Six defining challenges of omnichannel fulfillment
Retailers need to carefully craft an omnichannel strategy that effectively integrates online and offline distribution channels while complementing the company’s overall go-to-market strategy. It also needs to outline how to allocate inventory, where and when to fulfill orders, and how to handle returns.
The rapid growth of mobile technology and e-commerce continues to change the retail landscape dramatically. Although the growth in e-commerce has moderated since the height of the Covid-19 pandemic, recent forecasts from the National Retail Federation (NRF) indicate online sales continue to increase. The NRF projects that nonstore and online sales will grow between 10% and 12% year over year in 2023, to $1.41–$1.43 trillion.1 However, according to NRF, most of those sales are being driven by a multichannel or omnichannel approach with brick-and-mortar stores still remaining the primary point of purchase for 70% of retail sales. As a result, the line between traditional brick-and-mortar and pure-play e-commerce retailers is blurring. Both types of players are now omnichannel retailers in response to rising consumer demand for multiple buying channels.
This type of major shift in sales channels comes with many new challenges and opportunities. To gain a better sense of where retailers’ greatest concerns lie and how they are responding, the Omnichannel Lab at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Center for Transportation & Logistics (MIT CTL) conducted an online survey of U.S. retailers from October 2022 to April 2023 in collaboration with CSCMP’s Supply Chain Quarterly’s sister publication DC Velocity.2 Of the 270 people who responded to the survey, 68% said that order fulfillment is the area of supply chain management that is most impacted by the growth in e-commerce. (See infographic on pages 12–13 for survey results.)
We believe that an effective omnichannel strategy must address the challenges of omnichannel fulfillment. Based on our research of omnichannel supply chains, including an analysis of those 270 survey responses, we have identified six omnichannel fulfillment challenges that companies must address in order to be successful in today’s continually changing retail space. The answer in many cases, we believe, will involve adopting innovative technology and processes.
Challenge #1: Align your omnichannel strategy
The first challenge is the need to revisit the company’s strategic plans. To succeed in implementing an omnichannel strategy, it must be aligned with the company’s corporate and supply chain strategies. In our survey, 54% of respondents indicated that redefining company strategy to provide a seamless omnichannel experience for customers was the number one challenge companies face when shaping omnichannel distribution strategies. However, those retail companies that do take such a strategic approach tend to be more successful.
Challenge #2: Integrate online and offline channels
To be successful in the omnichannel realm, retailers need to integrate online and offline channels to offer a seamless customer experience. Integrating these channels means using the same existing facilities (for example, stores and distribution centers) to prepare online and offline orders, or adding new facilities (for example, online distribution centers) to the network and managing the entire network as part of the same supply chain. In contrast, previous multichannel strategies like the one followed by Dell in 2000 used a separate network to fulfill and deliver products.
Sixty percent of survey respondents indicated that integrating online and offline channels was a top challenge that they faced when it came to creating an omnichannel distribution strategy. That’s not surprising as adding channels typically increases network complexity, and in most cases, retail companies need to redesign their networks, rethink the roles of stores, and add new fulfillment options. Indeed, 47% of respondents in our survey indicated that network design is one of the supply chain areas highly impacted by e-commerce.
Zara, a major player in the fast-fashion industry, is a good example of a company that implemented these changes.5 The retailer introduced online distribution centers and overflow warehouses in its existing network to fully integrate its online and offline distribution channels. Also, Zara’s flagship stores created a unified customer experience across channels by offering a larger assortment of products closer to the range of products offered online and employed stores to fulfill online orders.
Challenge #3: Decide how to allocate inventory
Once the network is redesigned, retailers must decide where and how to allocate inventory. The challenge here is keeping the right inventory level in each channel location that allows the company to meet its service level commitments without incurring excessive inventory costs. Some configurations decentralize inventory to move stock closer to the customer and to facilitate fast deliveries. Others opted for a centralized inventory model, allowing inventory pooling that typically lowers inventory volumes and stockout rates. There are pros and cons associated with each decision.
Forty-eight percent of survey respondents identified positioning the correct item at the right location as one of the top pain points when implementing omnichannel distribution strategies. And 30% indicated they are focusing on item allocation/inventory placement.
The higher the number of channels managed, the more complexity is built into the network. In the survey, 37% of respondents reported managing a wider variety of stock-keeping units (SKUs) and 12% confirmed they manage lower orders per SKU than they had previously. Both findings point to more inventory management complexity in omnichannel supply chains.
Challenge #4: Decide when to deliver
Some reports indicate that the race to provide faster delivery times is slowing down in the post-Covid era, which might offer some relief to retailers as fast shipping options typically come a high cost. However, 36% of our survey respondents indicated they are still looking into speeding up deliveries to support faster shipping.
Retailers must weigh the costs versus the benefits and decide which combinations of shipping options (such as 2-5 business days, next-day, same-day, and/or two-hour delivery) they will offer to meet their customers’ needs and the demands of different product types. Also, they must configure their inventory management strategies to support their chosen delivery offerings.
Challenge #5: Decide where to fulfill the order
More than a third of survey respondents indicated that deciding where to fulfill omnichannel orders poses a major challenge to today’s retail operations.
Different companies use different types of facilities to fulfill online orders. When order volume justifies it, some companies opt for dedicated e-fulfillment centers. Some brick-and-mortar retailers use their stores to fulfill online orders, while others employ their backroom spaces or “warerooms” for this work. Another option is to use dark stores or micro fulfillment centers.
Deciding which approach works best for their operations plays a key role in the formation of a company’s omnichannel strategy. Fulfillment cost, speed, and capacity are factors retailers must consider when deciding which solutions are the most appropriate. These varied choices are reflected in our survey findings. To fulfill online orders, respondents confirmed they are transforming existing facilities (22%), investing in more internal warehouse capacity (25%), and increasing warehouse capacity through outsourcing (19%).
