Warehouse & transport network optimisation: DC strategy, 3PL reviews and transport tendering that deliver real results

A lot of network projects start the same way.

Someone walks you through a warehouse that feels like it’s bursting at the seams. Pallets are parked wherever there’s daylight. Pick paths have turned into obstacle courses. Dock congestion is “just how it is now”. Meanwhile, freight invoices keep climbing, and the customer team is fielding more “where’s my order?” calls than anyone wants to admit.

Then the question lands: Do we need another DC… or do we need a better network?

For Australian and New Zealand organisations—where distances are vast, labour markets are tight, and service expectations are rising—warehouse and transport network optimisation is one of the most reliable ways to unlock cost savings and improve service. Done well, it creates a network that fits today’s volumes and tomorrow’s growth. Done poorly, it becomes a spreadsheet exercise that never survives contact with operations.

This article is a practical playbook for leaders who are searching for:

• DC strategy (where should we hold stock and why?)
• warehouse network optimisation (how many sites, where, and what should each do?)
• 3PL reviews and 3PL tendering (is our provider right, and are we paying the right price?)
• transport tendering and freight optimisation (how do we reset rates and performance without blowing up service?)

And most importantly: how to run the program in a way that protects service levels, avoids disruption, and delivers savings that stick.

Why network optimisation is a high-impact lever right now

Network costs usually creep, then spike.

Warehousing gets more expensive through labour, space, congestion and inefficiency. Transport gets more expensive through fuel, carrier constraints, accessorials, and last-minute expedites. Inventory gets more expensive through buffer stock, split shipments, and “just in case” buying.

When you step back, most symptoms trace back to one underlying issue:

The network no longer matches the business.

That mismatch typically shows up as:

• too many nodes (complexity) or too few nodes (service pain)
• inventory in the wrong places
• transport lanes that don’t reflect where demand actually is
• contracts that were built for yesterday’s profile (store-based, not e-commerce; metro-heavy, not regional; stable volumes, not volatile)
• 3PL arrangements that reward activity rather than outcomes

Network optimisation is where you can align service, cost, and working capital—not by squeezing one lever, but by redesigning how the system works.

The common triggers that tell you it’s time to review your DC and transport network

If you’re seeing any of these, you’re not alone:

1) Warehouses are “full”, but you’re not sure why

• storage is maxed out, but pick faces are inefficient
• slow movers are consuming prime space
• inbound is lumpy, outbound is peaky, and the site can’t cope

2) Freight costs are escalating faster than revenue

• rate increases plus higher accessorials (wait time, redeliveries, tailgate, rural fees)
• lane mismatch (inventory location doesn’t match demand)
• increased expedites due to stockouts or late cut-offs

3) Service levels are slipping

• DIFOT/OTIF issues
• more partial shipments and split orders
• greater customer complaints and retailer chargebacks

4) Growth, channel shift, or range complexity has changed the game

• e-commerce and direct-to-consumer growth
• range expansion and SKU proliferation
• different order profiles (smaller, more frequent, more urgent)

5) A contract decision is looming

• 3PL contract expiry, extension, or underperformance
• warehouse lease expiry or rent escalation
• transport contracts being rolled without a true market test

6) You’re considering automation

Automation can be a great enabler—but it must be designed into the right network. Automating the wrong site, in the wrong place, for the wrong flows is an expensive lesson.

What “good” looks like: outcomes of an effective network optimisation program

A successful network optimisation doesn’t just produce a map. It produces a network that’s operationally viable and commercially defensible:

• Clear DC roles (e.g., national DC, regional forward stock, returns, bulky, temperature-controlled, spare parts)
• Defined service promise and order cut-offs aligned to customer expectations
• Reduced cost-to-serve (warehousing + transport) without degrading delivery performance
• Reduced inventory duplication and better stock availability
• Better carrier performance and visibility through realistic lanes and governance
• 3PL and transport contracts with clear KPIs, pricing mechanics, and escalation paths
• A staged transition plan that keeps the business running

The three truths that make or break DC and transport strategy in ANZ

Truth #1: The cheapest network on paper is rarely the cheapest network in real life

Models love simplification. Operations live in constraints: labour availability, site access, peak demand, industrial relations, safety, and IT limitations. Your “optimal” network must survive those realities.

Truth #2: Transport and warehousing decisions are inseparable

A DC in the “wrong” location can wipe out any labour savings through transport. Similarly, a cheap transport contract can fail if your warehouse dispatch discipline and cut-offs are unrealistic.

Truth #3: Implementation is where savings become real (or disappear)

Tendering is not the finish line. Transition planning, governance, and benefits tracking are where value sticks.

