2025 Logistics Technology Roundtable: AI, Automation, and the Future of Supply Chain Innovation

The rapid acceleration of technology is reshaping every aspect of supply chain and logistics management. From optimizing transportation networks with TMS to integrating automation and robotics in warehouses, the industry is at a crossroads—poised between innovation and real-world implementation challenges.

In this exclusive roundtable, four leading supply chain analysts offer their expert insights into the current state of logistics technology. This year we’re joined by Brock Johns, director analyst, Gartner Supply Chain; Norm Sanez, partner, managing director, St. Onge Co.; Dwight Klappich, VP, fellow, Gartner; and Howard Turner: director, supply chain execution systems, St. Onge Co.

With global disruptions, labor shortages, and efficiency demands mounting, companies must embrace smarter, tech-driven strategies. But how far have we really come? And what’s the next step for businesses looking to stay ahead? Our panel weighs in on the challenges, opportunities, and future of supply chain technology.

TMS: Time to tame the transportation chaos

LM: From your vantage point, how would you characterize the current state of transportation management for shippers in 2025?

Brock Johns: There’s no shortage of challenges and potential problems for logistics professionals in 2025. I think we can all agree on that. And, as always, it’s difficult to predict what the next issue or challenge is going to be or where it will come from. However, I think the best thing for shippers right now is patience and resilience.

We’re seeing some softening in transportation costs and rates, but with volatility in tariffs and the trade situation that could shift quickly. Shippers need to exercise patience and resist hitting the panic button too quickly. However, being patient does not mean shippers should be passive or inactive. There needs to be strategies in place to deal with the current environment—and that’s where resilience comes in. Do shippers have alternative sourcing strategies? Are there plans to shift production to different locations?

LM: Given these persistent challenges, what would you identify as the top transportation management hurdles shippers will face as we move into 2025?

Johns: What’s interesting is that despite all the news and the various obstacles and challenges that shippers have faced in recent years, things tend to come back down to a handful of big hurdles. Those hurdles are always going to include managing and optimizing costs, improving efficiency levels, and improving visibility.

Transportation leaders are always under pressure in these areas. And with the added pressures this year of tariffs and the potential for an economic slowdown, there will be even more emphasis on cost control. Cost control can also be impacted via better efficiency and increasing automation.

Of course, visibility is also going to continue to be vital. If an organization is shifting its sourcing strategy due to tariffs or utilizing new transportation lanes/carriers, insight into where things are will be critical.

LM: With these challenges in mind, how do you see TMS technology evolving to help shippers stay agile and competitive?

Johns: It’s increasingly difficult to manage the growing complexity with operations in a manual fashion. Many of the TMS solutions available today are designed to help shippers with the challenges we already mentioned—cost, efficiency, and visibility—but they do help companies in other ways.

We touched on sourcing strategies earlier, and if companies need to source from new suppliers or geographic locations, they potentially will need to connect with new carriers. Today’s TMS can ease that process and help facilitate the transportation procurement process. Connecting with carriers via API for real time rates can help a shipper better manage their costs.

TMS solutions are also utilizing AI to automate more of the workflows and processes to drive greater efficiency. Expanding use of GenAI may drive even more efficiency as it will help to streamline the process of gathering and analyzing data.

LM: From what you’re seeing, what are the most immediate and impactful benefits shippers can expect when implementing a TMS?

Johns: We’ve done research on this topic in the past, and, historically, the two biggest benefit areas for shippers have been in transportation sourcing and procurement and transportation planning. We already touched on a bit of the TMS capabilities for procurement, so let’s shift to talk about transportation planning.

When we talk about planning within a TMS, we include a variety of things: load consolidation and optimization; mode selection; carrier and rate selection; continuous move optimization and backhauls; as well as global multi-leg shipment planning.

They key ROI areas for many companies starts at a basic level, using the right carrier and rate. If you have carriers with the best mix of rates and service that are supposed to be used, but someone in the organization is not following the routing guide, that can become a costly issue. The TMS can automate that process and make the decision based on the loaded rates and configuration.

You ship with the right carrier, at the right cost, all the time. The other big piece that drives significant savings is the consolidation and optimization. Shippers can benefit from combining orders to make multi-stop truckloads or making sure that they’re utilizing a higher percentage of the trailer’s capacity.

LM: The market for TMS solutions has grown more competitive, with cloud-based, SaaS, and AI-driven platforms gaining traction. What should shippers prioritize when evaluating TMS options in today’s landscape?