Challenge #6: Manage commercial returns
As the growth of e-commerce has accelerated, the problem of how to manage product returns has grown both in complexity and scale. One study estimates that $816 billion worth of merchandise was returned in 2022, which represents 16.5% of sales on average.6 Return rates for online sales are higher than for traditional brick-and-mortar retailing (20–25% for digital sales compared to 10-15% for brick-and-mortar). Forty-six percent of respondents in our survey indicated that the growth in e-commerce highly impacts the volume of returns.
One of the reasons for this outcome is that companies use returns policies to replace the customer’s experience of being able to test a product in the store. Customers can buy items, receive and try them, and return the purchases if they are unsatisfied. This policy has made customers more willing to buy an item online that traditionally they would have been reluctant to purchase without trying it on or testing it out first. Excessive returns rates, however, are associated with multiple problems for retailers, including inflated costs for processing, shipping, handling returns as well as restocking and disposing of returned items. To continue to be successful in the online retailing world, companies will have to find an effective way to balance the customers’ need to test out products and the high cost of easy returns.
Innovation toolbox
The need to develop omnichannel fulfillment strategies that meet the demands of an unforgiving customer base represents one of the main strategic challenges retailers face today. Controlling costs while maintaining high service levels is a particularly thorny issue. Fifty-one percent of survey respondents identified higher logistics costs as their number one pain point when implementing omnichannel distribution strategies.
The good news is that retailers have a diverse set of innovative tools at their disposal to overcome these challenges. Notably, 37% of survey respondents said they are increasing levels of automation. Here are some of the innovations that retailers are deploying.
Mobile point of sale (MPOS). Retailers like Apple, Nike, and Adidas are trying to change and improve the in-store customer experience by utilizing digital tools in the brick-and-mortar store. MPOS allows customers to pay directly to store associates rather than visiting cashiers, thus avoiding lanes and wait times. The redesign of the in-store customer experience to incorporate some elements of the online customer experience can help to address challenge #1 (align your omnichannel strategy and your overall corporate strategy). For example, these changes can be made as part of an overall effort to make an organization more customer-centric.
Endless aisle. This technology brings inventory visibility to customers and staff through mobile touchpoints (for example, utilizing mobile device or touch screens located in the store to browse and order products that are not available in-store). Adidas is one company that uses this technology to display stock of available online products that can be shipped from their e-fulfillment centers. This technology enables stock visibility and allows customers to buy online from the store. The solution contributes to challenge #2 (integrate online and offline channels) by helping retailers provide customers with a seamless, integrated omnichannel experience. It also contributes to challenge #1 (redefining the company strategy), since the integration of channels should be part of the company’s supply chain strategy and business proposition.
Radio frequency identification (RFID). This technology uses electromagnetic fields to automatically identify and track tags attached to every single item. It allows retailers to improve inventory visibility and accuracy. RFID technology enables retailers to track their inventory in the store and across their supply chain networks. The technology also allows retailers to use in-store inventory to fulfill online orders, provides more timely information on product replenishment needs, and helps to reduce inventory levels.
Improved inventory visibility and inventory accuracy are issues covered in challenges #2 (integrate online and offline channels) and #3 (decide how to allocate inventory).
Augmented reality (AR) and virtual dressing rooms. This application of AR technology enhances the in-person experience, thereby reducing returns volumes, issues tackled in challenge #6 (managing returns) above. AR apps allow customers to see 3D images of products and provide better information about product fit. AR dressing rooms with RFID readers improve customers’ in-store experience (which helps to address challenge #1), increase sales, and allow retailers to offer online products to customers in-store. Implementing and rolling out this kind of real-time visibility technology takes time, requires flexible and agile processes that evolve jointly with the technology, and should be aligned with the SC strategy.
Retailers are also using technology to speed up the fulfillment of online orders. For example, in our survey, 30% of respondents confirmed they are using real-time inventory management solutions in this way. Cobots, robotic arm picking, and picking-to-light are other fulfillment solutions respondents are deploying to solve challenges #4 and #5 (deciding when and where to fulfill orders). These solutions require retailers to decide what technologies they should invest in, decisions that have a bearing on when and where orders should be fulfilled.
But our survey findings also indicate that while tech-driven fulfillment solutions are central to omnichannel strategies, they can also represent another challenge for retailers. Forty-one percent of respondents indicated that keeping up with relevant technological advances is one of the top pain points they experience when implementing omnichannel strategies.
In conclusion, customer expectations will continue to change, and supply chains must evolve and adapt to these changes. This is especially true with regard to the fast pace of technological change. AI and ML along with various automation technologies are evolving rapidly, and as users gain more experience with these innovations, new ways to apply them will emerge. It is vitally important that retail supply chain processes are flexible and agile enough to advance in synch with the advance of tech-driven innovation.
Editor's Note: This article from Dr. Eva Ponce of MIT appears in a special digital edition of CSCMP's Supply Chain Quarterly that looks at the retail supply chain. You can find the full issue here.
2. Conducted and analyzed by Eva Ponce and Laura Allegue at the MIT Center for Transportation & Logistics (MIT CTL), the 2023 edition of the “How is omnichannel transforming retailer’s supply chain?” survey explored the main omnichannel challenges that retailers have faced over the past 24 months. The project surveyed 270 logistics, warehousing, and supply chain professionals from a variety of industry sectors—including retailing, consulting/support services, and third-party logistics providers—from October 2022 to April 2023.
3. B. Lennox and C. Cordon, “Adidas Russia/CIS and the Russian crisis: retrench or double down—Case Study,” IMD (2016).
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.”
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.
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.”