Pierre-Francois Thaler is co-CEO and co-founder of EcoVadis (ecovadis.com), a provider of a collaborative platform for measuring and rating corporate social responsibility in global supply chains.
A shift from mass delivery of pharmaceuticals will create exponentially more touch points throughout the supply chain. That could be a problem; even without these new layers,
most companies struggle to achieve visibility beyond their tier-one suppliers.
When there's a major scientific or medical breakthrough, there is pressure on the business community to deliver it to the masses as quickly as possible. From the combustion engine to penicillin, the pressing need for widespread distribution of new solutions tends to burden one behind-the-scenes area of business in particular: the supply chain.
One of the latest innovations poised to disrupt the supply chain is again coming from the pharmaceutical industry. Through the study of genomics and the use of big data, it's now possible to create personalized medication to provide better care for patients based on their unique biochemistry. Certain medications—for treating diseases like
breast cancer, for example—can now be modified to eliminate detrimental side effects that a small percentage of people suffer when using the standard version of those drugs. This can be done by identifying the gene that contributes to that rare response and tweaking the drug to treat only that tiny population. This is a major step away from the established methods of treatment through mass-produced drugs.
Just as this signals a shift in the way the medical industry thinks about treatment, it also ushers in a new era for the supply chain. It's not clear, though, that pharmaceutical companies and their suppliers are prepared for the changes to come. According to health-care journalist Martin Barrow, "While attention has focused on the potential of personalized medicine to improve outcomes, the impact on manufacturing and the downstream supply chain may have been underestimated."
Individualized drugs and related services will present the pharmaceutical industry with significant new challenges that run contrary to traditional strategies of drug production, storage, and distribution en masse. For example, even before the execution of delivery begins, pharmaceutical companies will likely be tasked with identifying new suppliers that can achieve the required level of mass—yet patient-specific—customization, on demand.
In this new scenario, manufacturers will need to implement a new set of tools, techniques, and supplies to source and implement the testing and validation of each unique batch of drugs. Intellectual property may also be perilously exposed, as new players are brought into the sourcing process. The pharmaceutical industry will need solutions that help thoroughly vet this process to be sure that suppliers at every stage are not only compliant with regulations, but also are top performers that can meet the on-demand requirement of personalized treatment. "Batch sizes will shrink, requiring the development of more nimble systems perhaps capable of making several different products that same day while maintaining control and integrity of each product,"
said Barrow.
In addition to the speed required under this new model, the pharmaceutical supply chain will become more complex than ever. The shift away from mass delivery will create exponentially more touch points throughout the process that starts with drug manufacturing and ends with a patient filling a personalized prescription. Even without these additional layers in the supply chain,
most companies struggle to achieve a depth of visibility beyond their tier-one suppliers. This is already
one of the most difficult challenges for procurement professionals today, and this issue will be exacerbated in pharma with the adoption of personalized medicine.
Frighteningly, further down in the supply chain, among the multiple levels of sub-suppliers, is where the most difficult-to-detect risks often lie. Keeping track of what tier-one suppliers are doing isn't a challenge for most companies, but it becomes increasingly difficult to monitor the next tier—your suppliers' suppliers—and the next tier, and so on. Some suppliers might be reluctant to put a large multinational corporation into direct contact with their own suppliers out of fear of being bypassed, or worse, in an effort to conceal misconduct. Without a solution to connect the dots, the opacity created by a complex network of suppliers increases risk as information gets inadvertently lost or even deliberately buried by bad actors deep in the supply chain. This giant, high-stakes game of "telephone" only gets trickier with more players involved, as is necessary to deliver personalized medicine.
Not understanding the intricate details of the supply chain can expose pharma companies to major threats. As pharmaceutical organizations react to the shift toward personalized medicine, they must consider the logistics capabilities that will be necessary to keep their supply chains up to speed. These are unlikely to be minor changes. For example, wholly new partnerships may have to be negotiated, especially in the "last mile" of the supply chain, where delivery and storage of customized drugs will look vastly different from the legacy processes that delivered and stored mass treatments. Moreover, the ethics, responsibility, and sustainability of suppliers are critically important to the broader organization in any industry, but especially when pharmaceuticals and potentially life-altering medication is involved. Increased transparency could be the factor that makes or breaks successful efforts; knowing exactly where, when, and how materials are sourced, manufactured, and distributed provides the opportunity to mitigate risk and prevent potential health, safety, and public relations blunders in the future.
"Future supply chains must adjust much more quickly with the right set of traceability capabilities to report on where the drugs went, who bought them, and how they were purchased, if not on the individual level, then at least at the wholesale and pharmacy level," according to Barrow. Pharmaceutical organizations need to not only put in place a new process to centralize supplier assessments and help eliminate silos that contribute to opacity but also get buy in from the decision makers in each team or function. Before the benefits of personalized medicine can reach the millions of people who need potentially life-saving treatment, it's the supply chain that will need to make life-or-death decisions in order to bring this latest breakthrough to fruition.
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).
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.
That percentage is even greater than the 13.21% of total retail sales that were returned. Measured in dollars, returns (including both legitimate and fraudulent) last year reached $685 billion out of the $5.19 trillion in total retail sales.
“It’s clear why retailers want to limit bad actors that exhibit fraudulent and abusive returns behavior, but the reality is that they are finding stricter returns policies are not reducing the returns fraud they face,” Michael Osborne, CEO of Appriss Retail, said in a release.
Specifically, the report lists the leading types of returns fraud and abuse reported by retailers in 2024, including findings that:
60% of retailers surveyed reported incidents of “wardrobing,” or the act of consumers buying an item, using the merchandise, and then returning it.
55% cited cases of returning an item obtained through fraudulent or stolen tender, such as stolen credit cards, counterfeit bills, gift cards obtained through fraudulent means or fraudulent checks.
48% of retailers faced occurrences of returning stolen merchandise.
Together, those statistics show that the problem remains prevalent despite growing efforts by retailers to curb retail returns fraud through stricter returns policies, while still offering a sufficiently open returns policy to keep customers loyal, they said.
“Returns are a significant cost for retailers, and the rise of online shopping could increase this trend,” Kevin Mahoney, managing director, retail, Deloitte Consulting LLP, said. “As retailers implement policies to address this issue, they should avoid negatively affecting customer loyalty and retention. Effective policies should reduce losses for the retailer while minimally impacting the customer experience. This approach can be crucial for long-term success.”