Should companies continue to follow a just-in-time inventory management strategy? Or should they go back to holding safety stock just in case stockouts occur? The answer is a little bit of both.
Jonathan Byrnes (jlbyrnes@mit.edu) is a senior lecturer at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and is founder and chairman of Profit Isle, a SaaS profit-analytics Enterprise Profit Management company. He coauthor of the recently published book Choose Your Customer: How to Compete Against the Digital Giants and Thrive.
John Wass is CEO of Profit Isle and former senior vice president of Staples. He is a co-author of the recently published book, Choose Your Customer: How to Compete Against the Digital Giants and Thrive.
A November Wall Street Journal headline declared, “Companies Grapple with Post-Pandemic Inventories Dilemma.” The first paragraph read, “Companies are wrestling with how big their inventories should be, since the pandemic highlighted the danger of having both too much and too little stored away.” According to the article, the most important inventory question facing managers today is whether their supply chains should be just-in-time (with low inventories) or just-in-case (with high inventories).
Two important principles will enable managers to answer this question today:
The right amount of inventory for a particular product serving a specific customer depends on the customer’s profitability and the product’s demand pattern (in other words, is demand steady or erratic); and
The right definition of excellent service is always keeping your promises to your customers, but you don’t have to (and should not) make the same promises to all customers.
In other words, the right answer to the just-in-time vs. just-in-case question is both; companies should run multiple parallel supply chains with the supply chain structure and inventory strategy tailored to the specific customer and product.
In the past, this was impossible to do because companies did not have adequate information on customer profitability and product demand patterns. Instead they had to watch broad aggregate financial metrics like revenue, gross margin, and cost. They also had to monitor aggregate supply chain metrics like the percent of complete on-time order shipments. As a result, service intervals (the time between when an order is received and when the customer receives the shipment) were typically the same for all customers. In that era, it made sense to have broad, companywide policies for inventory management, like just-in-time vs just-in-case.
But today, advance analytics and business intelligence tools, such as an enterprise profit management (EPM) system, can provide profitability metrics down to the transaction level. These systems can produce the profit and demand variance information needed to set the right inventory and service intervals for every product ordered by every customer. Because an EPM system tracks every order, managers can determine both every customer’s demand variance (order pattern) for every product they purchase and every customer’s profitability. This enables astute managers to make the right service interval promises to each customer for each product, which provides the basis for determining the right inventory levels for each customer-product set.
Managers across industries who use EPM systems typically find a characteristic customer profitability pattern:
20% of their customers typically generate about 150% of the company’s profits. These “Profit Peak” customers are their large, high-profit accounts. For these customers, the objective is to flawlessly meet their needs and find ways to create service innovations that grow these relationships.
30% percent of their customers are large, money-losing accounts that end up eroding about 50% of the profits gained from the “Profit Peak” customers. In our experience, the problem with these “Profit Drain” customers is rarely that they are being offered below-market pricing but rather that they are accruing excessively high operating costs. For example, the customer may be ordering too frequently or holding excessive safety stock. In many cases, these practices are costly for both companies but can often be easily reversed.
50% of their customers are small accounts that produce minimal profit but consume about 50% of a company’s resources. For these “Profit Desert” customers, the goal is to reduce the operating costs associated with serving them while growing the few that are development prospects.
When a company is able to identify which of the three profitability categories a customer falls into and what the demand/order pattern for the product is, it finally becomes feasible and practical to tailor its inventory strategy to the customer. The company can now individualize (and keep) its customer service promises.
Make the right promises
Figure 1 presents a matrix that shows example service intervals that a company might promise to its customers. The columns represent profit-based customer segments, while the rows represent steady- vs. variable-demand patterns.
[Figure 1] What service interval should you be providing? Enlarge this image
Profit Peak customers and steady-demand products: Your Profit Peak customers provide your core profitability. Your most important supply chain task is to give each profit peak customer what it needs every time (unless supply chain disruptions make this impossible for a time). Their service interval is set at one-day (or less).
The amount of inventory needed for your profit peak customers depends on their demand variance. (Actually, it depends on the degree to which you can forecast their demand; a customer may have a lot of variance, but if you can forecast it, you can plan your inventory purchases to match the customer’s demand peaks and valleys.)
High-profit customers with steady demand products (for example, major urban hospitals buying IV solutions) only require low inventory levels. Their supply chains should be “flow-through pipelines” with minimal inventory at each point. (In other words, inventory should be replenished at a steady rate at every point in the supply chain to match the customer’s steady volume of consumption. You should only hold just enough safety stock inventory to meet emergencies.)
Profit Peak customers with variable-demand products: High-profit customers with variable-demand products (for example, major urban hospitals trying a new type of safety glasses) warrant a lot of safety stock. For these critical customers, you need to carry enough just-in-case inventory to ensure that they will almost never run out of product.
If the local distribution center (DC) runs low on one of these products, you should expedite shipments from a central facility at no cost to the customer. Their service interval is set at one day, as well.
