When it comes to improving their supply chains, industrial packaging companies (for the most part) have stalled out, but a few companies are making headway.
Supply chain leaders at industrial packaging companies navigate a difficult marketplace. Sitting two or three layers back in the supply chain, they struggle with increasing demand variability in a volatile world. They are under severe pressure from their customers, who are asking them to cut costs while improving customer service. Their lives would be easier if their downstream customers could improve demand-signal accuracy, but this has not been the reality.
Industrial packaging companies needed to improve agility in order to succeed in the face of these challenges. Yet the maturity of industrial packaging supply chains lags that of their upstream customers. In this industrial segment, companies are slow to adopt inventory and transportation systems. Historically, this industry has been a late adopter of technology and best practices. As a result, process evolution and supply chain improvement moves slowly.
Defining supply chain excellence in an uncertain world
While the concepts of supply chain excellence and improvement sound simple, it can be hard to define performance improvement and ascertain when a company is improving faster than a peer group. To help supply chain practitioners, like those in the industrial packaging segment, we created the Supply Chains to Admire methodology and our Supply Chain Index in 2014. Our methodology assesses both performance (rankings on revenue growth, operating margin, return on invested capital (ROIC), and inventory turns) against peer group and relative rates of improvement. The Supply Chain Index is a measure of improvement, while the Supply Chains to Admire methodology ranks companies both on improvement and performance within a peer group. (See the sidebar below for more detail about the Supply Chain Index and Supply Chains to Admire methodology.)
In Figure 1, we use the methodology to analyze companies in the packaging manufacturing industry for the period 2006-2014 while breaking out the trends for 2009-2014 (to assess the post-recession period) and 2011-2014 (to check for recent trends). Note that growth rates are increasing, but performance on operating margin and ROIC is flat. Industry performance on inventory turns is declining slightly. As you scan Figure 1, you will see that many of the companies perform better than the average on one or two metrics, but few companies perform better than the industry average on the entire, balanced portfolio of metrics. Amcor, CCL, and International Paper had the fastest rate of improvement on the four supply chain performance metrics when compared to the peer group. However, only CCL performed better than the industry averages (shown in the last line of the table) while also showing improvement. This is hard to accomplish. What makes it happen? Our research has found that companies are able to achieve this level of success when they focus on a balanced metric portfolio, a clear supply chain strategy, and conscious tradeoffs across the organization in cross-functional processes.
There are five traits of higher-performing companies in the packaging manufacturing industry: 1) implementation of innovative business models for packaging design and artwork management; 2) data sharing (of manufacturing line schedules) with customers; 3) vendor-managed inventory programs with strategic suppliers; 4) high standards for packaging quality; and 5) excellence in supply chain execution systems.
Companies performing well also have greater organizational alignment, and their commercial and operational teams work closely together. To accelerate sales, they have built supply chains for samples and small runs for test markets, and they work with their suppliers' research and development teams. In these organizations, the commercial teams understand that winning and keeping business from consumer products customers requires strong supply chain support. Note the patterns of the companies making progress in Figure 2 versus those not making progress in Figure 3.
Â
Supply chain excellence requires discipline and focus. It is about balance and resiliency. The Supply Chain Index measures resiliency as the intersection of inventory turns and operating margin. A tighter pattern, such as those seen in Figure 2, indicates greater reliability and consistency in responding to market and economic conditions over time. One of the issues for the packaging supply chain leader is the difficulty of achieving resiliency in year-over-year results. Due to demand volatility, the swings in performance are greater than in other industries.
The supply chain is a complex system that needs to be managed through the use of a balanced scorecard. Gains happen in small increments over time, and progress happens over many years. Success does not happen by focusing on a single project, a series of projects, or functional metrics. Instead, the leadership team must take a long-term view, steering the helm to focus on year-over-year momentum while maintaining resiliency.
ABOUT THE ANALYSIS AND METHODOLOGY
To build the Supply Chain Index and the Supply Chains to Admire methodology, we studied balance-sheet patterns for over 2,000 public companies and shared the results with more than 150 executive teams. The metrics we selected are based on correlation to market capitalization; we selected the metrics with the highest correlation, including a balanced scorecard of revenue growth, inventory turns, operating margin, and return on invested capital (ROIC). Based on this research, we believe supply chain excellence can be defined as the ability to improve across this entire portfolio of metrics. Success requires balance and alignment, not just superior performance on a single metric. (For more details about the Supply Chain Index and its associated metrics, see "The Supply Chain Index: A new way to measure value" in the Q3/2014 issue of CSCMP's Supply Chain Quarterly.)
