Third-party logistics (3PL) providers’ share of large real estate leases across the U.S. rose significantly through the third quarter of 2024 compared to the same time last year, as more retailers and wholesalers have been outsourcing their warehouse and distribution operations to 3PLs, according to a report from real estate firm CBRE.
Specifically, 3PLs’ share of bulk industrial leasing activity—covering leases of 100,000 square feet or more—rose to 34.1% through Q3 of this year from 30.6% through Q3 last year. By raw numbers, 3PLs have accounted for 498 bulk leases so far this year, up by 9% from the 457 at this time last year.
By category, 3PLs’ share of 34.1% ranked above other occupier types such as: general retail and wholesale (26.6), food and beverage (9.0), automobiles, tires, and parts (7.9), manufacturing (6.2), building materials and construction (5.6), e-commerce only (5.6), medical (2.7), and undisclosed (2.3).
On a quarterly basis, bulk leasing by 3PLs has steadily increased this year, reversing the steadily decreasing trend of 2023. CBRE pointed to three main reasons for that resurgence:
Import Flexibility. Labor disruptions, extreme weather patterns, and geopolitical uncertainty have led many companies to diversify their import locations. Using 3PLs allows for more inventory flexibility, a key component to retailer success in times of uncertainty.
Capital Allocation/Preservation. Warehousing and distribution of goods is expensive, draining capital resources for transportation costs, rent, or labor. But outsourcing to 3PLs provides companies with more flexibility to increase or decrease their inventories without any risk of signing their own lease commitments. And using a 3PL also allows companies to switch supply chain costs from capital to operational expenses.
Focus on Core Competency. Outsourcing their logistics operations to 3PLs allows companies to focus on core business competencies that drive revenue, such as product development, sales, and customer service.
Looking into the future, these same trends will continue to drive 3PL warehouse demand, CBRE said. Economic, geopolitical and supply chain uncertainty will remain prevalent in the coming quarters but will not diminish the need to effectively manage inventory levels.
Retailers should take advantage of their brick-and-mortar locations not only to satisfy the growing demand for “buy online pickup in store” but also to support microfulfillment efforts for e-commerce.
Retailers are increasingly looking to cut costs, become more efficient, and meet ever-changing consumer demands. But how can they do so? The answer is updating their fulfillment strategy to keep pace with evolving customer expectations. As e-commerce continues to dominate the retail space and same-day delivery has become the norm, retailers must look to strengthen their “buy online pick up in store” (BOPIS) and microfulfillment strategies to stay ahead.
BOPIS allows customers to order online and pick up items at the retailers' brick-and-mortar location, and microfulfillment involves housing a retailer’s products closer to the consumer to improve delivery times. While these strategies each serve different purposes, both are centered around getting the product closer to the consumer to ensure faster fulfillment. By combining the two, retailers will be primed to meet customers’ needs—now and in the future.
The store of the future: meeting customers where they are
While e-commerce has become the top way for many consumers to shop today, building the store of the future does not mean focusing solely on an online fulfillment strategy and abandoning physical stores entirely. Instead, retailers can take advantage of their brick-and-mortar locations, often already situated in “hot spot” areas, to support microfulfillment efforts for e-commerce. These locations can also cater to the growing demand for BOPIS options, with 61% of consumers choosing to shop with a retailer that offers BOPIS over one that does not, according to recent Körber Supply Chain Software research.
When developing a fulfillment strategy, retailers should look to be able to satisfy customer needs at any moment in time. With the surge in same- or next-day shipping, consumers are no longer as interested in walking around a store to locate products or waiting many days for their items to arrive. Whether it’s on their doorstep or at the storefront, customers want their products as quickly as possible. For example, Körber Supply Chain Software found 29% of BOPIS shoppers would like their products to be ready almost immediately or within 30 minutes after placing an order.
Shoppers know which retailers can satisfy their need for quick fulfillment and will likely gravitate towards those companies for their shopping needs. For example, I recently placed a BOPIS order with a retailer, and when I arrived later that afternoon, my order still had not been picked yet. The retailer let me know that though I was currently there, based on their picking process, there were still multiple orders ahead of mine. While we both saw the product on the shelf, they were unable to fulfill my order given the inefficient process, prompting me to question whether I would continue to be loyal to that retailer.
