Ben Ames has spent 20 years as a journalist since starting out as a daily newspaper reporter in Pennsylvania in 1995. From 1999 forward, he has focused on business and technology reporting for a number of trade journals, beginning when he joined Design News and Modern Materials Handling magazines. Ames is author of the trail guide "Hiking Massachusetts" and is a graduate of the Columbia School of Journalism.
Once upon a time, the retail industry was a safe, predictable way to make a living. Businesses simply had to take delivery of inventory, stock the shelves, and greet eager customers at the door.
Sign on for a retail job in 2016, however, and you'd better buckle up for a wild ride. This industry is one of the fastest-changing sectors of the U.S. economy, with companies hustling to adapt to trends like drone delivery, virtual reality, and mobile commerce. One change looms over all the others, however: the rush to join the omnichannel revolution.
To get a better understanding of how companies are meeting the challenges of omnichannel commerce, DC Velocity and ARC Advisory Group, a Dedham, Mass., management consulting firm, teamed up to conduct our fourth annual survey on retail fulfillment practices. Respondents answered 37 questions on their approach to meeting current challenges in omnichannel commerce and their plans for the future.
The results showed that in spite of an array of new logistics strategies and processes, most retailers have simply bolted their new omnichannel operations onto existing infrastructure, fulfilling multiple order streams in the same DCs where they handle traditional store fulfillment. The survey statistics that follow tell the story of why, how, and where businesses are performing omnichannel fulfillment.
PRESERVE MARKET SHARE
When it comes to why companies embark on the omnichannel journey, the answer seems to be all about preserving their slice of the market. Asked for the top three reasons they were participating in omnichannel commerce or intended to do so, respondents said they wanted to boost sales, increase market share, and improve customer loyalty. Those responses finished far above cost-focused alternatives such as increasing margins, improving ability to rebalance inventory, decreasing markdowns, or reducing capital expenditures associated with building a new e-fulfillment warehouse.
We asked respondents which omnichannel capabilities they currently support, and they ranked the five options as follows:
Order at store, fulfill from warehouse (67 percent)
Return to store, even when goods are ordered online (65 percent)
Inventory rebalancing, shipping excess inventory from one store to another (54 percent)
Order at store, fulfill from another store (42 percent)
Parcel return, even when goods were bought in a store (32 percent)
As for how respondents fulfill online orders, the answers were all over the map: 75 percent said orders were fulfilled through a traditional DC that also handles e-commerce, 44 percent said orders were filled from a store, 38 percent said items were shipped directly from a manufacturer or supplier, and 32 percent use a Web-only DC. It should be noted that respondents were allowed to select more than one response, and as the percentages indicate, a number of those companies are using multiple methods. (See Exhibit 1.)
With three-quarters of retailers fulfilling orders from multiple channels in a single facility, that approach is clearly a foundation of omnichannel practice. And as our survey made clear, they're not backing off from that practice. Seventy-seven percent of respondents to this year's survey said they handled e-commerce fulfillment and traditional fulfillment at the same facility, an increase from the 69 percent who answered the same way in last year's survey. (See Exhibit 2.)
Retailers are taking orders from a diverse range of sources. In fact, when it comes to ringing up sales, it appears all doors are open: 86 percent said they took orders online (including mobile), 77 percent said brick and mortar, and 42 percent said call center and catalog. (Totals came to more than 100 percent because most businesses support multiple channels.)
Although many retailers are fulfilling orders from multiple channels in a single building, our survey also revealed that there is plenty of room for them to merge those operations more completely. When we asked whether respondents' e-fulfillment operations were segregated from traditional fulfillment, 59 percent of respondents said yes. That indicates that retailers run their e-commerce and traditional fulfillment streams in a single building, but use separate operations, employees, and inventory.
TOOLS OF THE TRADE
Within the warehouse, retailers are using a range of sophisticated software tools to manage their operations. When we asked respondents what technologies they used to support their omnichannel initiatives, the top seven answers were: warehouse management systems (WMS), demand management software, distributed order management (DOM) systems, total-landed-cost analytics software, inventory optimization software, transportation management systems (TMS), and labor/work force management systems (LMS). (See Exhibit 3.)
