used as personal shoppers. For retail, Google\u2019s agents serve as conversational agents that can understand user intent, analyze images, and make personalized recommendations.<\/p>\n

\n\tBut in the rush to deploy these robots into the market, industry experts are warning of potential mishaps as well as privacy and policy issues that may arise.<\/p>\n

\n\tBalancing AI with the human touch<\/p>\n

\n\tIn a recent report from VoCoVo, titled \u201cIn-store Intelligence: AI\u2019s Role in Retail\u2019s Human Touch,\u201d researchers said as stores become increasingly connected and data-centric, \u201cAI is reshaping how customers shop, colleagues work, and retail leaders plan for the future.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tIn a survey of 250 retail executives and 500 consumers, the authors of the report noted an acceleration of AI adoption. Amid that ramp up of investments, researchers also revealed some significant tension. The report noted that \u201cwhile retailers are urgently adopting automation to address labor pressures, rising theft, and operational costs, consumers remain guided by trust, transparency, and comfort.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tThe report revealed that shoppers want faster, easier experiences, \u201cbut not at the expense of human connection or privacy. This gap between technological ambition and emotional readiness is becoming a central issue for U.S. retailers.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tThe survey showed that 43.6 percent of retail executives polled said they plan to implement AI within the next 12 months while 28.1 percent already use it, and\u00a0 12.7 percent said they are not considering AI at all. The top reasons for deploying AI include reducing checkout time (38.9 percent), improving inventory visibility (27.8 percent), and reducing labor burden (22.2 percent).<\/p>\n

\n\tThe research also showed that nearly 80 percent of shoppers polled said they are unsure how AI is used and expressed discomfort \u201cwhen it feels like surveillance.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tWhat is the role of AI in retail?<\/p>\n

\n\tMartin Smethurst, chief customer officer at VoCoVo, a communications solution provider for retailers, told Sourcing Journal that the research showed a growing gap between retail AI ambitions and consumer trust. \u201cWhile 94 percent of retailers see AI as a vital tool for operational efficiency\u2014and most shoppers appreciate the convenience offered by automation\u2014our research shows that confusion and anxiety around data use persist.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tSmethurst said the survey results also show that shoppers still rely heavily on human team members for assistance. \u201cHelp finding products (38.66 percent), understanding product information (37.63 percent), and resolving issues at checkout (30.27 percent) are key touchpoints where shoppers most depend on [store associates] for help, reinforcing that store staff remain central to the customer journey,\u201d Smethurst said.<\/p>\n

\n\tWith AI shopping assistants, there\u2019s also the issue of trust. While there are guardrails in place, industry experts say AI agents could make mistakes with purchases and other tasks, with the financial burden of those mishaps falling on the consumer.<\/p>\n

\n\tSmethurst said the success of AI in retail will depend not only on capability, but also on trust. \u201cBy distancing themselves from the liability of AI errors, and by viewing AI purely as a strategic necessity, retailers run the risk of eroding the trust that sustains customer loyalty,\u201d Smethurst said.<\/p>\n

\n\tAt VoCoVo, Smethurst said the company believes AI \u201cshould accelerate, connect and enhance, making shopping more convenient, faster and more human. AI is most effective when it empowers colleagues to deliver better service\u2014not when it creates a friction-filled barrier.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tWho pays for AI mistakes?<\/p>\n

\n\tAlix Gallardo, co-founder of useinvent.com<\/a>, a platform where retailers build AI assistants, told Sourcing Journal that \u201cno retailer wants to be solely responsible for the financial risks of AI errors, especially when their competitors aren\u2019t. That\u2019s why we\u2019re seeing more retailers develop their own native AI assistants, allowing them to set controls, monitor outputs, and intervene when necessary.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tGallardo said there\u2019s been hiccups with Walmart\u2019s \u201cSparky\u201d and Amazon\u2019s \u201cRufus,\u201d and said this is also why OpenAI offers a white-glove solution \u201ctailored for the retail sector, helping companies implement robust AI systems with built-in risk mitigation.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tThe use of AI agents also goes beyond the transactional. Gallardo said Lowe\u2019s recently launched \u201cAsk Mylow,\u201d for example, offers not just a list of products with prices, but also detailed step-by-step how-to advice on projects, \u201chelping customers with home improvement solutions to make more informed decisions and gain a comprehensive view of the entire customer journey.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tGallardo said retailers should be careful about policy changes regarding AI assistants. \u201cBrand trust is built on the implicit promise that a retailer has your back; a terms-of-service clause that says \u2018if our AI buys the wrong thing, that\u2019s on you\u2019 signals the opposite,\u201d Gallardo said. \u201cEven if errors are rare, the knowledge that you\u2019re unprotected changes the psychological calculus of using the tool.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tBalancing innovation and accountability<\/p>\n

