Many buyers expect supply chain software will slash costs and take performance to new levels, but survey results show that nearly half of the implementations have not produced the expected return.
Supply chain organizations regularly make major investments in software, hoping to see a significant increase in productivity or cost savings. Yet one out of every two supply chain software deployments is not delivering the expected return on the investment, according to the results of a survey of 215 readers of CSCMP's Supply Chain Quarterly and its sister publication DC Velocity. Conducted by Boston-based Nucleus Research, the study looked at which applications are most popular, what kind of payback they're providing, and the challenges users face in achieving a successful deployment.
The survey's insights are based on responses from a broad range of companies. Survey takers represented a variety of industries, with 29 percent coming from manufacturing, 21 percent from third-party logistics services, and 18 percent from wholesale distribution. Another 14 percent worked in retail, 6 percent in transportation, and the remaining 12 percent in "other" industries. Respondents also represented organizations of all sizes, with roughly a third of them working for companies with annual revenues of under US $100 million, a third for companies with revenues between $100 million and $1 billion, and a third for corporations with revenues over $1 billion.
[Figure 2] How are users applying business analytics software?Enlarge this image
WMS most commonly purchased
What kind of software are readers investing in? Warehouse management systems (WMS) topped the list, with 57 percent of respondents using this type of solution, followed by enterprise resource planning (ERP) software, transportation management software (TMS), and business analytics solutions. (For the full list, see Figure 1.) Nearly a quarter (23 percent) of survey takers said their company had purchased such software tools within the past year. WMS accounted for 21 percent of those purchases, TMS for another 10 percent, and business analytics represented 9 percent. The remaining 60 percent of purchases were split among a variety of other solutions.
The study found that different types of businesses favored different types of software. For example, manufacturers were the top users of WMS and warehouse control systems (WCS) as well as "control towers" (technology hubs that allow organizations to gather information and gain visibility for supply chain decision making) and solutions for demand planning, supply planning, and analytics. Companies in the wholesale distribution sector were the primary users of inventory optimization software, while third-party logistics service providers (3PLs) were the biggest users of TMS and yard management software. Labor management software usage was evenly split among manufacturers, retailers, and 3PLs, indicating that all three groups are seeking to optimize distribution center workforce performance. Finally—and surprisingly—slightly more manufacturers than retailers said they had deployed distributed order management systems (DOMs). DOMs, which are designed to help users determine the optimal location from which to fill a particular order (for instance, from store inventory versus distribution center stock), are generally regarded as a tool for retailers engaged in omnichannel commerce.
Company size also played a role in software use. For instance, 82 percent of respondents from companies with annual sales between US $1 billion and $5 billion were using a WMS, compared with only 47 percent of respondents from companies with less than $100 million in revenues. This may indicate that small companies still have a hard time justifying the software's expense.
What's holding analytics back?
The survey results for business analytics, also known as business intelligence software, are particularly interesting. These solutions help users gain insights into their operations and parlay them into process improvements. To find out how far readers had progressed in adopting these tools, our survey asked about their use of four types of analytics: descriptive (which detail what happened in the past and why), predictive (which foretell what might happen in a supply chain), prescriptive (which recommend courses of action), and "big data" analysis (which entails sifting through large quantities of information for operational insights).
Despite the current hype about business intelligence, only 41 percent of survey respondents said they were using them right now. Of the respondents in that subgroup, just over half (51 percent) are using descriptive analytics, 43 percent predictive analytics, and 17 percent prescriptive analytics. Thirty-three percent said they were engaging in big data analysis.
The majority of those analytics users—65 percent—are using the software for inventory management. Clearly, companies are struggling with the classic inventory challenge: determining how low they can go with respect to stock levels without sacrificing service. The second most common area was warehousing, cited by 56 percent. This likely reflects retailers' and manufacturers' desire to modify warehouse operations to meet the demands of omnichannel commerce. (See Figure 2 for the complete list.)
The flip side, of course, is that the majority of respondents—59 percent—are not using analytics at all. When asked why, 39 percent of the nonusers cited a lack of staff resources. Another 19 percent said they saw no value in it. Clearly the software vendors have to do more to convince potential clients that it's a worthwhile expenditure of time and money.
Given the issue of resources, it's not surprising that the biggest companies were the most likely to be using business analytics. Indeed top-tier companies—those with more than US $5 billion in annual revenues—had the highest adoption rate, at 65 percent. The next tier down—companies with revenues between $1 billion and $5 billion—had the second highest adoption rate, at 54 percent. Moreover, business intelligence often requires the help of outside experts to mine the data for operational insights. It would stand to reason that bigger, better-capitalized companies would be in a better position to take advantage of this technology.