Johns: That’s my favorite question. First off, a reminder to anyone out there looking at a new or replacement solution to do your homework and not rush the decision. The TMS market is competitive with different options out there.

Shippers need to do everything they can to find the best-fit solution for their complexity, requirements and use cases. Use research, industry events, peer networks and any other resources to help get oriented on what is out there.

But when it boils down to what to prioritize, there are really three key categories to focus on: Vendor expertise and viability; product capabilities; innovation and roadmap; and total cost of ownership.

Product capabilities should still be the number one factor for shippers. It’s important to not only identify what’s needed today, but also what capabilities may be needed in the future. We see shippers increasingly putting a focus on a vendor’s product roadmap and the level of innovation that delivered

LM: How are TMS providers incorporating AI into their platforms today, and what does a truly AI-enhanced TMS look like in practice?

Johns: AI techniques really are table stakes within today’s TMS solutions. Vendors have been using AI in some form for years. We’ve seen a rise in interest with capabilities associated with GenAI, and we are starting to see some vendors in the market leaning into Agentic AI.

Agentic AI refers to goal-driven software entities that have been granted rights by the organization to act on its behalf to autonomously make decisions and take action. If we start to think about more “advanced” TMS solutions, those are going to be offerings that have more breadth in their capabilities. This means going beyond core capabilities, such as execution and planning, and providing more advanced functionality such as transportation forecasting and modeling.

Eventually, there’s the potential for a shipper to leverage a solution with more advanced capabilities, but to rely more on AI agents to push transportation management into more of an autonomous, hands-free process.

There’s no doubt that vendors are betting on AI. During our last research cycle, over 50% of TMS vendors had completed some form of AI innovation in the past year. Even more exciting, I think, is that 75% of vendors had innovations involving AI on their roadmaps for 2025.

LM: Many shippers struggle with integrating TMS into their broader supply chain tech stack. What best practices or emerging solutions are making TMS implementation and interoperability more seamless?

Johns: Integration has always been an ugly word. The fact is that it requires lots of planning and hard work to make things work together. And while you mention a shippers’ broad supply chain stack, for most companies it’s a challenge just for their transportation technology stack.

TMS solutions are often working with real-time transportation visibility, multi-carrier parcel, routing and scheduling and other solutions. We’re looking at this and predicted that through at least 2027, 75% of large shippers will struggle to juggle their fragmented transportation application portfolios, despite strategies to support a single solution.

If you’re a smaller shipper that has less complexity, it may be easier for you because you might only need a TMS. However, circling back to the broader stack, you will still likely need to integrate your TMS to an ERP and a WMS. API connectivity is helping ease the implementation and integration burden with a TMS.

The other thing we’re seeing is increased interest in logistics integration platforms. These platforms provide modern, cloud-based, centralized electronic data interchange (EDI) and API-based integration support, leading to more automated business processes with their supply chain partners.

LM: Looking five years ahead, how would you define the capabilities of a truly next-generation TMS? What new functions or breakthroughs will fundamentally change how shippers manage transportation?

Johns: I mentioned last year that larger and more complex shippers will see the TMS as a hub, connected to other transportation technologies. It would be pulling data in and pushing it back out to help orchestrate end-to-end transportation. That is where we’re headed. I think the shift we see now is that AI capabilities, specifically AI agents, could well drive us towards truly autonomous transportation management.

Even for smaller shippers with less complex operations, we’ll see solutions that are designed to support their requirements, but that will automate more of the process. Will we really see shippers leveraging a fully autonomous TMS five years from now? It may sound absurd to some, but I believe we’re inching closer to that as a reality.

Automation: Are we there yet?

LM: You recently worked with our Peerless Research Group (PRG) team to analyze our 2025 Outlook Survey, which captures where and when our readership plans to invest in automation inside the four walls this year. Based on that data, how would you characterize the current mindset toward automation investment?

Norm Saenz: Based on the 2025 Outlook Survey, about a one-third of the respondents say they’re looking to add automation in 2025. And we can see and feel the urgency from our clients to keep up with the pace of adopting automation. I think the urgency is fueled by the ongoing labor market constraints, and market share competition. 

It’s also hard to ignore the developments of technology, like AI and the vast array of goods-to-person and related automation. So, the current mindset is to at least evaluate automation as a possible solution. Still, while there’s excitement and a sense of urgency to rush to automation, we encourage companies to take their time to learn more, identify feasible use cases, and evaluate the many options.

