Packaging may seem like a small detail in your supply chain until it starts driving delays, costs, and inefficiencies. Discover why this hidden bottleneck is holding you back and how to fix it structurally.
Summary of this article
Your supply chain is running smoothly. Products are being manufactured, stored and transported according to plan. Yet friction still arises. Extra handling, damage, delays or unexpected costs seem to be an inevitable part of the process.
But the role of packaging is rarely examined. In many organisations, packaging moves continuously through the chain, from production to storage, from internal transport to delivery to the customer and sometimes back again. It is everywhere, yet at the same time there is often a lack of overview. Where is it? What condition is it in? Is it being reused efficiently?
That is precisely where the first fault line lies. In practice, packaging often functions as a separate component. It is deployed when needed, adapted when something goes wrong, and replaced when it no longer meets requirements. Structural inspection, repair and redeployment are rarely part of a fixed process.
At the same time, packaging is still too often only considered after decisions regarding production, logistics and planning have already been made. As a result, it does not fit in optimally with storage, handling and transport. What emerges is a system that moves, but is not controlled.
This lack of control often remains invisible, as the impact is spread across multiple links. An extra handling operation here, damage there, inefficient stacking further down the chain.
On their own, these seem like minor deviations. But together, they form a structural pattern of inefficiency.
And precisely because packaging moves physically through the chain and is intrinsically linked to multiple processes, these inefficiencies reinforce one another.
So the question is not whether packaging affects your supply chain.
The question is how much control you actually have over it.
Many organisations lack a structured process for managing packaging. It is deployed, enters the supply chain and disappears from view. Attention is only paid when something goes wrong, such as damage or shortages.
This means that important questions remain unanswered. How often is packaging reused? In what condition does it return? When is repair needed and when is replacement required?
Without this insight, a pattern of reactive behaviour emerges. Packaging is replaced whilst it is still usable, or remains in circulation for too long, thereby increasing risks. Reuse does happen, but is rarely monitored or optimised.
The result is not only waste, but also unpredictability in operations.
In addition to a lack of control, there is a second problem. Packaging is often only considered after other decisions have already been made.
Product design, logistics routes and schedules are fixed, after which packaging must fit in. This leads to compromises: sub-optimal stacking, extra protective material, or manual adjustments to the process.
What is intended as support thus becomes a source of extra work.
Because these inefficiencies are spread across different departments, they are rarely recognised as a single, coherent problem. Yet they have a direct impact on logistics efficiency and costs.
Even when internal processes are well coordinated, friction often arises as soon as packaging leaves the organisation.
Suppliers and customers have their own systems, handling procedures and requirements. Without active coordination, differences arise in usage, return flows and expectations.
As a result, the packaging must constantly ‘fit’ into a different context.
This makes the system vulnerable. What appears efficient internally proves less robust within the supply chain. And it is precisely there that the difference is made between a well-functioning supply chain and one that has to constantly make adjustments.
As soon as packaging is no longer viewed as isolated resources, but as part of a coherent system, the dynamics of the supply chain change fundamentally.
Instead of reactive adjustments, control is established. Packaging is tracked, assessed and redeployed in a targeted manner. Not because it has to be, but because it is part of how the operation is organised.
This shifts the role of packaging. It not only supports the process, but helps to steer it.
This is reflected in predictability. Fewer surprises, fewer corrections after the event and greater control over costs and lead times.
When this control is combined with broader coordination across the supply chain, a second wave of acceleration emerges.
Packaging not only aligns better with internal processes, but also with the way suppliers and customers operate. Handling becomes more consistent, handover runs more smoothly and return flows are organised more efficiently.
This requires collaboration. Not just coordinating when problems arise, but consciously examining how packaging contributes to fewer handling operations, better use of space and less damage in the supply chain.
The benefit here lies not in a single optimisation, but in the elimination of friction between links.
The impact of this is often underestimated.
Where small inefficiencies used to accumulate, a scalable system is now emerging. Growth in volume or changes in the supply chain do not immediately lead to new bottlenecks, because packaging adapts to the process.
This means less material waste, fewer unnecessary handling steps and reduced pressure on operations.
But perhaps even more importantly: it makes the supply chain more robust.
Many organisations recognise parts of this story. They have taken steps, improved processes and sought alignment. Yet the question remains as to whether these improvements will hold up in the face of change.
Because that is where the difference lies.
Not in how well packaging functions today, but in the extent to which it continues to work when volumes increase, supply chains change or requirements shift.
Most organisations fall somewhere between control and integration. They have visibility over parts of the process, but lack the full picture. Or they have implemented integration, but without structural safeguards.
And it is precisely that difference that determines whether packaging plays a supporting role or delivers a strategic advantage.
Would you like to know where your organisation stands?
Find out with the IPMM assessment and gain insight into the maturity of your packaging approach.
Erik Holleman is Marketing Manager at Faes and focuses on strengthening the company’s positioning as a 4PP partner. With his expertise in strategic marketing and the Industrial Packaging Maturity Model (IPMM), he helps companies gain insight into their packaging processes and optimize them for maximum efficiency and cost savings.
More articles by Erik HollemanGood packaging doesn’t happen by chance. Using a proven process, our specialists guide you step by step from the initial idea to the final product.