\n\tAssaf Feldman, chief technology<\/a> officer at Riskified (https:\/\/www.riskified.com\/<\/a>), the fraud protection company used by brands such as Aldo, Prada, and others, said that simply \u201cauthenticating the identity behind an AI agent won\u2019t stop chargebacks,\u201d and noted that \u201cthe industry must shift to protocols that capture verifiable intent, proving the customer actually authorized the agent\u2019s action.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tFeldman said retailers are navigating a delicate balance between innovation and accountability as AI agents enter commerce, even as consumer expectations remain divided. According to data from Riskified, more than half of consumers believe the AI platform \u201cshould be accountable for unauthorized purchases, while 23 percent point to the retailer itself.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cFrom here, we expect to see a flood of non-fraud chargebacks from customers claiming that\u2019s not what I wanted my agent to buy, which often morphs into friendly fraud,\u201d Feldman said. \u201cThis highlights how intent is tied to the dispute and chargeback process.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tFeldman said retailers risk losing the \u201cdirect relationship with their customers, which erodes brand loyalty and lifetime value.\u201d Feldman said moving forward requires safeguards such as verifiable intent, \u201cwhere a customer\u2019s approval is recorded, encrypted and saved and for merchants to actively invest in their own native AI while ensuring platforms implement risk correctly from day one.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tIf all this sounds like a complex, technological policy quagmire, it is.<\/p>\n

\n\tJackie Swanson, managing partner at Gartner Consulting, expects terms and conditions policies to be more standardized next year. And it is all about money.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cThe economics are straightforward: retailers want to capture the efficiency and conversion gains of agentic commerce without absorbing the financial risk of AI errors at scale,\u201d Swanson said, adding that there will likely be \u201cstandard boilerplate [policies] across mass merchants and grocery within the next 12 months. The outlier will be whichever retailer is bold enough to guarantee its AI\u2019s accuracy and uses that guarantee as a competitive differentiator.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tWhen asked if purchasing policies that hold the customer liable for AI agent mistakes can sour the relationship between a brand and the consumer, Swanson said, \u201cIt can, but the real story here is that consumer trust in AI-driven commerce is on a spectrum and it\u2019s going to evolve.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cRight now, we\u2019re in the earliest innings,\u201d Swanson said. \u201cMost shoppers have never delegated a purchase to an autonomous agent, so the tolerance for error is essentially zero. A single wrong order attributed to an AI assistant can feel like a betrayal, especially when the retailer\u2019s own terms say the mistake is yours to own. That\u201ds a difficult starting point for building confidence.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tSwanson said over time, as these AI tools improve in accuracy and consumers develop a working understanding of what agentic shopping can and can\u2019t do, \u201dthe trust calculus will shift. We\u2019ve seen this pattern before, like when consumers were deeply skeptical of storing credit cards online, of one-click purchasing, of auto-replenishment subscriptions. Each of those required an adoption curve where early friction gave way to comfort through repeated positive experience.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tRegarding other implications of AI policies, there is also regulatory scrutiny to be considered. For example, the EU\u2019s proposed AI Liability Directive \u201cwould place the burden on the deployer, not the consumer, in high-risk scenarios,\u201d Swanson said, adding that U.S. regulators, state attorneys general, and the FTC \u201care watching how agentic commerce unfolds and consumer-unfriendly terms could accelerate intervention.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tSwanson said these new systems also risk creating a divided experience. While tech-literate consumers might navigate the pitfalls successfully, more vulnerable groups\u2014such as the elderly or those less comfortable with technology\u2014are left wide open to errors and exploitation.<\/p>\n

\n\tHowever, there is a massive opportunity for a retailer or brand to lead with integrity. The first retailer to stop making excuses and actually guarantee their AI\u2019s accuracy\u2014taking financial responsibility for its mistakes\u2014will win a level of consumer trust that no marketing campaign can buy.<\/p>\n

\n\tRachid Wehbi, founder and CEO of Sell The Trend, an AI-powered ecommerce platform that is designed to help entrepreneurs discover winning products, analyze trends, and grow profitable online stores, expects retailers will be slow in AI adoption as shoppers feel they are taking on the risk with AI policies.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cThere is also the issue of consent, transparency, risk, liability, and responsibility for biased, incomplete, or commercially driven recommendations,\u201d Wehbi said. \u201cThe retail AI sector winners will be those who combine smart AI with customer-first accountability, automation, and uncomplicated reversals.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Earlier this year at the National Retail Federation (NRF) Big Show in New York, everything was about AI\u2014from…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":4254,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[24,25,3990,134],"class_list":{"0":"post-4253","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-ai","8":"tag-ai","9":"tag-artificial-intelligence","10":"tag-retail-technology","11":"tag-technology"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4253","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4253"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4253\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/4254"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4253"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4253"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4253"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}