LM: Beyond labor, what are the biggest operational challenges managers face today when optimizing warehouse/DC operations?

Saenz: For sure, labor management, productivity, availability, and high turn-over are at the top of the list of challenges to be solved and minimized by automation. Related to these labor challenges is the need to decrease the order cycle time or speed up the throughput of fulfillment operations. 

Automation can greatly decrease the time it takes to fulfill and ship orders. And another challenge faced by operators is increasing storage density—reducing the amount of required warehouse square footage. Most AS/RS solutions provide an increase in storage density over traditional warehousing—such as, 100’ tall AS/RS cranes, pallet and tote shuttles, and other cube-based designs. 

LM: Our research found that 34% of respondents expect their company’s spending on automation to increase this year. Are you seeing that reflected in the field? If so, what types of automation solutions are gaining the most traction?

Saenz: Absolutely, there’s growing interest from our clients to evaluate automation. Most of our facility planning projects now include ‘use-case’ automation evaluations. We’re asked: Where might automation reduce labor costs, improve throughput, increase storage density, and help with inventory accuracy? And many companies have done their homework and come to the project with plenty of concepts they want to evaluate.

The most traction we’re seeing is with the multitude of goods-to-person systems, including roaming shuttles and AMRs. In the meantime, autonomous lift trucks for put-away and retrieval from storage area rack continue to develop to reach higher and handle the demands of interacting with push back and drive-in rack. Basically, we’re evaluating anything that can squeeze into an existing building and automate operations to drive savings.

LM: Given that every operation has unique needs, are there specific automation technologies that consistently deliver the best results across different warehouse/DC environments?

Saenz: As noted, many of our projects involve adding automation to an existing operation. We’re finding that AMRs, AGVs and related autonomous lift trucks are very adaptable to existing operation. These vehicles essentially replace manual pallet jacks and forklifts traveling through an operation.

The key is identifying which operations can benefit the most from automation then evaluating the application to decide the type and number of automated vehicles required and conducting the cost/benefit analysis. It’s important to also consider the building floor flatness and levelness as well as power requirements.

LM: With so much focus on cutting-edge automation, are there any tried-and-true technologies—whether hardware or software—that continue to be underutilized but could still play a valuable role in improving operations?

Saenz: This discussion comes up each year, and the fact remains that there are decades-old technologies that can make big improvements over a manual operation. It’s all about where you are today in terms of technology—paper, scanning, etc.

If you have a legacy WMS, lacking basic functionality, then a new WMS might give you 30% to 50% productivity improvements across the warehouse. But, otherwise, focusing on order picking, there are many technologies that increase productivity and accuracy over paper, including voice and pick to light.

And, if you’re pushing around carts, the use of conveyor technology for pick lines, multi-level platforms, zone-divert systems, and sorters are stable solutions. And the back end of order fulfillment is enhanced with proven box forming, dunnage, sealing, and print and apply technologies. We do recommend companies investigate these tried-and-true technologies before jumping directly into automation.

LM: As automation adoption increases, so do misconceptions. Are there any persistent myths about warehouse/DC automation that you believe need to be debunked?

Saenz: My first thoughts are that I don’t think—or hope—there are many misconceptions since we’ve seen an increasing number of installations over the past 3 to 5 years. But to be clear, there is no ‘easy button’ to press for installing an automated system—and not all automation works for everyone. 

Data accuracy matters more than when operating a manual operation. The control software should be at the forefront of the supplier selection and design, and properly integrated controls with your existing systems will be vital to that success.

Maintenance costs are going to increase, and preventative maintenance is heavily required.  Your facility infrastructure conditions, matter and need to be evaluated in the cost and feasibility of installing automation. I believe there are enough case studies and recent installations that folks have diminishing misconceptions.

LM: For logistics professionals looking to accelerate automation adoption, what key considerations should guide their decision-making process?

Saenz: Don’t accelerate the process. Identify where you’re hurting the most—labor, throughput, accuracy, space. What are your objectives? What are your realistic budget constraints? Get up to speed on what’s out there. Go to ProMat and Modex and become familiar with the technology—tour operations, ask questions.

Then the main considerations come down to designing a solution that works and addresses the objectives, capital cost, labor and other savings as well as the payback. Factor in growth, scalability and flexibility. Often, the labor alone is not enough to justify automation, so consider facility network changes that drive more volume to increase labor savings, add freight savings, reduce returns, capture more market share, and reduce facility operating space costs.

