Erik Holleman
Marketing Manager
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 HollemanIn many industrial organisations, packaging is not a specific area of focus. It is woven into processes, spread across departments, and is often dealt with as and when necessary. Operations handles it for transport, procurement determines packaging choices with suppliers, and logistics resolves issues as they arise.
At first glance, this seems efficient. There is no extra layer, no complex decision-making, and everyone plays their part. But it is precisely this fragmentation that creates a fundamental problem.
Because no one has ultimate responsibility, packaging choices are rarely viewed as a whole. Decisions are made locally, within the context of a single department or a single moment. What is missing is coherence. And that is exactly where the loss of control begins.
You don’t see this immediately in a single incident. Not in a damaged consignment or an extra handling step. But in the accumulation of small inefficiencies that pile up.
Without clear oversight, this remains under the radar. Not because it isn’t important, but because it isn’t explicitly documented or managed anywhere.
And that means that in many organisations, packaging management is not a strategic issue, but a silent process running in the background. Until the moment when scale, complexity or costs no longer allow it.
As long as packaging management has no clear owner, there is no complete picture of what is actually happening in the supply chain. That does not mean that processes do not work, but it does mean that they are difficult to understand and improve.
In practice, packaging choices are often made based on immediate necessity. A supplier chooses a solution that is available, operations makes a few adjustments to make it fit, and logistics ensures it can still be dispatched.
Every decision makes sense in itself. But without central coordination, there is no consistent approach. What works today may no longer be optimal tomorrow. And what seems efficient at one location may actually cause extra work elsewhere.
Many organisations are good at solving packaging problems. Damage is repaired, deviations are corrected and processes are adjusted where necessary.
But without structural insight, these remain isolated interventions. Patterns are not recognised, causes remain implicit and the same issues recur in a different form. The organisation thus becomes dependent on reactive solutions, rather than preventive management.
The biggest challenge often lies not in visible costs, but in everything scattered throughout the operation. Extra handling, inefficient loading, minor damage or delays are rarely viewed as a single entity.
This creates a distorted picture of the actual impact of packaging choices. Not because the organisation lacks control, but because the information needed for targeted management is missing.
And that is precisely where an opportunity is being missed. Because without that insight, packaging management remains an operational issue, whilst its influence on logistics efficiency and supply chain optimisation is far greater than is often assumed.
The difference arises when packaging is no longer ‘somewhere in the organisation’, but is consciously managed as part of the process.
In organisations where management takes hold, the focus shifts. Problems are still solved, but are primarily used as input for structural improvement. Not every incident stands alone, but is seen as part of a pattern.
This creates insight into where value is lost and where adjustments are needed. Not based on gut feeling, but on recurring signals.
Clear accountability also fosters consistency. Packaging choices are no longer determined on a case-by-case basis, but fit within a broader strategy.
Trade-offs between cost, quality and risk are made explicit. Not just for the short term, but with an eye on the impact across the supply chain. This makes decisions better substantiated and more repeatable.
At a higher level, packaging is no longer seen as a final step, but as an integral part of supply chain optimisation. Decisions align with product development, logistics and supplier choices.
This is where the tipping point lies. Packaging is no longer a necessary cost item, but a means to improve performance and reduce risks.
Many organisations wonder whether their packaging is ‘good enough’. But the more relevant question is:
To what extent is packaging management within your organisation actually structured to drive cost, risk and performance?
The difference between reacting and steering rarely lies in a single major decision. It lies in how ownership, insight and decision-making come together.
And that is precisely what is often difficult to assess from within.
Without a clear frame of reference, packaging management remains difficult to pin down. What feels structured to one organisation may, in reality, still depend heavily on chance or individual commitment.
A mature approach therefore starts with an understanding of where you currently stand. Not just at an operational level, but specifically in the way responsibility, decision-making and management are organised.
The Industrial Packaging Maturity Model makes this visible. It shows where value remains untapped and where the biggest improvements can be made, without requiring you to change everything immediately.
For organisations wishing to improve their logistics efficiency and gain greater control over packaging choices, this is often the missing starting point.
