TRADITIONAL STUDIES OF STORE THEFT HAVE SEVERAL WEAKNESSES. FIRST, THEIR FOCUS ON SHOPLIFTING HAS LED TO NEGLECT OF THE UNDOUBTEDLY GREATER PROBLEM OF EMPLOYEE THEFT. SECOND, THEIR METHODOLOGICAL PROBLEMS OF REPRESENTATIVENESS AND BIAS ARE INHERENT IN THEIR DEPENDENCE ON ANALYSES OF RECORDED OFFENDERS. THIRD, DEFINITIONAL DIFFICULTIES FOR TERMS SUCH AS SHRINKAGE (ERRORS, BURGLARY, EMPLOYEE THEFT, AND SHOPLIFTING) HAVE NOT BEEN OVERCOME. AS A RESULT,TRADITIONAL RESEARCH HAS LED TO INACCURATE CONCLUSIONS RESULTING IN POTENTIALLY COST-INEFFECTIVE PROCEDURES. THE PROPOSED EVERYDAY PERSPECTIVE EMPHASIZES INTERPRETIVE PROCEDURES BASED ON J. D. DOUGLAS'S SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES OF OBJECTIVITY AND INTERPRETATION (1971). SHOPLIFTING IS VIEWED AS A THEORETICAL CATEGORIZATION. TO INVESTIGATE THE SHOPLIFTING PROBLEM, PARTICIPANT OBSERVERS MIGHT INVESTIGATE THE WORLDS OF THE SHOPLIFTER AND THE STORE DETECTIVE TO DISCOVER, FOR EXAMPLE, WHAT MAKES A PERSON LOOK SUSPICIOUS AND HOW SHOPLIFTERS OPERATE. THE SOCIAL CONTEXT WOULD BE EMPHASIZED TO DETERMINE WHY SOME OFFENDERS ARE PROSECUTED AND OTHERS RELEASED, AND, THEREFORE, HOW SHOPLIFTING STATISTICS ARE PRODUCED. SIMILARLY, THE EVERYDAY PERSPECTIVE OF EMPLOYEE THEFT WOULD FOCUS ON THE SHOP FLOOR AND WOULD QUESTION WHY AND HOW THE TWO FORMS OF THEFT ARE DISTINGUISHED. RESEARCH BASED ON THIS APPROACH WOULD GIVE A BROAD PICTURE OF SHOPLIFTING AS IT HAPPENS. RESEARCH MIGHT DISPEL MYTHS ABOUT TYPICAL OFFENDERS, AND, MORE IMPORTANT, WOULD SUPPORT THE HYPOTHESIS THAT EMPLOYEE THEFT AND SHOPLIFTING ARE PARTS OF THE SAME PROBLEM AND MUST THEREFORE BE CONSIDERED TOGETHER. REFERENCES ARE INCLUDED. (CFW)