Robotics at a Crossroads: Adoption, innovation, and the path ahead

LM: How would you realistically define the current robotics landscape inside today’s logistics operations? What trends or challenges are shaping adoption right now?

Dwight Klappich: We continue to see strong interest in what Gartner refers to as intralogistics smart robots which are ‘the class of smart robots that orchestrate and perform work within the four walls of a site and can be mobile or stationary, operating autonomously or collaboratively with humans or other robots.’

However, the actual growth of the market is relatively flat right now. On the demand side we continue to see strong intentions to pursue automation within logistics operations, with 93% of respondents to a Gartner study saying that they either have or plan to invest in cyber-physical automation over the next two years.

Specific to robots, the same study found that of those companies pursuing automation, 90% of respondents are in the process of deploying their first robots, with 8% already fully deployed—and only 2 % with absolutely no plans to consider robotics over the next two years.

While the customer demand side remains strong, robotics market growth in terms of the numbers of new robotics customers, robotic sales revenues and numbers of robots deployed is slow and trailing expectations. We also hear from many vendors that sales cycles remain quite long, and vendors often say they feel trapped in never ending proofs of concept. From talking to vendors and customers we believe there are several reasons for this.

LM: Why do you believe that sales cycle remains so long?

Klappich: First, buyers lack the internal robotics expertise, so they’re often learning as they go, and they have been forced to turn to the robotics vendors for most of their knowledge since consultants and systems integrators remain late to the robotics party.

This leads to long sales cycles as companies feel compelled to vet offerings extensively. However, the good news is that our research finds that once companies get over their first selection, 82% say they ‘plan to expand their fleet of robots’ and 82% say they are ‘actively considering other robotics use cases.’ And of that number, 42% say they’re already pursuing new use cases.

LM: Since our last technology roundtable, how much progress have we made in the application of robotics?

Klappich: One encouraging thing we now see that we believe will help drive market growth, are robotics vendors now focusing on providing business solutions, not just robots. Initially, robot vendors offered a generic technology that might solve many problems, but it was largely up to the customer to figure out where, what, why and how robots would benefit their business.

Today, more and more robot providers are offering packaged business solutions such as truck loading or un-loading, parcel sortation and singulation, palletizing de-palletizing, order/case picking, collaborative picking or goods-to-person picking. By focusing on specific use cases and offering more packaged solutions robot vendors will help buyers target the most appropriate places to aim their evaluations and this will also help buyers with developing their investment business case.

LM: How is robotics adoption reshaping workforce strategies? Are companies shifting toward reskilling programs or new workforce models?

Klappich: Over the last three years I can’t recall a single conversation with a customer that started with ‘we’re looking at robots to help us cut our work force by X%.’ However, this doesn’t mean that labor isn’t still a major issue for logistics operations.

In the study mentioned above, we ask respondents what their primary motivation was for investing in robots. In this year’s study, 52% of respondents said that it was due to rising labor costs, with 48% saying it was due to labor shortage. Three years ago, it was quite different, with only 41% saying it was due to rising labor costs, but 59% saying it was due to labor shortages.

What we believe from talking to customers is that companies continue to have many of the same issues with labor shortages, but they have been trying to pay their way out of this situation by offering higher hourly wages, signing bonuses and or incentive pay which have further led to rising labor costs.

More broadly speaking robotics has a positive impact on the operational work force and we are not finding employee resistance to the introduction of robotics. Again, as mentioned above, companies struggle to find enough people, and it’s hard to keep people for many mundane or taxing jobs in warehouses, such unloading trucks in Houston in July, or walking 11 kilometers a day as one of our clients told me each of their pickers does.

Consequently, from an operational standpoint, we have not seen organizations having to do much to their workforce to introduce robots.

LM: A few years ago, you described the emergence of “heterogeneous robotic fleets.” Could you define what that means in today’s context? Has this vision materialized, and how are operations managing the complexity?

Klappich: We believe that over the next decade most medium to large companies will be operating heterogeneous fleets of robots in their warehouses, and as noted above, 87% of companies say that once they deploy their first robot, they plan to seek other robotics use cases.

By heterogenous fleet we mean a company will have multiple different kinds of robots from different vendors doing different things. One data point we have found is that over half of companies believe they will have 1 to 5 different types of robots in their warehouses over the next 3 years, and over 30% of companies said they will have over 5 different types of robot.

