The iconic retailer has revamped its inventory practices to support a multi-channel selling strategy. The result: less overstock of seasonal inventory, more of the products its customers buy all year long, and a reduction in warehousing costs.
As it approaches its 100th anniversary, L.L. Bean Inc. is not the same type of retailer it was a century ago. The company started out as a manufacturer and seller of hunting boots, became a catalog merchant, branched into retail store sales, and now is involved in online retailing. Its evolution has prompted L.L. Bean, based in Freeport, Maine, USA, to modify its supply chain to reflect the many ways it does business today.
Five years ago, it became apparent that L.L. Bean's existing fulfillment strategy was causing inventory levels to rise. That led the company to take a hard look at its inventory and distribution practices.
The iconic retailer has since revamped its inventory policies with multi-channel sales in mind. A better understanding of product lifecycles together with improved forecasting helped it reduce overstocks of seasonal inventory, improve availability of products customers buy all year long, and reduce warehousing costs.
It all started with a boot
The story goes that Leon Leonwood Bean came back from a hunting trip unhappy because of his cold, damp feet. Bean hit upon the idea of stitching leather uppers to workmen's rubber boots to create more comfortable, water-resistant footwear for tramping through the Maine woods. In 1912 he founded the company bearing his name to sell his unique "Maine Hunting Shoe," working out of the basement of his brother's apparel shop.
A century later, the company still sells the original hunting boot (a 16-foot sculpture of one stands outside its flagship store in Freeport). Today L.L. Bean also offers hundreds of other products, including apparel for men, women, and children, footwear, and, of course, outdoor gear for camping, fishing, hiking, and other sports. Sales reached about US $1.5 billion in 2010.
L.L. Bean still produces its signature boots in the United States. It has two manufacturing facilities in Maine that make boots and tote bags and perform some customization of other manufactured products. Although the retailer sources 10 percent to 12 percent of its merchandise in the United States, the rest of its goods are made in Asia and Europe. "We try to source as close as we can (to Maine) where it makes economic sense to do so," says Vice President for Fulfillment Mike Perkins.
Sales channels expand
Over the course of nearly 100 years, L.L. Bean has diversified its sales channels. When Leon Leonwood Bean founded the company in 1912, he sold his boot through mail solicitation, which evolved into a catalog operation. Five years after starting the company, Bean opened a retail store in Freeport, Maine, which still exists today as part of a seven-acre retail campus.
Over the last two decades, L.L. Bean has expanded its retail presence at home and abroad. Currently it has 33 retail and outlet stores in the United States, located in the Northeast as well as in the Chicago area. The company opened its first international retail store in Tokyo, Japan, in 1992 and now operates dozens of stores in Japan and China. In addition, L.L. Bean sells online worldwide and mails its catalogs to customers in more than 160 countries.
Several years ago, the company separated its retail store and direct-to-customer fulfillment operations. Since then, L.L. Bean has operated two distribution centers (DCs), both in Freeport—one for retail, the other for catalog and online sales. "We wanted retail to own their inventory to do a better job of forecasting and sourcing product to the stores," says Perkins. "That's why we went down the road of two distinct inventory pools."
Shipping is also handled differently for each channel. Although customers who place orders online or through a catalog can select their preferred delivery method, about 90 percent of all direct-sales merchandise is shipped from Freeport by UPS, Perkins says. As for the retail outlets, L.L. Bean operates its own private fleet to supply its stores in the states of Maine, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire. It uses a variety of less-than-truckload carriers to serve its remaining stores in other parts of the country.
Too much seasonal inventory
In 2007, as L.L. Bean's Internet sales and retail network began to expand, the company decided to examine its distribution network to determine whether it could increase throughput capacity and avoid having to invest in a new distribution center. "Our fulfillment capacity was being challenged ? and we knew we were a couple years away from needing to do something," says Perkins. "We didn't want to invest more money in warehouse space when we could be investing that money in retail stores."
L.L. Bean worked with the consulting firm Fortna, which conducted a distribution network analysis. Philip Quartel, a Fortna consultant who worked on that project, says that the analysis encompassed transportation, capacity, inventory, distribution operations, stock-keeping units (SKUs), systems capabilities, and the impacts of any proposed changes on the overall business. Fortna analyzed data for more than 200,000 SKUs and more than 40 million order lines, which represented a year's worth of online, catalog, retail store, and businessto- business transactions. "Fortna looked at Bean from a service perspective and cost perspective, and at drivers like SKU counts, item variability, seasonality, and peak versus average days," Perkins recalls. "They took the system apart."