To be successful, the store of the future must leverage technology to make the physical store a powerhouse for BOPIS and microfulfillment. By leveraging tools that provide insights on inventory location and consumer demand, companies can make informed decisions on the best approach for seamless fulfillment. So, how can companies get started with future-proofing their stores
How to develop a winning hybrid-fulfillment strategy
While meeting consumer demand is top of mind for retailers, operational efficiency and cost reduction are also priorities. It is not enough to just deploy BOPIS and microfulfillment; companies must focus on finetuning these strategies to maximize success. Some ways to do so include:
1. Utilize the “only handle it once” (OHIO) method: In a warehouse environment, companies keep a close eye on how much it costs to touch a product before they sell it. Typically, it is most cost-effective and efficient for companies to only handle it once. A similar consideration should be used for fulfilling orders through BOPIS or microfulfillment. For a BOPIS order, this might mean the product goes directly from the backroom of a store to a customer instead of being stocked on the shelf. For microfulfillment, this might mean going from a microfulfillment site directly to the consumers’ door.
2. Deploy solutions for inventory visibility, management, and communication: To successfully fulfill both online and in-person orders, retailers must have full visibility into the inventory within their warehouses and store locations and across the supply chain. From a BOPIS perspective, stores may be competing with in-person shoppers for the same items on the shelf. Therefore, it is key for retailers to fully develop their backroom inventory strategy, which may mean keeping some inventory off the shelves. While it is important for shoppers in store to have access to the full breadth and depth of assortment, it is also important that shoppers who buy online can get their order fulfilled.
Some retailers have already started operating like the store of the future. Reformation, a sustainable clothing store, has deployed an innovative retail concept at their Boston location where they only showcaseone of each garment. If a customer wants to try on an item, they use a tablet to request their size, and a sales associate retrieves the item from the store’s large backroom and brings it directly to the customer’s dressing room. BOPIS could be added to this arrangement, so that customers shopping in the store will have their needs met and customers shopping from home can ensure they will not receive a late order cancellation or delayed fulfillment.
Furthermore, having full visibility into inventory at physical stores can be leveraged on the microfulfillment side as well. Given that brick-and-mortar stores are strategically placed in areas where there is high consumer demand, their backrooms can also function as fulfillment centers for online orders, ensuring that the product gets into the customer’s hands as quickly as possible.
3. Continually analyze fulfillment strategy and fine-tune operations: Consumer demand is always evolving, making it difficult to predict what will be the next shift in expectations. Given this, it is critical for retailers to continually collect and analyze data, such as stock keeping unit (SKU) velocity, to ensure that they have an effective strategy.
With the demand for faster fulfillment, retailers will need to utilize this data to fine-tune their operations and ensure they are able to access the necessary products. To do so, retailers must examine backroom operations to make sure stocking items can readily be picked and staged for pickup. This approach also makes it possible, and easier, for retailers to ship direct to the consumer if they want to provide that option.
Looking ahead: hybrid fulfillment strategies in 2025 and beyond
As we head into 2025, companies are going to increasingly focus on how they serve their customers and ways to stand out among their competitors. If they have not done so already, many major retailers will utilize both BOPIS and microfulfillment to effectively and efficiently meet customers where they are. Looking ahead, customers will continue to demand faster fulfillment and more convenient ways to shop, making it critical for companies to fine-tune their BOPIS and microfulfillment strategies to avoid falling behind. By utilizing the above tips, decision-makers will have the insights they need to properly stock their stores and microfulfillment centers and meet customer needs.
“The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated.” Mark Twain said this about himself in 1897, but 127 years later the same sentiment could be applied to the concept of just-in-time (JIT) inventory management.
During the supply chain crunch of 2020–2021, firms struggled to build up inventories sufficient to meet demand. This led to speculation that firms should move away from JIT management and toward a just-in-case (JIC) model. The subsequent rapid buildup of inventories then resulted in the opposite problem in 2022. Inventories spiked up to near-record levels, and measures needed to be taken to reduce inventories, leading directly to the contraction of U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) in Q2 of that year. It took over a year to correct the inventory overages, meaning the traditional peak season did not materialize in 2023, as firms continued to run inventories down.
