Retailers can save big on inventory and shipping costs by filling e-commerce orders from brick-and-mortar stores. But the practice also carries some serious risks—like alienating in-store shoppers.
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.
If you’ve shopped in a brick-and-mortar store in recent months, you may have seen store employees acting strangely. Instead of restocking shelves or helping customers find goods, they’re on the floor picking inventory themselves, filling carts with items for e-commerce orders.
The trend is the latest way that exploding e-commerce demand has rocked the world of retail.
The advantages of filling online orders from store shelves are clear—retailers can save money by offering curbside pickup or same-day delivery to consumers who live nearby, instead of shipping those orders from distant warehouses. They also stand to realize major cost savings by serving both store and online customers from a single pool of inventory.
However, industry experts warn that there are drawbacks to the practice as well. For one thing, there’s the potential for traffic jams when consumers and employees all try to pick from the same inventory at once. For another, there’s the risk of alienating shoppers who may find themselves competing with store employees for items that are in short supply. And that’s to say nothing of the cost implications of devoting expensive urban real estate to tasks usually performed in warehouses in low-rent areas. Or the need to retrain workers for specialized shipping operations.
All this goes to say that as appealing as shifting to a store-based fulfillment may sound, it’s not a decision to be taken lightly. There’s more to it than simply having employees pivot from placing shelf goods into shopping carts to placing shelf goods into shipping cartons. In reality, it’s a complex calculation that requires retailers to weigh a host of sometimes competing factors that include real estate costs, training needs, and in-store shoppers’ experiences.
PRESERVING THE IN-STORE EXPERIENCE
It’s an issue Michele Dupré sees retailers struggle with every day. Dupré, who is group vice president at Verizon Enterprise Solutions with responsibility for enterprise customers in the retail, hospitality/travel, and distribution sectors, says companies from across the retail landscape are combing through their market data and statistics to determine whether it makes sense to perform e-commerce fulfillment in their stores.
What makes the decision so difficult, Dupré says, is that it forces retailers to balance the competing needs of on-site shoppers and digital shoppers. “Retailers are weighing the current obstacles, because the last thing you want to do is provide a bad experience, so the shopper doesn’t engage with the brand and you lose their business.”
Given the complexities involved, it’s no surprise that the retail industry has yet to settle on a single operating model, she adds. “It’s an ever-evolving and changing environment, as the sector continues to morph into co-existing digital and physical operations.”
SELECTIVE SERVICES
Of course, in-store fulfillment doesn’t have to be an “all or nothing” endeavor. One way to capture the savings of in-store fulfillment while avoiding clashes with in-store shoppers is to roll out the practice in only a few of a retailer’s stores within a given city, says Joe Dunlap, managing director for supply chain advisory with the real estate services and investment firm CBRE Group Inc.
“If a retailer has four, five, or six facilities in a given metro [area], it can still provide next-day time-in-transit service to the broader market by doing e-commerce fulfillment from a single location,” Dunlap says. “Maybe it’s overkill to ship from every store; you just need one in a given market.”
Another option might be to limit the types of e-commerce fulfillment services provided from a given brick-and-mortar outlet. For example, a retailer might decide to make “buy online/pick up from store” (BOPIS) service available at a given site but not the more ambitious ship-from-store service, which requires more employee involvement and training. Still other possibilities include shifting e-commerce activities to a nearby microfulfillment center (MFC) or to a “dark store” (one without live shoppers).
As for which strategies are gaining the most traction, the answer is not yet clear. “It’s still a little bit early to see trends here because property data doesn’t distinguish between those uses yet—for pure walk-in, BOPIS, or buy online/ship from store,” Dunlap says. “[Retailers are all performing] ongoing perpetual analysis as the infrastructure changes, volumes change, and consumer behavior adapts to these new shopping patterns.”
NO SILVER BULLET
As retailers continue to struggle with this issue, they’re looking to both high-tech and low-tech solutions, according to Jim Barnes, CEO of supply chain consulting and IT services firm enVista. On the low-tech side, the solutions can be as simple as scheduling e-commerce fulfillment work for off-peak times such as early mornings and late nights to minimize inconvenience to shoppers. “Stores don’t want … their sales associates to pick food during peak shopping times, when they might be competing with in-store shoppers for that last container of Chobani yogurt,” he says.
As for technology-based solutions, retailers are investing in handhelds and tablets as well as exploring their automation options—although progress on that front has been slow to date. For example, according to a white paper from enVista titled CMOs and CFOs Take Control: Don’t Let Your Ship From Store Strategy Break the Bank, less than 25 percent of retailers have well-defined, automated processes for ship from store.
Still, when it comes to multistep operations like ship from store, simply upgrading your technology is no silver bullet, Barnes warns. It’s more complicated than swapping out a basic order management system (OMS) for a “light” warehouse management system (WMS), he says.
“What you don’t want to do is think you can turn on your WMS and … be able to ship from store, because there are so many other variables,” Barnes adds. By way of example, he points to the need to train employees on how to package and ship delicate goods like lamps or glassware.
A LONG ROAD AHEAD
Launching omnichannel fulfillment operations within a brick-and-mortar store remains an enticing option for retailers caught between skyrocketing e-commerce demand and the need to keep shipping costs in check. But it also requires them to meet the sometimes competing needs of in-store and online shoppers. And when it comes to the question of how best to do that, industry analysts warn there’s no clear path forward yet.
“There is overlap between pure industrial and pure retail; there’s a gray space in between brick and mortar, pick up in store, and ship from store,” CBRE’s Dunlap says. “There are blurred lines between what’s an industrial space and what’s a retail space. There’s still a long road ahead.”
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.
Global trade will see a moderate rebound in 2025, likely growing by 3.6% in volume terms, helped by companies restocking and households renewing purchases of durable goods while reducing spending on services, according to a forecast from trade credit insurer Allianz Trade.
The end of the year for 2024 will also likely be supported by companies rushing to ship goods in anticipation of the higher tariffs likely to be imposed by the coming Trump administration, and other potential disruptions in the coming quarters, the report said.
However, that tailwind for global trade will likely shift to a headwind once the effects of a renewed but contained trade war are felt from the second half of 2025 and in full in 2026. As a result, Allianz Trade has throttled back its predictions, saying that global trade in volume will grow by 2.8% in 2025 (reduced by 0.2 percentage points vs. its previous forecast) and 2.3% in 2026 (reduced by 0.5 percentage points).
The same logic applies to Allianz Trade’s forecast for export prices in U.S. dollars, which the firm has now revised downward to predict growth reaching 2.3% in 2025 (reduced by 1.7 percentage points) and 4.1% in 2026 (reduced by 0.8 percentage points).
In the meantime, the rush to frontload imports into the U.S. is giving freight carriers an early Christmas present. According to Allianz Trade, data released last week showed Chinese exports rising by a robust 6.7% y/y in November. And imports of some consumer goods that have been threatened with a likely 25% tariff under the new Trump administration have outperformed even more, growing by nearly 20% y/y on average between July and September.