Retailers are investing in those tools because they expect e-commerce revenues will continue to rise, no matter where the fulfillment happens. As for where that fulfillment will happen, the situation appears to be in flux. Asked how they see e-commerce fulfillment locations changing over the next five years, 32 percent of respondents said they expected to see a rise in e-commerce orders fulfilled in traditional DCs, compared with 28 percent who expect to see more fulfillment taking place in stores and 19 percent who said Web-only DCs.
DELIVERING THE GOODS
So that's how the orders are sorted and picked, but how does the actual merchandise reach consumers' doorsteps? The omnichannel approach offers practitioners a dazzling array of options, from the latest high-tech drones to the do-it-yourself alternative: pick up in store.
We asked how retailers handled "last mile" deliveries and found that in practice, most retailers stuck with tried-and-true methods. The most common answer was courier delivery service (FedEx, UPS, etc.) at 43 percent, followed by a third-party logistics (3PL) partner at 23 percent, and arranging for items to be drop-shipped by partners at 20 percent. (See Exhibit 4.)
Some retailers are also experimenting with more creative alternatives, including deliveries made by store staff (via car, bicycle, foot, etc.) at 5 percent, drones at 2 percent, and crowdsourced delivery services (Deliv, Instacart, etc.) at 1 percent. And the future may hold even greater change. When we asked which delivery methods our respondents do not currently use but plan to use, the top three replies were crowdsourced delivery service with 8 percent, drop-shipped by partners also with 8 percent, and 3PL delivery partner at 7 percent.
Despite the rapid rise of omnichannel commerce, our survey revealed that e-commerce revenue has a long way to go before it passes sales from physical stores. When asked what percentage of their direct retail revenue currently came from each channel, respondents said 67 percent came from brick-and-mortar locations, 24 percent from online sites (including mobile), and 9 percent from call center and catalog sales. (See Exhibit 5.)
Overall, the survey indicated that omnichannel fulfillment remains in a state of flux. As retailers scramble to adjust to a shifting marketplace, they are experimenting with a wide variety of fulfillment practices and technologies. Stay tuned as DC Velocity continues to track the evolution of omnichannel fulfillment practices and shares the hard-won lessons of industry leaders.
ABOUT THE STUDY
This year's omnichannel study was conducted by ARC Advisory Group in conjunction with DC Velocity. ARC analyst Chris Cunnane oversaw the research and compiled the results. The 2016 study builds on research done last year in this area.
The study explored the details of DC operations to support omnichannel initiatives as well as how companies are handling the last-mile dilemma. The findings reported here are based on 109 responses. Respondents included logistics professionals from a variety of industries, who submitted answers between May and August of 2016.
As for the demographic breakdown, the majority of respondents (63 percent) sold goods through a combination of direct and indirect sales channels. Another 27 percent sold merchandise through direct retail only, and the remaining 10 percent through indirect sales channels only.
Congestion on U.S. highways is costing the trucking industry big, according to research from the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI), released today.
The group found that traffic congestion on U.S. highways added $108.8 billion in costs to the trucking industry in 2022, a record high. The information comes from ATRI’s Cost of Congestion study, which is part of the organization’s ongoing highway performance measurement research.
Total hours of congestion fell slightly compared to 2021 due to softening freight market conditions, but the cost of operating a truck increased at a much higher rate, according to the research. As a result, the overall cost of congestion increased by 15% year-over-year—a level equivalent to more than 430,000 commercial truck drivers sitting idle for one work year and an average cost of $7,588 for every registered combination truck.
The analysis also identified metropolitan delays and related impacts, showing that the top 10 most-congested states each experienced added costs of more than $8 billion. That list was led by Texas, at $9.17 billion in added costs; California, at $8.77 billion; and Florida, $8.44 billion. Rounding out the top 10 list were New York, Georgia, New Jersey, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and Tennessee. Combined, the top 10 states account for more than half of the trucking industry’s congestion costs nationwide—52%, according to the research.
The metro areas with the highest congestion costs include New York City, $6.68 billion; Miami, $3.2 billion; and Chicago, $3.14 billion.