Taken altogether, the 2020s have seen firms abandon traditional inventory cycles. However, this no longer seems to be the case in 2024.
A return to peak
The Inventory Levels and Inventory Costs Indices show a return to more traditional inventory cycles.
Zachary S. Rogers/Logistics Managers' Index
This shift back to more traditional inventory cycles is evident in Figure 1, which displays the Inventory Levels (orange line) and Inventory Costs (green line) indices from the monthly Logistics Managers’ Index (LMI) for August 2022 to August 2024. (These are both diffusion indices, so any number above 50 represents expansion, and any number below 50 represents contraction.)
After three months of contraction throughout the summer of 2024, Inventory Levels expanded with a reading of 55.7 in August. When compared to the last two years, this is a good sign. In August of 2022, firms still had too much inventory left over from early in the year, and there was no peak season. In August of 2023, inventories were being run down due to high costs and the anticipation of weak consumer demand. Once again, there was no true peak season.
August of 2024 seems to be telling a different story. After truly leaning out over the last 18 months, firms are bringing goods in at an accelerated pace. (See, for example, the record levels of twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs) coming into the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach and the Port of New York and New Jersey.) The gradual increase in inventory levels in August and September suggests that firms are anticipating strong consumer demand in Q4.
A lot of the inventory that has passed through the ports is currently being held upstream in places like the Inland Empire, California; Western Phoenix, Arizona; and Las Vegas, Nevada. However, the majority of it did not reach retailer shelves until well into September. The August increase in overall inventory levels was primarily driven by upstream firms like manufacturers, wholesalers, distributors, and logistics service providers. These upstream firms reported a robust inventory growth reading of 59.4, significantly higher than the slight contraction of 46.3 reported by downstream retailers. This only shifted in September, when retailers began to build inventories for the first time since spring. The difference between upstream and downstream inventory levels suggests that JIT inventory management practices are alive and well in the retail industry. Essentially, inventory is being held at upstream central locations, while retail stores are keeping a minimal amount of inventory on hand and are depending on fast replenishment from partners.
Both upstream inventory growth and downstream inventory contraction are reflected in the continued expansion of inventory prices, represented by the green line in Figure 1. Upstream inventory costs are up due to the high levels of inventory upstream companies are storing. Downstream inventory costs are up because, despite the low overall levels of goods retailers are currently holding, recent reports have shown that retail sales are up this summer, suggesting that retailers are constantly shipping in new goods. Doing so enables them to turn their lean inventories over quickly (a key tenet of classic JIT practices), but it also pushes up transportation and overall costs, which is why inventory prices are also up.
The average "retail inventory to sales" ratio is currently lower than it was pre-pandemic.
Macrolevel data suggests that retail inventory-to-sales ratios are actually leaner than they were pre-COVID (see Figure 2). Inventory-to-sales ratios are a measure of the value of inventory carried relative to the value of sales. Higher values indicate that inventory is high relative to sales and vice versa. Figure 2 shows that in the five years before COVID lockdowns, U.S. retailers maintained an average inventory-to-sales ratio of 1.47, with minimal variation (represented by the dashed gold line). From 2020 to 2022, however, inventory-to-sales ratios varied greatly. Then starting in July of 2022, inventory-to-sales ratios reached a “new normal,” averaging around 1.28 for the next two years. This new normal reflects retailers’ commitment to maintaining lower inventories in an attempt to keep costs down. The lower inventory levels also reflect retailers’ confidence that enough slack exists in the freight industry for them to be able to receive orders quickly.
That slack will not last long. Respondents to the LMI survey predict that an increasing volume of this inventory will soon begin trickling downstream to retailers, and as it does, freight capacity will likely tighten up. This is good news for carriers. After two years of contraction, the freight market has been trending up throughout 2024, and we expect to see a return to seasonal movements of Q4 inventory. This month's report strongly suggests that—barring any unforeseen disruption—peak freight season and traditional holiday spending should be back in 2024.
LMI respondents also predict that the Inventory Level index will expand to a reading of 61.0 over the next 12 months. Similar to what we’re seeing now, this will be primarily driven by bustling activity upstream (63.8) and lean, frequently turning inventories (51.7) downstream. A reading of 50.0 indicates no movement, so the fact that retailers are planning for inventory levels at 51.7 over the next year is a clear statement of intent to pursue JIT policies in 2025.