As a part of this methodology, we analyze performance and improvement for three time periods: 2006-2014, 2009-2014, and 2011-2014. The choice of these time periods and the methodology are based on several principles.
1.Complete and accurate data. The analysis extends back to the first year where there is generally available public data for the industries studied. Prior to 2006, the data is too sparse to analyze.
2.Understanding post-recession trends. The period of 2007-2010 included a major economic downturn. We measure the entire period of 2006-2014, but our primary focus is on the post-recession performance of 2009-2014, which we believe is the time period that allows the most accurate comparisons. We also look at 2011-2014 to check for recent trends. However, the year-over-year analysis of the patterns within that period is limited due to the fact that it the analysis only covers three years. Supply chain excellence takes three to five years to see marked improvement compared to a peer group.
3.Analysis of a peer group. The data analysis is by industry sector based on North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes. We must have at least five companies in a peer group to make an assessment. While there have been many mergers and acquisitions, we want to derive as "clean" a peer group as possible, so we eliminate companies that have gone through major merger and acquisition activity during the period from our analysis.
Companies in every sector are converting assets from fossil fuel to electric power in their push to reach net-zero energy targets and to reduce costs along the way, but to truly accelerate those efforts, they also need to improve electric energy efficiency, according to a study from technology consulting firm ABI Research.
In fact, boosting that efficiency could contribute fully 25% of the emissions reductions needed to reach net zero. And the pursuit of that goal will drive aggregated global investments in energy efficiency technologies to grow from $106 Billion in 2024 to $153 Billion in 2030, ABI said today in a report titled “The Role of Energy Efficiency in Reaching Net Zero Targets for Enterprises and Industries.”
ABI’s report divided the range of energy-efficiency-enhancing technologies and equipment into three industrial categories:
Commercial Buildings – Network Lighting Control (NLC) and occupancy sensing for automated lighting and heating; Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based energy management; heat-pumps and energy-efficient HVAC equipment; insulation technologies
Manufacturing Plants – Energy digital twins, factory automation, manufacturing process design and optimization software (PLM, MES, simulation); Electric Arc Furnaces (EAFs); energy efficient electric motors (compressors, fans, pumps)
“Both the International Energy Agency (IEA) and the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP) continue to insist on the importance of energy efficiency,” Dominique Bonte, VP of End Markets and Verticals at ABI Research, said in a release. “At COP 29 in Dubai, it was agreed to commit to collectively double the global average annual rate of energy efficiency improvements from around 2% to over 4% every year until 2030, following recommendations from the IEA. This complements the EU’s Energy Efficiency First (EE1) Framework and the U.S. 2022 Inflation Reduction Act in which US$86 billion was earmarked for energy efficiency actions.”
Economic activity in the logistics industry expanded in November, continuing a steady growth pattern that began earlier this year and signaling a return to seasonality after several years of fluctuating conditions, according to the latest Logistics Managers’ Index report (LMI), released today.
The November LMI registered 58.4, down slightly from October’s reading of 58.9, which was the highest level in two years. The LMI is a monthly gauge of business conditions across warehousing and logistics markets; a reading above 50 indicates growth and a reading below 50 indicates contraction.
“The overall index has been very consistent in the past three months, with readings of 58.6, 58.9, and 58.4,” LMI analyst Zac Rogers, associate professor of supply chain management at Colorado State University, wrote in the November LMI report. “This plateau is slightly higher than a similar plateau of consistency earlier in the year when May to August saw four readings between 55.3 and 56.4. Seasonally speaking, it is consistent that this later year run of readings would be the highest all year.”
Separately, Rogers said the end-of-year growth reflects the return to a healthy holiday peak, which started when inventory levels expanded in late summer and early fall as retailers began stocking up to meet consumer demand. Pandemic-driven shifts in consumer buying behavior, inflation, and economic uncertainty contributed to volatile peak season conditions over the past four years, with the LMI swinging from record-high growth in late 2020 and 2021 to slower growth in 2022 and contraction in 2023.
“The LMI contracted at this time a year ago, so basically [there was] no peak season,” Rogers said, citing inflation as a drag on demand. “To have a normal November … [really] for the first time in five years, justifies what we’ve seen all these companies doing—building up inventory in a sustainable, seasonal way.
“Based on what we’re seeing, a lot of supply chains called it right and were ready for healthy holiday season, so far.”
The LMI has remained in the mid to high 50s range since January—with the exception of April, when the index dipped to 52.9—signaling strong and consistent demand for warehousing and transportation services.
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).