Profit Drain customers with steady-demand products: Profit Drain customers with steady-demand products (for example, distant mid-sized hospitals purchasing IV solutions) also require only low levels of inventory. They also should have flow-through pipeline supply chains. However, their steady demand means that you will not have to carry safety stock locally. If local stock is tight, they should have lower priority than your Profit Peak customers.
Here, the service interval again should be one day, with the understanding that it will stretch to two to three days on the rare occasions that your local DC is low on stock and reserving product for your Profit Peak customers. If they insist on getting faster service in these unusual occasions, they should bear the cost of expediting the product from a central warehouse.
Profit Drain customers with variable-demand products. If a large, money-losing customer has erratic demand for a product (for example, a distantly located mid-sized hospital buying fashionable flowered gowns), it is not necessary to hold high levels of local safety stock. Instead, you should set a service interval (perhaps three days) that enables you to bring stock in from a central warehouse. The safety stock inventories of these products in the local DC should be reserved for your higher priority Profit Peak customers.
Profit Desert customers with steady-demand products: Your Profit Desert segment is comprised of numerous small customers. Typically, the top quartile of this segment (arrayed in descending order by profit) is quite profitable, the bottom quartile is quite unprofitable, and the middle quartiles produce negligible profits. Although the aggregate demand is stable, the demand for a local DC serving these customers can be very unpredictable.
The top quartile Profit Desert customers should get priority on order fulfillment over the other three quartiles. The service interval for steady-demand products (for example, consumables ordered by small machine shops) might be set at three days. In most cases, your top quartile Profit Desert customers will receive their orders in one day, but if your large Profit Peak and Profit Drain customers have a surge in demand, the three-day service interval provides ample time to bring product in from a central warehouse while still meeting your service commitments. The other three quartiles of Profit Desert customers would typically have a three-day service interval.
Profit Desert customers with variable-demand products: The service interval for variable-demand products sold to customers in the Profit Desert segment (for example, a specialized machine tool needed by a small machine shop for an occasional project) might be set at five days. This will provide ample time to bring product in from a central warehouse while giving priority on DC stock to the Profit Peak and Profit Drain customers. Because the majority of products typically have variable demand, this will greatly reduce your overall inventory costs while maintaining your high service levels. If a Profit Desert customer needs a product quickly, it should pay the cost of expediting the product from a central warehouse.
Manage your account relationships
Tailoring your service intervals to match customer profitability and demand pattern will help you keep your inventory low while keeping your service level high. If you don’t tailor your inventory strategy, you risk facing stockouts for your Profit Peak customers or carrying expensive safety stock for the Profit Drain and Profit Desert customers (which is not economically justified). The key is to be clear in advance about the “rules” of how you will serve your customers. If you always keep these promises, your service level will be 100%.
This process might raise concerns that customers will leave for other suppliers with uniformly short service intervals. However, this is often not the case. Most major customers have their own in-house inventories and are simply issuing periodic replenishment orders. Oftentimes if the service interval is a few days, the customer can adequately plan for this. The real reason why most customers want very fast deliveries is that they do not trust the supplier to meet its commitments, and the reason why most suppliers can’t meet their commitments is because they make the same short-interval commitments to every customer. If you keep your service commitments 100% of the time (and accommodate the occasional actual emergency need), your customers will be fully satisfied. If your customers do complain about your service intervals, they have the option of working with you to bring your return on serving them up to a level that warrants a shorter service interval.
Moreover, the differentiated process described above commits to one-day (or less) service intervals for all Profit Peak customers on all products and even for Profit Drain customers’ steady products. Most Profit Drain customers can tolerate a short wait for variable-demand products, especially for periodic restocking orders. Your Profit Drain and Profit Desert customers should pay compensatory prices if they want uniformly quick service and not require you to make your Profit Peak customers cross-subsidize the losses that they cause.
Manage your supply chain(s)
This process of carrying the right inventory for each customer segment is very manageable. We have described only six business segments: Profit Peak customers, Profit Drain customers, and Profit Desert customers—each with ether steady or erratic demand.
In complex companies, this matrix can be expanded to address more customer segments (for example, special development accounts) and product types (for example, mission-critical parts). However, increasing the complexity quickly makes the system much more difficult to manage and maintain.
By tailoring their inventory strategy to the customer-profit segment, managers can boost their profitability by providing the right set of incentives for each segment:
Profit Peak customers get consistently fast service, with constant priority on inventory;
Profit Drain customers get appropriate service promises, which are always kept, and they have an incentive to engage with you to bring your profitability on serving them to Profit Peak levels (giving them priority on inventory);
Profit Desert customers get appropriate service promises, which they can rely on, and they have an incentive to grow their business and profitability to Profit Peak status.
This practical process enables you to define multiple parallel supply chains, each appropriate for a distinct business segment. This is the key to setting the right inventory level for each product, aligning them with your changing business, and using your supply chain to fuel your profitable growth.
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.
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.”