ATRI’s analysis also found that the trucking industry wasted more than 6.4 billion gallons of diesel fuel in 2022 due to congestion, resulting in additional fuel costs of $32.1 billion.
ATRI used a combination of data sources, including its truck GPS database and Operational Costs study benchmarks, to calculate the impacts of trucking delays on major U.S. roadways.
There’s a photo from 1971 that John Kent, professor of supply chain management at the University of Arkansas, likes to show. It’s of a shaggy-haired 18-year-old named Glenn Cowan grinning at three-time world table tennis champion Zhuang Zedong, while holding a silk tapestry Zhuang had just given him. Cowan was a member of the U.S. table tennis team who participated in the 1971 World Table Tennis Championships in Nagoya, Japan. Story has it that one morning, he overslept and missed his bus to the tournament and had to hitch a ride with the Chinese national team and met and connected with Zhuang.
Cowan and Zhuang’s interaction led to an invitation for the U.S. team to visit China. At the time, the two countries were just beginning to emerge from a 20-year period of decidedly frosty relations, strict travel bans, and trade restrictions. The highly publicized trip signaled a willingness on both sides to renew relations and launched the term “pingpong diplomacy.”
Kent, who is a senior fellow at the George H. W. Bush Foundation for U.S.-China Relations, believes the photograph is a good reminder that some 50-odd years ago, the economies of the United States and China were not as tightly interwoven as they are today. At the time, the Nixon administration was looking to form closer political and economic ties between the two countries in hopes of reducing chances of future conflict (and to weaken alliances among Communist countries).
The signals coming out of Washington and Beijing are now, of course, much different than they were in the early 1970s. Instead of advocating for better relations, political rhetoric focuses on the need for the U.S. to “decouple” from China. Both Republicans and Democrats have warned that the U.S. economy is too dependent on goods manufactured in China. They see this dependency as a threat to economic strength, American jobs, supply chain resiliency, and national security.
Supply chain professionals, however, know that extricating ourselves from our reliance on Chinese manufacturing is easier said than done. Many pundits push for a “China + 1” strategy, where companies diversify their manufacturing and sourcing options beyond China. But in reality, that “plus one” is often a Chinese company operating in a different country or a non-Chinese manufacturer that is still heavily dependent on material or subcomponents made in China.
This is the problem when supply chain decisions are made on a global scale without input from supply chain professionals. In an article in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Kent argues that, “The discussions on supply chains mainly take place between government officials who typically bring many other competing issues and agendas to the table. Corporate entities—the individuals and companies directly impacted by supply chains—tend to be under-represented in the conversation.”
Kent is a proponent of what he calls “supply chain diplomacy,” where experts from academia and industry from the U.S. and China work collaboratively to create better, more efficient global supply chains. Take, for example, the “Peace Beans” project that Kent is involved with. This project, jointly formed by Zhejiang University and the Bush China Foundation, proposes balancing supply chains by exporting soybeans from Arkansas to tofu producers in China’s Yunnan province, and, in return, importing coffee beans grown in Yunnan to coffee roasters in Arkansas. Kent believes the operation could even use the same transportation equipment.
The benefits of working collaboratively—instead of continuing to build friction in the supply chain through tariffs and adversarial relationships—are numerous, according to Kent and his colleagues. They believe it would be much better if the two major world economies worked together on issues like global inflation, climate change, and artificial intelligence.
And such relations could play a significant role in strengthening world peace, particularly in light of ongoing tensions over Taiwan. Because, as Kent writes, “The 19th-century idea that ‘When goods don’t cross borders, soldiers will’ is as true today as ever. Perhaps more so.”
Hyster-Yale Materials Handling today announced its plans to fulfill the domestic manufacturing requirements of the Build America, Buy America (BABA) Act for certain portions of its lineup of forklift trucks and container handling equipment.
That means the Greenville, North Carolina-based company now plans to expand its existing American manufacturing with a targeted set of high-capacity models, including electric options, that align with the needs of infrastructure projects subject to BABA requirements. The company’s plans include determining the optimal production location in the United States, strategically expanding sourcing agreements to meet local material requirements, and further developing electric power options for high-capacity equipment.