Disappointing ROI
Since a software purchase can run into the thousands of dollars, it's hardly surprising that companies would be looking for a significant payback. However, many respondents expressed disappointment with their software implementations. Only 48 percent reported that they had realized the expected return on investment (ROI), while 18 percent said they had not. Another 34 percent were uncertain as to whether the software had met their company's expectations for ROI.
As for the reasons behind the disappointment, one common complaint was that the vendor had oversold the software's potential for improving performance. One reader wrote about a WMS deployment: "Support and maintenance continued to bleed cash as the products overpromised and underperformed." Another reader reported that a WMS deployment had resulted in "cost overruns, project delays, a large number of defects, and overall poor performance."
The survey also asked readers to name the biggest obstacle they faced in achieving a successful software deployment. First on the list was systems integration, cited by 31 percent. Next came lack of employee acceptance and support, cited by 21 percent. Rounding out the list were lack of information technology (IT) resources (19 percent), lack of good user training (10 percent), and absence of upper management support for software deployments (9 percent).
One option for companies looking to minimize software implementation costs and overcome some of these common obstacles is to take the cloud-based route—a model in which the application is hosted by the vendor (or a third party) on an off-site server and delivered via the Internet. Among other advantages, this allows the user to avoid a hefty capital outlay for software licenses as well as ongoing expenses for upgrades and maintenance. Plus, the user can configure the cloud application to its business needs instead of having to pay a programmer for custom coding.
And in fact, one-third of the survey respondents have done just that, opting to use cloud-based versions of at least some of their applications (TMS and business intelligence programs being the most popular cloud-based choices). When asked whether this had shortened the payback period, 53 percent of the cloud-based software users replied that it had.
All this suggests that when it comes to future software implementations, supply chain managers may want to consider going to the cloud. Not only are cloud-based applications likely to provide a quicker return on investment than traditional versions do, but they also tend to be easier to use. And more importantly, perhaps, they offer users a way around some of the most common hurdles to a successful software implementation, such as inadequate systems integration and lack of IT support.
Just 29% of supply chain organizations have the competitive characteristics they’ll need for future readiness, according to a Gartner survey released Tuesday. The survey focused on how organizations are preparing for future challenges and to keep their supply chains competitive.
Gartner surveyed 579 supply chain practitioners to determine the capabilities needed to manage the “future drivers of influence” on supply chains, which include artificial intelligence (AI) achievement and the ability to navigate new trade policies. According to the survey, the five competitive characteristics are: agility, resilience, regionalization, integrated ecosystems, and integrated enterprise strategy.
The survey analysis identified “leaders” among the respondents as supply chain organizations that have already developed at least three of the five competitive characteristics necessary to address the top five drivers of supply chain’s future.
Less than a third have met that threshold.
“Leaders shared a commitment to preparation through long-term, deliberate strategies, while non-leaders were more often focused on short-term priorities,” Pierfrancesco Manenti, vice president analyst in Gartner’s Supply Chain practice, said in a statement announcing the survey results.
“Most leaders have yet to invest in the most advanced technologies (e.g. real-time visibility, digital supply chain twin), but plan to do so in the next three-to-five years,” Manenti also said in the statement. “Leaders see technology as an enabler to their overall business strategies, while non-leaders more often invest in technology first, without having fully established their foundational capabilities.”
As part of the survey, respondents were asked to identify the future drivers of influence on supply chain performance over the next three to five years. The top five drivers are: achievement capability of AI (74%); the amount of new ESG regulations and trade policies being released (67%); geopolitical fight/transition for power (65%); control over data (62%); and talent scarcity (59%).
The analysis also identified four unique profiles of supply chain organizations, based on what their leaders deem as the most crucial capabilities for empowering their organizations over the next three to five years.
First, 54% of retailers are looking for ways to increase their financial recovery from returns. That’s because the cost to return a purchase averages 27% of the purchase price, which erases as much as 50% of the sales margin. But consumers have their own interests in mind: 76% of shoppers admit they’ve embellished or exaggerated the return reason to avoid a fee, a 39% increase from 2023 to 204.
Second, return experiences matter to consumers. A whopping 80% of shoppers stopped shopping at a retailer because of changes to the return policy—a 34% increase YoY.
Third, returns fraud and abuse is top-of-mind-for retailers, with wardrobing rising 38% in 2024. In fact, over two thirds (69%) of shoppers admit to wardrobing, which is the practice of buying an item for a specific reason or event and returning it after use. Shoppers also practice bracketing, or purchasing an item in a variety of colors or sizes and then returning all the unwanted options.
Fourth, returns come with a steep cost in terms of sustainability, with returns amounting to 8.4 billion pounds of landfill waste in 2023 alone.