Part of this increase in upstream inventories is likely reflective of the Federal Reserve’s announced (and through mid-September partially carried out) plan to cut federal funds rates. There is anecdotal evidence that manufacturers have been “keeping their powder dry” and not pursuing CapEx spending. As interest rates decrease and cash becomes cheaper, it is likely that activity in the manufacturing and construction will pick up—activity that will require the continued growth of inventories upstream.
Over the last four years, inventory managers have had to deal with a lot of excitement, as stocks swung back forth due to black swan events including COVID, the invasion of Ukraine, and record inflation. Now, at the end of 2024, it appears as if inventory managers are finally seeing a return to normal.
JIT is not dead. Long live JIT.
Author’s note:For more insights like those presented above, see the LMI reports posted the first Tuesday of every month at: www.the-lmi.com.
The logistics process automation provider Vanderlande has agreed to acquire Siemens Logistics for $325 million, saying its specialty in providing value-added baggage and cargo handling and digital solutions for airport operations will complement Netherlands-based Vanderlande’s business in the warehousing, airports, and parcel sectors.
According to Vanderlande, the global logistics landscape is undergoing significant change, with increasing demand for efficient, automated systems. Vanderlande, which has a strong presence in airport logistics, said it recognizes the evolving trends in the sector and sees tremendous potential for sustained growth. With passenger travel on the rise and airports investing heavily in modernization, the long-term market outlook for airport automation is highly positive.
To meet that growing demand, the proposed transaction will significantly enhance customer value by providing accelerated access to advanced technologies, improving global presence for better local service, and creating further customer value through synergies in technology development, Vanderlande said.
In a statement, Nuremberg, Germany-based Siemens Logistics said that merging with Vanderlande would “have no operational impact on ongoing or new projects,” but that it would offer its current customers and employees significant development and value-add potential.
"As a distinguished provider of solutions for airport logistics, Siemens Logistics enjoys a first-class reputation in the baggage and air-cargo handling areas. Together with Vanderlande and our committed global teams, we look forward to bringing fresh impetus to the airport industry and to supporting our customers' business with future-oriented technologies," Michael Schneider, CEO of Siemens Logistics, said in a release.
Five material handling companies have merged into a single entity, forming an Elgin, Illinois-based company called “Systems in Motion” that will function as a tier-one, turnkey material handling integrator, the members said.
The initiative is the culmination of the companies’ close working relationship for the past five years and represents their unified strength. “We recognized that going to market under a cadre of names was not helping our customers understand our complete turn-key services and approach,” Scott Lee, CEO of Systems in Motion, said in a release. “Operating as one voice, and one company, Systems in Motion will move forward to continue offering superior industrial automation.”
Systems in Motion provides material handling systems for warehousing, fulfillment, distribution, and manufacturing companies. The firm plans to complete a rebranded web site in January of 2025.
Keep ReadingShow less
Future warehouse success depends on robot interoperability.
Interest in warehouse robotics remains high, driven by labor pressures and a general desire to further automate distribution processes. Likewise, the number of robot makers also continues to grow. By one count, more than 50 providers exhibited at the big MODEX show in Atlanta in March 2024.
In distribution environments, there is especially strong interest in autonomous mobile robots (AMRs) for collaborative order picking. In this application, the AMR meets pickers at the right inventory location, and the workers then place picks in totes on the robot, which then moves on to another location/picker or off to packing, greatly reducing human travel time.
While the use of robots in distribution is still early in its maturity, for many, if not most, companies, the future is one of heterogeneous robots—different types of bots from different vendors operating in a given facility. With the growth in robotics, these different robots will often need to communicate with each other—either directly or indirectly through use of an integration platform—to automate the flow of information and work. This is broadly termed “interoperability,” and it is an important concept for companies planning warehouse robotics initiatives, with the ultimate goal of achieving a “plug and play” environments where new robots can easily be added to the automation mix and processes adapted over time.
Interoperability example
Why is interoperability important?
Consider the following example. A company buys perhaps 20 AMRs to support collaborative picking. A few years later, additional AMRs are needed to support growth. But now there is another AMR from a different vendor that the company prefers for cost, design, change in stock keeping unit (SKU) attributes, or other factors.