"After several years of mitigating inflation, disruption, supply shocks, conflicts, and uncertainty, we are currently in a relative period of calm," John Paitek, vice president, GEP, said in a release. "But it is very much the calm before the coming storm. This report provides procurement and supply chain leaders with a prescriptive guide to weathering the gale force headwinds of protectionism, tariffs, trade wars, regulatory pressures, uncertainty, and the AI revolution that we will face in 2025."
A report from the company released today offers predictions and strategies for the upcoming year, organized into six major predictions in GEP’s “Outlook 2025: Procurement & Supply Chain.”
Advanced AI agents will play a key role in demand forecasting, risk monitoring, and supply chain optimization, shifting procurement's mandate from tactical to strategic. Companies should invest in the technology now to to streamline processes and enhance decision-making.
Expanded value metrics will drive decisions, as success will be measured by resilience, sustainability, and compliance… not just cost efficiency. Companies should communicate value beyond cost savings to stakeholders, and develop new KPIs.
Increasing regulatory demands will necessitate heightened supply chain transparency and accountability. So companies should strengthen supplier audits, adopt ESG tracking tools, and integrate compliance into strategic procurement decisions.
Widening tariffs and trade restrictions will force companies to reassess total cost of ownership (TCO) metrics to include geopolitical and environmental risks, as nearshoring and friendshoring attempt to balance resilience with cost.
Rising energy costs and regulatory demands will accelerate the shift to sustainable operations, pushing companies to invest in renewable energy and redesign supply chains to align with ESG commitments.
New tariffs could drive prices higher, just as inflation has come under control and interest rates are returning to near-zero levels. That means companies must continue to secure cost savings as their primary responsibility.
Specifically, 48% of respondents identified rising tariffs and trade barriers as their top concern, followed by supply chain disruptions at 45% and geopolitical instability at 41%. Moreover, tariffs and trade barriers ranked as the priority issue regardless of company size, as respondents at companies with less than 250 employees, 251-500, 501-1,000, 1,001-50,000 and 50,000+ employees all cited it as the most significant issue they are currently facing.
“Evolving tariffs and trade policies are one of a number of complex issues requiring organizations to build more resilience into their supply chains through compliance, technology and strategic planning,” Jackson Wood, Director, Industry Strategy at Descartes, said in a release. “With the potential for the incoming U.S. administration to impose new and additional tariffs on a wide variety of goods and countries of origin, U.S. importers may need to significantly re-engineer their sourcing strategies to mitigate potentially higher costs.”
Freight transportation providers and maritime port operators are bracing for rough business impacts if the incoming Trump Administration follows through on its pledge to impose a 25% tariff on Mexico and Canada and an additional 10% tariff on China, analysts say.
Industry contacts say they fear that such heavy fees could prompt importers to “pull forward” a massive surge of goods before the new administration is seated on January 20, and then quickly cut back again once the hefty new fees are instituted, according to a report from TD Cowen.
As a measure of the potential economic impact of that uncertain scenario, transport company stocks were mostly trading down yesterday following Donald Trump’s social media post on Monday night announcing the proposed new policy, TD Cowen said in a note to investors.
But an alternative impact of the tariff jump could be that it doesn’t happen at all, but is merely a threat intended to force other nations to the table to strike new deals on trade, immigration, or drug smuggling. “Trump is perfectly comfortable being a policy paradox and pushing competing policies (and people); this ‘chaos premium’ only increases his leverage in negotiations,” the firm said.
However, if that truly is the new administration’s strategy, it could backfire by sparking a tit-for-tat trade war that includes retaliatory tariffs by other countries on U.S. exports, other analysts said. “The additional tariffs on China that the incoming US administration plans to impose will add to restrictions on China-made products, driving up their prices and fueling an already-under-way surge in efforts to beat the tariffs by importing products before the inauguration,” Andrei Quinn-Barabanov, Senior Director – Supplier Risk Management solutions at Moody’s, said in a statement. “The Mexico and Canada tariffs may be an invitation to negotiations with the U.S. on immigration and other issues. If implemented, they would also be challenging to maintain, because the two nations can threaten the U.S. with significant retaliation and because of a likely pressure from the American business community that would be greatly affected by the costs and supply chain obstacles resulting from the tariffs.”
New tariffs could also damage sensitive supply chains by triggering unintended consequences, according to a report by Matt Lekstutis, Director at Efficio, a global procurement and supply chain procurement consultancy. “While ultimate tariff policy will likely be implemented to achieve specific US re-industrialization and other political objectives, the responses of various nations, companies and trading partners is not easily predicted and companies that even have little or no exposure to Mexico, China or Canada could be impacted. New tariffs may disrupt supply chains dependent on just in time deliveries as they adjust to new trade flows. This could affect all industries dependent on distribution and logistics providers and result in supply shortages,” Lekstutis said.