“As returns have become an integral part of the shopper experience, retailers must balance meeting sky-high expectations with rising costs, environmental impact, and fraudulent behaviors,” Amena Ali, CEO of Optoro, said in the firm’s “2024 Returns Unwrapped” report. “By understanding shoppers’ behaviors and preferences around returns, retailers can create returns experiences that embrace their needs while driving deeper loyalty and protecting their bottom line.”
Facing an evolving supply chain landscape in 2025, companies are being forced to rethink their distribution strategies to cope with challenges like rising cost pressures, persistent labor shortages, and the complexities of managing SKU proliferation.
1. Optimize labor productivity and costs. Forward-thinking businesses are leveraging technology to get more done with fewer resources through approaches like slotting optimization, automation and robotics, and inventory visibility.
2. Maximize capacity with smart solutions. With e-commerce volumes rising, facilities need to handle more SKUs and orders without expanding their physical footprint. That can be achieved through high-density storage and dynamic throughput.
3. Streamline returns management. Returns are a growing challenge, thanks to the continued growth of e-commerce and the consumer practice of bracketing. Businesses can handle that with smarter reverse logistics processes like automated returns processing and reverse logistics visibility.
4. Accelerate order fulfillment with robotics. Robotic solutions are transforming the way orders are fulfilled, helping businesses meet customer expectations faster and more accurately than ever before by using autonomous mobile robots (AMRs and robotic picking.
5. Enhance end-of-line packaging. The final step in the supply chain is often the most visible to customers. So optimizing packaging processes can reduce costs, improve efficiency, and support sustainability goals through automated packaging systems and sustainability initiatives.
That clash has come as retailers have been hustling to adjust to pandemic swings like a renewed focus on e-commerce, then swiftly reimagining store experiences as foot traffic returned. But even as the dust settles from those changes, retailers are now facing renewed questions about how best to define their omnichannel strategy in a world where customers have increasing power and information.
The answer may come from a five-part strategy using integrated components to fortify omnichannel retail, EY said. The approach can unlock value and customer trust through great experiences, but only when implemented cohesively, not individually, EY warns.
The steps include:
1. Functional integration: Is your operating model and data infrastructure siloed between e-commerce and physical stores, or have you developed a cohesive unit centered around delivering seamless customer experience?
2. Customer insights: With consumer centricity at the heart of operations, are you analyzing all touch points to build a holistic view of preferences, behaviors, and buying patterns?
3. Next-generation inventory: Given the right customer insights, how are you utilizing advanced analytics to ensure inventory is optimized to meet demand precisely where and when it’s needed?
4. Distribution partnerships: Having ensured your customers find what they want where they want it, how are your distribution strategies adapting to deliver these choices to them swiftly and efficiently?
5. Real estate strategy: How is your real estate strategy interconnected with insights, inventory and distribution to enhance experience and maximize your footprint?
When approached cohesively, these efforts all build toward one overarching differentiator for retailers: a better customer experience that reaches from brand engagement and order placement through delivery and return, the EY study said. Amid continued volatility and an economy driven by complex customer demands, the retailers best set up to win are those that are striving to gain real-time visibility into stock levels, offer flexible fulfillment options and modernize merchandising through personalized and dynamic customer experiences.
Geopolitical rivalries, alliances, and aspirations are rewiring the global economy—and the imposition of new tariffs on foreign imports by the U.S. will accelerate that process, according to an analysis by Boston Consulting Group (BCG).
Without a broad increase in tariffs, world trade in goods will keep growing at an average of 2.9% annually for the next eight years, the firm forecasts in its report, “Great Powers, Geopolitics, and the Future of Trade.” But the routes goods travel will change markedly as North America reduces its dependence on China and China builds up its links with the Global South, which is cementing its power in the global trade map.
“Global trade is set to top $29 trillion by 2033, but the routes these goods will travel is changing at a remarkable pace,” Aparna Bharadwaj, managing director and partner at BCG, said in a release. “Trade lanes were already shifting from historical patterns and looming US tariffs will accelerate this. Navigating these new dynamics will be critical for any global business.”
To understand those changes, BCG modeled the direct impact of the 60/25/20 scenario (60% tariff on Chinese goods, a 25% on goods from Canada and Mexico, and a 20% on imports from all other countries). The results show that the tariffs would add $640 billion to the cost of importing goods from the top ten U.S. import nations, based on 2023 levels, unless alternative sources or suppliers are found.
In terms of product categories imported by the U.S., the greatest impact would be on imported auto parts and automotive vehicles, which would primarily affect trade with Mexico, the EU, and Japan. Consumer electronics, electrical machinery, and fashion goods would be most affected by higher tariffs on Chinese goods. Specifically, the report forecasts that a 60% tariff rate would add $61 billion to cost of importing consumer electronics products from China into the U.S.