Interoperability will allow a company to keep the AMRs they have and seamlessly add the new AMRs to the mix. Beyond basic integration, a company will want to manage the robots across both vendors in terms of visibility, task assignment, performance measurement, and more, operating as if it’s a single fleet.
That’s a good example of what interoperability is all about.
Are there interoperability standards?
There are some initiatives across the robotics sector to develop cross-vendor integration protocols that will make interoperability much easier. However, these standards, such as VDA5050 (a standardized interface for automated guided vehicles) and the Mass Robotics 2.0 AMR Interoperability Standard, are either not widely used or are still under development.
Many vendors have also started offering support for what is called a “robot operating system” (ROS/ROS2). However, this is a loose, open source framework (not a full standard) that doesn’t fully address the interoperability challenge.
The robotics platform alternative
In the absence of useful standards, companies still have a few options for achieving interoperability. One is the traditional approach of manually programming interfaces between different robots and interfaces between robots and software systems such as warehouse management (WMS) or warehouse execution systems (WES).
The downsides of this approach are well understood. They include extended developing times and the high cost to get the integrations done, as well as a significant lack of flexibility down the road, with some added risk thrown into the mix as well.
A better alternative is the use of a platform strategy. Which begs the question: What is a robotics platform?
A robotics software platform is a middleware ecosystem—cloud-based or on-premise—that provides various capabilities and services from integration to fulfillment planning and execution. It also acts as a bridge between automation systems and various enterprise software applications.
The starting point for any robotic platform success is, in fact, integration. That integration capability includes advanced tools that enable flexible “no code/low code” approaches to connecting robot fleets.
The right platform can also more rapidly integrate with WMS/WES or other software applications, using AI to greatly accelerate the often time-consuming data-mapping process. Once the WMS/WES is connected to the platform, then the robots are also connected to enable real-time, bidirectional access to the WMS/WES data.
Such a platform delivers interoperability across robot types and connects different automated processes. A simple example would be a communication from the platform to a robot needed to move goods from receiving to reserve storage, where another robot is made aware via the platform that there is a new putaway task ready for completion.
Other interoperability considerations
To maximize interoperability opportunities, companies should consider the following interoperability-related capabilities that may be available from a given robotics platform:
Flexibility in integration based on robot software functionality: Different robot vendors come with software at different levels of maturity. An interoperability platform should be able to work with robotic vendors at any level of software functional capability, ensuring flexibility in robot selection.
User experience consistency: For interoperability to be functionally effective, the user interface across robotic-enabled processes should be consistent, so that users can easily interact and switch between different tasks.
Flexible communication protocols: A platform should provide support for a wide range of different protocols, such as application programming interfaces (APIs), socket communication (a two-way communication link between a server and a client program), web services, ROS/ROS2.0, and VDA5050, to name just a few.
Observability: AMRs especially will generate huge of amount of data on their movements and activities that can be used for analytics. The robotics platform should normalize data packets from different vendors to create a unified dashboard.
Safety and risk mitigation: A robotics platform can help achieve safety across different types of robots by understanding the safety protocols of different machines and coming up with a common set of rules. These rules will exist in an extended fleet manager that runs in the platform and sits on top of the fleet managers of each individual brand of AMR.
While some of these capabilities may not be relevant in a company’s early years in warehouse robotics, they could prove valuable down the road, so give them some consideration today.
Interoperability use cases
We’ve already covered a couple of common robotic interoperability use cases:
Adding new robots of the same type but from a different vendor and having all of them operate together as a single fleet.
Connecting different types of robots or automation to support multi-step process flows (for example, receiving to putaway).
Here is another: One global consumer goods company wants to heavily automate distribution processes but give individual regions or countries they operate in the flexibility to select the vendor for a specific type of robot (for example, a layer picker) and be able to easily plug that specific equipment into the larger platform infrastructure. This allows a centralized automation strategy with local execution.
The Interoperability Imperative
For a significant and growing number of companies, the future on the distribution center floor will be robotics of multiple types and vendors. To maximize flow and productivity, these heterogeneous environments must adopt interoperability strategies, enabling systems of different types to operate as if a single fleet. While standards to help with all this may arrive in future, for now a robotics integration and execution platform will provide an attractive alternative to traditional programming-heavy approaches.