As a part of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the BABA Act aims to increase the use of American-made materials in federally funded infrastructure projects across the U.S., Hyster-Yale says. It was enacted as part of a broader effort to boost domestic manufacturing and economic growth, and mandates that federal dollars allocated to infrastructure – such as roads, bridges, ports and public transit systems – must prioritize materials produced in the USA, including critical items like steel, iron and various construction materials.
Hyster-Yale’s footprint in the U.S. is spread across 10 locations, including three manufacturing facilities.
“Our leadership is fully invested in meeting the needs of businesses that require BABA-compliant material handling solutions,” Tony Salgado, Hyster-Yale’s chief operating officer, said in a release. “We are working to partner with our key domestic suppliers, as well as identifying how best to leverage our own American manufacturing footprint to deliver a competitive solution for our customers and stakeholders. But beyond mere compliance, and in line with the many areas of our business where we are evolving to better support our customers, our commitment remains steadfast. We are dedicated to delivering industry-leading standards in design, durability and performance — qualities that have become synonymous with our brands worldwide and that our customers have come to rely on and expect.”
In a separate move, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also gave its approval for the state to advance its Heavy-Duty Omnibus Rule, which is crafted to significantly reduce smog-forming nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from new heavy-duty, diesel-powered trucks.
Both rules are intended to deliver health benefits to California citizens affected by vehicle pollution, according to the environmental group Earthjustice. If the state gets federal approval for the final steps to become law, the rules mean that cars on the road in California will largely be zero-emissions a generation from now in the 2050s, accounting for the average vehicle lifespan of vehicles with internal combustion engine (ICE) power sold before that 2035 date.
“This might read like checking a bureaucratic box, but EPA’s approval is a critical step forward in protecting our lungs from pollution and our wallets from the expenses of combustion fuels,” Paul Cort, director of Earthjustice’s Right To Zero campaign, said in a release. “The gradual shift in car sales to zero-emissions models will cut smog and household costs while growing California’s clean energy workforce. Cutting truck pollution will help clear our skies of smog. EPA should now approve the remaining authorization requests from California to allow the state to clean its air and protect its residents.”
However, the truck drivers' industry group Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) pushed back against the federal decision allowing the Omnibus Low-NOx rule to advance. "The Omnibus Low-NOx waiver for California calls into question the policymaking process under the Biden administration's EPA. Purposefully injecting uncertainty into a $588 billion American industry is bad for our economy and makes no meaningful progress towards purported environmental goals," (OOIDA) President Todd Spencer said in a release. "EPA's credibility outside of radical environmental circles would have been better served by working with regulated industries rather than ramming through last-minute special interest favors. We look forward to working with the Trump administration's EPA in good faith towards achievable environmental outcomes.”
Editor's note:This article was revised on December 18 to add reaction from OOIDA.
A Canadian startup that provides AI-powered logistics solutions has gained $5.5 million in seed funding to support its concept of creating a digital platform for global trade, according to Toronto-based Starboard.
The round was led by Eclipse, with participation from previous backers Garuda Ventures and Everywhere Ventures. The firm says it will use its new backing to expand its engineering team in Toronto and accelerate its AI-driven product development to simplify supply chain complexities.
According to Starboard, the logistics industry is under immense pressure to adapt to the growing complexity of global trade, which has hit recent hurdles such as the strike at U.S. east and gulf coast ports. That situation calls for innovative solutions to streamline operations and reduce costs for operators.
As a potential solution, Starboard offers its flagship product, which it defines as an AI-based transportation management system (TMS) and rate management system that helps mid-sized freight forwarders operate more efficiently and win more business. More broadly, Starboard says it is building the virtual infrastructure for global trade, allowing freight companies to leverage AI and machine learning to optimize operations such as processing shipments in real time, reconciling invoices, and following up on payments.
"This investment is a pivotal step in our mission to unlock the power of AI for our customers," said Sumeet Trehan, Co-Founder and CEO of Starboard. "Global trade has long been plagued by inefficiencies that drive up costs and reduce competitiveness. Our platform is designed to empower SMB freight forwarders—the backbone of more than $20 trillion in global trade and $1 trillion in logistics spend—with the tools they need to thrive in this complex ecosystem."