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.
ReposiTrak, a global food traceability network operator, will partner with Upshop, a provider of store operations technology for food retailers, to create an end-to-end grocery traceability solution that reaches from the supply chain to the retail store, the firms said today.
The partnership creates a data connection between suppliers and the retail store. It works by integrating Salt Lake City-based ReposiTrak’s network of thousands of suppliers and their traceability shipment data with Austin, Texas-based Upshop’s network of more than 450 retailers and their retail stores.
That accomplishment is important because it will allow food sector trading partners to meet the U.S. FDA’s Food Safety Modernization Act Section 204d (FSMA 204) requirements that they must create and store complete traceability records for certain foods.
And according to ReposiTrak and Upshop, the traceability solution may also unlock potential business benefits. It could do that by creating margin and growth opportunities in stores by connecting supply chain data with store data, thus allowing users to optimize inventory, labor, and customer experience management automation.
"Traceability requires data from the supply chain and – importantly – confirmation at the retail store that the proper and accurate lot code data from each shipment has been captured when the product is received. The missing piece for us has been the supply chain data. ReposiTrak is the leader in capturing and managing supply chain data, starting at the suppliers. Together, we can deliver a single, comprehensive traceability solution," Mark Hawthorne, chief innovation and strategy officer at Upshop, said in a release.
"Once the data is flowing the benefits are compounding. Traceability data can be used to improve food safety, reduce invoice discrepancies, and identify ways to reduce waste and improve efficiencies throughout the store,” Hawthorne said.
Under FSMA 204, retailers are required by law to track Key Data Elements (KDEs) to the store-level for every shipment containing high-risk food items from the Food Traceability List (FTL). ReposiTrak and Upshop say that major industry retailers have made public commitments to traceability, announcing programs that require more traceability data for all food product on a faster timeline. The efforts of those retailers have activated the industry, motivating others to institute traceability programs now, ahead of the FDA’s enforcement deadline of January 20, 2026.
Inclusive procurement practices can fuel economic growth and create jobs worldwide through increased partnerships with small and diverse suppliers, according to a study from the Illinois firm Supplier.io.
The firm’s “2024 Supplier Diversity Economic Impact Report” found that $168 billion spent directly with those suppliers generated a total economic impact of $303 billion. That analysis can help supplier diversity managers and chief procurement officers implement programs that grow diversity spend, improve supply chain competitiveness, and increase brand value, the firm said.
The companies featured in Supplier.io’s report collectively supported more than 710,000 direct jobs and contributed $60 billion in direct wages through their investments in small and diverse suppliers. According to the analysis, those purchases created a ripple effect, supporting over 1.4 million jobs and driving $105 billion in total income when factoring in direct, indirect, and induced economic impacts.
“At Supplier.io, we believe that empowering businesses with advanced supplier intelligence not only enhances their operational resilience but also significantly mitigates risks,” Aylin Basom, CEO of Supplier.io, said in a release. “Our platform provides critical insights that drive efficiency and innovation, enabling companies to find and invest in small and diverse suppliers. This approach helps build stronger, more reliable supply chains.”
Logistics industry growth slowed in December due to a seasonal wind-down of inventory and following one of the busiest holiday shopping seasons on record, according to the latest Logistics Managers’ Index (LMI) report, released this week.
The monthly LMI was 57.3 in December, down more than a percentage point from November’s reading of 58.4. Despite the slowdown, economic activity across the industry continued to expand, as an LMI reading above 50 indicates growth and a reading below 50 indicates contraction.
The LMI researchers said the monthly conditions were largely due to seasonal drawdowns in inventory levels—and the associated costs of holding them—at the retail level. The LMI’s Inventory Levels index registered 50, falling from 56.1 in November. That reduction also affected warehousing capacity, which slowed but remained in expansion mode: The LMI’s warehousing capacity index fell 7 points to a reading of 61.6.
December’s results reflect a continued trend toward more typical industry growth patterns following recent years of volatility—and they point to a successful peak holiday season as well.
“Retailers were clearly correct in their bet to stock [up] on goods ahead of the holiday season,” the LMI researchers wrote in their monthly report. “Holiday sales from November until Christmas Eve were up 3.8% year-over-year according to Mastercard. This was largely driven by a 6.7% increase in e-commerce sales, although in-person spending was up 2.9% as well.”
And those results came during a compressed peak shopping cycle.
“The increase in spending came despite the shorter holiday season due to the late Thanksgiving,” the researchers also wrote, citing National Retail Federation (NRF) estimates that U.S. shoppers spent just short of a trillion dollars in November and December, making it the busiest holiday season of all time.
The LMI is a monthly survey of logistics managers from across the country. It tracks industry growth overall and across eight areas: inventory levels and costs; warehousing capacity, utilization, and prices; and transportation capacity, utilization, and prices. The report is released monthly by researchers from Arizona State University, Colorado State University, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rutgers University, and the University of Nevada, Reno, in conjunction with the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP).
As U.S. small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) face an uncertain business landscape in 2025, a substantial majority (67%) expect positive growth in the new year compared to 2024, according to a survey from DHL.
However, the survey also showed that businesses could face a rocky road to reach that goal, as they navigate a complex environment of regulatory/policy shifts and global market volatility. Both those issues were cited as top challenges by 36% of respondents, followed by staffing/talent retention (11%) and digital threats and cyber attacks (2%).
Against that backdrop, SMEs said that the biggest opportunity for growth in 2025 lies in expanding into new markets (40%), followed by economic improvements (31%) and implementing new technologies (14%).
As the U.S. prepares for a broad shift in political leadership in Washington after a contentious election, the SMEs in DHL’s survey were likely split evenly on their opinion about the impact of regulatory and policy changes. A plurality of 40% were on the fence (uncertain, still evaluating), followed by 24% who believe regulatory changes could negatively impact growth, 20% who see these changes as having a positive impact, and 16% predicting no impact on growth at all.
That uncertainty also triggered a split when respondents were asked how they planned to adjust their strategy in 2025 in response to changes in the policy or regulatory landscape. The largest portion (38%) of SMEs said they remained uncertain or still evaluating, followed by 30% who will make minor adjustments, 19% will maintain their current approach, and 13% who were willing to significantly adjust their approach.
Specifically, the two sides remain at odds over provisions related to the deployment of semi-automated technologies like rail-mounted gantry cranes, according to an analysis by the Kansas-based 3PL Noatum Logistics. The ILA has strongly opposed further automation, arguing it threatens dockworker protections, while the USMX contends that automation enhances productivity and can create long-term opportunities for labor.
In fact, U.S. importers are already taking action to prevent the impact of such a strike, “pulling forward” their container shipments by rushing imports to earlier dates on the calendar, according to analysis by supply chain visibility provider Project44. That strategy can help companies to build enough safety stock to dampen the damage of events like the strike and like the steep tariffs being threatened by the incoming Trump administration.
Likewise, some ocean carriers have already instituted January surcharges in pre-emption of possible labor action, which could support inbound ocean rates if a strike occurs, according to freight market analysts with TD Cowen. In the meantime, the outcome of the new negotiations are seen with “significant uncertainty,” due to the contentious history of the discussion and to the timing of the talks that overlap with a transition between two White House regimes, analysts said.