This is materializing and we actually now see that some material handling systems integrators are building businesses around helping companies deploy holistic robotic solutions comprised of different robots doing different things. 

LM: With more facilities using robots from different vendors, how critical is interoperability? How are companies solving the challenge of multi-agent orchestration?

Klappich: If I have one robot from one vendor, interoperability is not a big issue nor is integration between my business applications and my robot platform. However, as you start to introduce more robots doing different things, interoperability becomes a big challenge.

Gartner has adopted the name ‘multi-agent orchestration platform’ (MAOP) to describe the software layer that will integrate with and manage the work of a heterogeneous fleet of robots.

Originally, we called this ‘multi-robot orchestration,’ but we soon realized that for robots to effectively operate in the physical world they also need to talk to other things (agents) such as doors, elevators or conveyors so we expanded the name to multi-agent orchestration.

LM: Can you dig a little deeper on the capabilities of MAOP?

Klappich: There are various capabilities that comprise an MAOP. Integration is the first challenge. As the size and diversity of the fleet grows, being able to integrate to all of these becomes increasingly important. MAOP provides the ability to easily connect multiple robots/agents to the platform as well as the ability to seamlessly connect upstream to one or more business application.

Next, most robot platforms have their own fleet management software controlling the activities of their robots. However, once you have multiple robots from multiple vendors, you need something to help orchestration activities across the various robots. At a minimum they need to understand two physical objects cannot occupy the same physical space at the same time, but more importantly, the orchestration layer will control task interplay between various agents.

Next, once I can orchestrate work, the logical next step is to add optimization capabilities to enhance the decision-making process. Finally, just like most robot providers have their own fleet managers they also often have their own analytics. What customers would like is a single pane of glass where they can observe the work being done by all the robots to provide a holistic picture of the performance across the fleet of agents.

LM: What are some of the key benefits operations can realize once they successfully apply and optimize a heterogeneous robotic fleet?

Klappich: Historically, if you drew an automation continuum, it would start with nothing on the left and you would leap to extreme conventional automation on the right, and there was very little in the middle.

While large scale conventional automation is mature, proven and can, where appropriate, have strong value proposition, this comes at a high cost in time, money and effort. Robots bridge this gap, offering companies of all sizes the potential to get benefits from automation while maintaining the flexibility, scalability and adaptability of humans.

Revolutionizing Logistics: The power of SCM software in automation

LM: Here we are, nearly halfway through 2025. How would you best define the current environment inside today’s logistics operations?

Turner: I will use 2020 as a comparative reference point. We all know how 2020 upended supply chains. As a result, we [St. Onge] experienced a surge in clients looking to increase or expand their DC network footprint. Fast forward to the present day, 2025, and we’re starting to see that demand level off. It’s continuing to grow, but at a slower rate. 

Our economy has been robust since 2020, and companies are continuously looking at ways to improve the utilization of this space. So, we’re seeing great interest in the potential of automation and robotics—more than I have seen in my career. Of course, software is key when considering warehouse automation.

LM: What would you say is the current environment with supply chain management software overall? What key advancements have been made in recent years?

Turner: We’re seeing software suite providers—those that offer multiple SCM applications such as WMS, TMS, YMS, and LMS—intensify their platform convergence efforts. They’re coupling this with a micro-services architecture so that only needed functionality is deployed. 

Having all these systems on the same platform not only yields obvious benefits, such as improved user experience and streamlined application integration management, but also starts the blur the lines between these systems.

Not in the sense that a WMS supports TMS functions or vice versa for example. But in the sense that users can open a single application to support their supply chain needs, whether it’s researching inventory (WMS), warehouse productivity (LMS) or trailer shipment status (TMS). From a user’s perspective, it is just one SCM software application.

LM: What would you say are the most fundamental challenges you’re seeing inside today’s operations based on the environment you just defined?

Turner: In contrast to SCM software companies moving their applications to a single platform, companies are looking for ways to corral their various systems and get a unified network view of their supply chain. In these cases, we see interest in control tower applications combined with data warehouse or data lakes. 

This makes sense, as this is the exact use case for these applications. But this has presented another challenge. What is the sole source of truth for key metrics? Often, you have key metrics that are tracked, measured or calculated differently based on the application. These master data issues can easily derail the benefits associated with SCM software deployments.

LM: In what ways are companies using SCM software to optimize warehouse and distribution center operations to overcome these challenges today?