One of the most important findings was that the company's inventory levels were much too high. "They were carrying a bunch of inventory out of season in large quantities," Quartel observes. "Some of the SKUs were not [generating enough revenue to cover] the cost of handling them."
This discovery indicated that a different approach to inventory management was in order. "They needed to align inventory policy to service requirements," Quartel says. The solution, he explains, was to develop an end-to-end product lifecycle strategy that would segment demand and adjust inventory accordingly. "Based on the fact that certain SKUs did not require [a very high] fill rate and others would have a higher fill rate requirement, L.L. Bean could adjust their inventory position ... by determining the proper service level or fill rate per SKU," he says.
Core and non-core products
Fortna recommended that L.L. Bean segment its stock into "core" and "non-core" items. Core items are those for which there is fairly consistent demand all year. "Core inventory would be defined as things you don't want to be out of," says Perkins. "Core inventory in retail includes boots and denim jeans, which sell year 'round, day in and day out."
Non-core items, for the most part, included seasonal products, such as fleece jackets and snowshoes. L.L. Bean established a sales and inventory lifecycle for those items. As the season for a particular item winds down, it reduces the stock on hand and holds back on placing additional orders. "If it's snowing outside, toboggans are popular in the Northeast," Perkins says. "Around March, you don't want a lot of toboggans hanging around." To liquidate seasonal products, L.L. Bean advertises specials online and offers in-store price reductions. (The company does not have a lifecycle for core items.)
The company had an unusual problem when it came to rationalizing SKUs. Unlike some other retailers, L.L. Bean could not simply eliminate all of its slow sellers. Because the company has established its reputation as a provider of outdoor equipment for sportsmen, Perkins says, it has to carry certain products, such as jackknives, despite low sales volumes.
But the retailer could reduce the amount of stock it holds for these essential but slow-selling items and focus on carrying more core products. To help it optimize its inventory holdings and get the right mix of stock, L.L. Bean uses a software application it developed in-house to examine each item's profitability within the context of its lifecycle.
"The tool looks at all costs in providing profitability views," says Perkins. But, he adds, the retailer does not rely on this software exclusively to make decisions because "we have some items that may not be as profitable as others but are needed to round out our offerings to customers."
Same variety, less space
The results of the distribution network study led to some big changes in L.L. Bean's warehouse operations. As part of its lifecycle-based inventory strategy, the retailer has expanded its use of continuous replenishment. In the past, Perkins says, the company had done some continuous replenishment but often ordered large quantities of an item to keep in stock during a selling season. Now it is receiving smaller, more frequent shipments as needed from more of its suppliers.
The company also cut down on the amount of merchandise preparation that's done in its warehouse and instead began shifting that responsibility to its suppliers. How merchandise is prepared for sale depends on the sales channel. Consider a shirt as an example. If the shirt is intended for sale in a retail store, it will arrive at the retail distribution center folded in such a way that it will fit on a store shelf, bearing a price tag and an adhesive strip indicating the size. A shirt intended for online sale, by contrast, will arrive at the direct-to-customer DC with collar stiffeners and pins, which prevent the shirt from wrinkling during handling, shipping, and delivery.
Although L. L. Bean realizes that it costs more to maintain two inventory pools, it's sticking with that approach for now. "We understand that there's a cost involved with separate inventories, but we don't want to do a lot of the prep work ourselves," says Perkins.
As a result of having a better handle on its inventory mix and quantities, L.L. Bean has been able to avoid the need to construct another distribution center. In fact, the company has done so well in this regard, Perkins says, that this year it was able to close a 150,000- square-foot warehouse that it had leased for extra space for the past 20 years. The storage from the leased building was absorbed into the two main distribution centers.ding was absorbed into the two main distribution centers.
Focusing on product lifecycles does not mean that L.L. Bean carries less variety than it did in the past. Instead, it adjusts the amounts in stock to better match anticipated sales. In fact, thanks to targeted, more precise management of its stock, the retailer is now able to fulfill customer orders across multiple sales channels with little or no excess inventory. "We have a selling strategy to make sure that the customer gets what he or she wants, when he or she wants it," says Perkins, "but we don't want to be warehousing it when the season is over."
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.