Deloitte found that 66% of retail executives surveyed plan to restructure their supply chains through onshoring, nearshoring, and supplier diversification if input costs rise, and that 30% already use AI for supply chain visibility, rising to an expected 41% within a year.
Restructuring at that scale is a response to a demand shape that no longer matches the network carrying it. What follows is what eCommerce actually changed, why capacity alone does not resolve it, and the structural responses that do.
What changed, precisely
The common description is that eCommerce increased volume. That is not the difficulty, and networks handle volume growth routinely.
eCommerce changed the shape of the volume. The same tonnage now moves as many more consignments, to many more destinations, in much smaller quantities per drop, with shorter notice and tighter windows.
MIXMOVE frames the consequence directly. Freight economics rest entirely on consolidation. eCommerce fragments consignments at exactly the point where consolidation used to happen, so every efficiency built on grouping is handed back at the end of the chain.
What freight networks were originally built for
Distribution networks were designed for flows towards a small number of large destinations. A supplier shipped in bulk to a distribution centre, which replenished stores in full loads on predictable cycles.
Every element followed from that. Hub locations were chosen for bulk consolidation. Vehicles were sized for full loads. Systems were built to plan replenishment cycles rather than individual orders. Buffers were held because demand at a store was more predictable than demand at a household.
The physical network still reflects those choices. The demand does not.
The four pressures eCommerce created
Consignment fragmentation. More orders of fewer units each, which collapses drop density and vehicle utilisation on the final legs.
Compressed decision time. Orders arrive continuously and require despatch decisions within hours. Overnight planning cycles cannot respond to demand that keeps arriving after the plan is fixed.
Destination proliferation. Delivery points multiplied from hundreds of stores to millions of addresses, and each new address adds route complexity rather than volume.
Reverse flow at scale. Online return rates run several times higher than in physical retail, which creates a second network flowing in the opposite direction through infrastructure designed for one-way movement.
Why adding capacity does not resolve it
Capacity addresses volume. The problem is fragmentation, which is a coordination failure rather than a capacity shortfall.
A larger hub processes more consignments. It does not make them fuller. More vehicles carry more drops. They do not raise the drop density that determines cost per delivery. Both responses scale the cost alongside the volume, which is precisely what a distribution network exists to avoid.
McKinsey research into mid-mile and last-mile handovers found that waste created at blind handoffs between shippers, dispatchers, third-party logistics providers, and carriers accounts for between 6% and 13% of carrier revenue, with dwell time named as a leading driver. Fragmentation multiplies handoffs, and each additional handoff carries that cost forward.
The five structural responses
Consolidate later in the chain. Where fragmentation happens at the end, consolidation must move to meet it. Grouping at the final hub compresses the leg where utilisation is worst.
Decide per shipment rather than per facility. A single inbound trailer now carries freight requiring several different treatments. A facility-level rule cannot serve them all correctly.
Replace overnight planning with continuous allocation. Where orders arrive after the plan is set, the allocation must be able to change during the day rather than waiting for the next cycle.
Design the reverse flow deliberately. Returns handled as an exception process consume disproportionate cost and destroy recoverable value while units wait for inspection.
Capture execution data at the point of the event. Networks changing this quickly cannot be managed from records reconstructed after the fact, and emissions reporting now requires the same detail.
What this means for B2B, not only retail
The pattern is frequently described as a consumer phenomenon. It is not.
Business ordering has followed the same path. Smaller order quantities, higher frequency, shorter lead times, and direct delivery to point of use rather than to a central store. The consequences for the network are identical, and the tolerance for failure is lower, because a missing component halts production rather than disappointing a shopper.
What the evidence shows
Deloitte reports that 66% of retail executives surveyed plan to restructure their supply chains if input costs rise, with 30% using AI for supply chain visibility rising to an expected 41% within a year, and 59% anticipating positive return on investment within 12 months.
McKinsey attributes between 6% and 13% of carrier revenue to waste at handover points, with dwell time named as a leading driver.
The European Environment Agency identifies road freight as one of the fastest-growing sources of transport emissions, driven by rising delivery volumes and low vehicle utilisation.
Across MIXMOVE deployments, operations have recorded fill rate improvements of 10% to 20%, up to 130% higher warehouse hub throughput, up to 80% fewer errors, up to 50% less warehouse space, and up to 58% labour cost savings. The platform is in use across 35+ distribution companies in 20+ countries.
At 3M, a decade of collaboration produced a 90% truck fill rate, a 35% reduction in transport costs, and a 50% reduction in CO₂ emissions.
“By using the MIXMOVE software, 3M managed to reduce transport costs by 35% and CO₂ emissions by 50%.”
— Patrick Van De Vyver, Former Head of EMEA Logistics Operations, 3M
How MIXMOVE HUB OS restores consolidation
Fragmentation is a sorting problem before it is a transport problem. MIXMOVE HUB OS identifies inbound freight at item level on arrival and matches it against live outbound commitments, which allows consignments heading to the same area to be grouped at the last possible moment rather than at the earliest.
Because the decision is made per shipment rather than per facility, a single trailer can be split, cross-docked, and pooled in one pass. That is what fragmented demand requires and what facility-level rules cannot provide.
Allocation responds to orders arriving during the day rather than to a plan fixed the night before, which is the difference between a network that absorbs fragmentation and one that pays for it.
MIXMOVE HUB OS operates alongside an existing TMS, WMS, or ERP as an orchestration layer, or as a standalone platform.
MIXMOVE DI structures the execution record for network reporting, including utilisation by leg and Scope 3 transport reporting built to ISO 14083 methodology.
eCommerce did not add volume. It removed the density freight economics depend on. Operations that rebuild consolidation at the end of the chain recover what fragmentation took.
Read the MIXMOVE HUB OS overview to see how split, cross-dock, and pool decisions are made on a single inbound trailer.
Frequently asked questions
How has eCommerce changed logistics?
It changed the shape of freight rather than the quantity. The same tonnage now moves as more consignments, to more destinations, in smaller quantities per drop, with shorter notice, which removes the consolidation that freight economics depend on.
Why has eCommerce made delivery more expensive?
Because cost per delivery is driven by drop density. Smaller, more frequent orders to more addresses reduce the number of drops a vehicle completes per journey, so the fixed cost of the journey is spread across fewer deliveries.
Does this affect B2B logistics as well as retail?
Yes. Business ordering has moved the same way, towards smaller quantities, higher frequency, and delivery to point of use. The network consequences are the same and the tolerance for failure is lower.
What should networks do in response?
Consolidate later in the chain, decide treatment per shipment rather than per facility, replace overnight planning with continuous allocation, design the returns flow deliberately, and capture execution data at the point of the event.