Turner: Specific to the challenges that I just shared; we have clients taking what I consider to be an effective approach to address master data issues. We have clients that are addressing their master data needs concurrently with SCM software investment. 

There are several reasons why master data issues exist. It could be a reliance on several legacy/home grown systems, or a strategy that utilizes 3PL partners with varying levels of technology capabilities to run distribution centers. In these cases, our clients are initially focusing on supply chain health metrics where master data issues do not exist. Which means, initially, it’s a limited rollout. 

As a positive, limiting the rollout also provides an opportunity to develop buy-in across the organization for the selected solution. Next, they’re strategically upgrading legacy/homegrown systems and establishing new metrics to serve as a single point of truth. Where 3PL partners are involved, they’re implementing change management programs to establish key data requirements to ensure those parts of the organization are measuring and calculating metrics consistently.

LM: One of the biggest areas of interest is how SCM software integrates with automation systems in warehouses and DCs. How far have we come in this integration, and what challenges still remain?

Turner: Software integration remains a challenge to a certain degree. While I normally try to avoid absolutes, it seems no two systems are truly plug-n-play. However, these concerns are continuously being addressed and streamlined by software providers—specifically, software providers that support warehouse automation. 

We’re seeing clear guidance of supported interface protocols. They’re gaining experience from integrating with more and varied SCM software as the use of automation grows. Major SCM software companies have partnered with select automation providers to allow for direct integration to their software. 

For instance, if you’re using a best-of-breed WMS and considering a robot pick assist system, there’s likely a list of preferred vendors that have ‘pre-built’ interfaces. The downside is that there are limits to the options presented by the preferred vendors. However, it can significantly streamline—not eliminate—the integration effort.

LM: What are the most critical features of today’s SCM software that make it a game-changer for warehouse operations? How do these features support real-time decision-making?

Turner: We find that clients really appreciate the mobility aspect of current SCM applications.  While there’s still trepidation regarding cumulative costs associated with subscription as a service (SaaS) software, there’s no denying the benefits of running applications from the cloud.

Mobility in this case means a light application footprint capable of running in web browser while all the heavy computing takes place in the cloud.  These applications are designed to work on all the leading web browsers in multiple formats—desktop, tablet, or mobile phone without sacrificing any functionality. 

This results in a uniform experience regardless of the type of device being used to access the SCM application. The spatial component is sometimes missed when discussing real-time decision making. Typically, decision makers would need to be in their office at their desktop at the right time to make real-time decisions. Mobility—and the fact that we are tied to our devices—essentially eliminates the spatial component of real-time decision making.

LM: With the increasing role of data in supply chain optimization, how does modern SCM software harness real-time data to improve warehouse and DC efficiency?

Turner: Best in class warehouse and fulfillment operations understand the importance of data and invest the effort in ensuring accurate foundational data, such as item dimensions, pack quantities, warehouse mapping, and MHE set-up. Factors such as improvements in SCM software, advances in database technology and the prevalence of internet connected devices have produced a plethora of valuable data to be mined and analyzed. 

Looking back 10 to 15 years ago we saw SCM applications promoting their customizable dashboards that could be set by user. The problem with dashboards was that once it was set, it tended to restrict users to certain vantage points of their operation. 

If you added more dashboards then users started to drift into analysis paralysis. AI and machine learning offers promise in this regard. We’re starting to see systems incorporate AI/ML to cut through all available data to provide summaries and focus on key metrics that require actions. Over time, and through observing how users respond to various conditions, these systems can recommend and rank potential courses of action. 

LM: Where do you see supply chain management software evolving over the next 5 to 10 years, especially in relation to automation and other advanced technologies?

Turner: Just as we’re seeing greater interest in warehouse automation at a DC level, we’re also seeing an uptick in interest in network software solutions such as control towers and distributed order management (DOM) applications. Network solutions are particularly interesting in their ability to support sales and operations planning (S&OP) processes, optimize omnichannel order management, drive lower transportation costs and act upon real-time data across the network. 

It will be interesting to see how these systems can leverage data from connected warehouse automation to further drive efficiencies. Network solutions operate in part by understanding order fulfillment capacities of DCs within its footprint—and warehouse automation directly impacts a location’s order fulfillment capacity. 

The ability to route orders not just based on inventory availability and transportation costs, but also real-time productivity and accuracy of warehouse automation, is an intriguing concept.  And the ability to leverage this information both internally [updating inventory re-order points] and externally [improved order tracking information] opens several possibilities.