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.
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.