The network optimisation playbook: a step-by-step approach that works

Phase 1: Baseline the current network (2–4 weeks)

Start with a clean view of “what is”:

• sites, roles, capacities, constraints
• volumes by lane (inbound, inter-DC, outbound)
• order profile (lines/order, units/line, cube, peak factors)
• service levels and failure points
• warehousing cost structure (labour, occupancy, MHE, systems, overhead)
• transport cost structure (linehaul, last-mile, accessorials, fuel, minimums)
• inventory positioning and working capital impacts

Key outputs:

• a network map with flows and volumes
• a baseline cost-to-serve view
• service performance baseline (what “good” looks like today, and where it breaks)

Phase 2: Clarify the service promise and constraints (1–2 weeks)

This sounds obvious, but it’s where many projects drift.

You need alignment on:

• delivery lead times (metro vs regional, AU vs NZ, island vs island)
• cut-off times and dispatch discipline
• service tiers by customer segment (not every customer needs the same speed)
• compliance and safety constraints (Chain of Responsibility, site access, fatigue, temperature, dangerous goods, biosecurity where relevant)
• growth scenarios and strategic priorities (cost vs speed vs resilience)

Key output: a set of non-negotiables for modelling and tendering.

Phase 3: Design scenarios (2–3 weeks)

Network optimisation is scenario thinking, not a single answer.

Common scenarios include:

• centralised (fewer DCs, strong linehaul, high efficiency, potentially longer last-mile)
• hybrid (national DC + regional forward stock for speed/peaks)
• decentralised (more nodes for service, higher complexity and duplication risk)
• 3PL vs in-house (and hybrids)
• channel-specific fulfilment (stores/DC/DTC split)
• cross-dock vs stock-holding approaches

Each scenario should quantify:

• warehousing costs (including capacity and peak handling)
• transport costs by lane and service tier
• inventory impacts (duplication, safety stock, working capital)
• service implications (lead times, DIFOT risk)
• operational feasibility (labour, property, systems readiness)
• transition complexity and risk

Key output: 2–4 viable scenarios to take to decision.

Phase 4: Validate with operational reality (1–2 weeks)

This is where you pressure-test assumptions with the people who run the network.

Practical checks include:

• capacity modelling vs actual congestion points (docks, despatch, pick faces)
• labour availability and shift design
• inbound scheduling capability
• returns processing and reverse logistics implications
• cartonisation, pallet standards, and dispatch discipline
• what your WMS/TMS can actually support (and what needs uplift)

Key output: a preferred scenario that operations can stand behind.

Phase 5: Convert strategy into a procurement and transition plan (2–4 weeks)

Here’s the pivot many teams miss: once you choose a network direction, you need an executable plan.

This includes:

• which services to tender first (3PL, linehaul, last-mile, warehousing labour, packaging, etc.)
• lotting strategy (state-based vs national; metro vs regional; temperature vs ambient; bulky vs parcel)
• KPI and reporting design
• transition plan (site cutovers, inventory moves, IT changes, customer comms)
• governance and benefits tracking approach

Key output: a tender-ready procurement roadmap, not just a network diagram.

3PL reviews: how to assess performance before you retender

If you’re searching for “3PL review” or “warehouse outsourcing review”, it usually means one of two things:

1. You suspect you’re overpaying, under-served, or both
2. You need confidence before committing to an extension, rebid, or transition

A practical 3PL review should cover:

1) Commercial health

• rate card structure and where costs actually accrue
• accessorials and “variation” behaviours
• indexation mechanics and wage pass-through rules
• volume bands and what happens when volumes change
• how claims, damages, and rework are handled commercially

2) Operational performance

• DIFOT/OTIF and order cycle time
• pick accuracy, inbound compliance, stock integrity
• labour productivity and peak management
• dock utilisation and dispatch discipline
• incident and safety performance

3) Capability and fit

• technology (WMS maturity, reporting, integrations)
• process maturity (CI, standard work, escalation cadence)
• culture and leadership stability
• ability to support channel changes (e-com growth, store replenishment changes, new product types)

4) Governance and “ways of working”

Often the contract isn’t the problem; the governance is.

• weekly performance cadence
• who owns root cause fixes
• data and reporting definitions
• issue escalation paths that actually work

The point of a 3PL review isn’t to build a case against the provider.
It’s to establish a fact base so you can decide whether to fix, renegotiate, retender, or redesign.

Transport tendering: how to reset freight cost without torching service

Transport tendering in ANZ can be deceptively tricky. The lane mix is diverse: metro, regional, remote; courier, parcel, pallet; linehaul, last-mile, inter-island; time-definite vs economy. If your data and scope aren’t tight, you’ll get bids you can’t compare—or rates that look good until accessorials show up.

Step 1: Build a clean lane and volume picture

At minimum:

• origin and destination postcodes
• shipment type (parcel, pallet, bulky, temperature-controlled, dangerous goods if relevant)
• weight and cubic volume distributions
• frequency and peak factors
• delivery service tier requirements

Step 2: Fix the service promise before you price it

You need clarity on:

• delivery timeframes by zone
• cut-offs and dispatch windows
• POD requirements
• returns and failed delivery rules
• customer experience expectations

Step 3: Design a pricing schedule that forces comparability

Good tenders separate:

• linehaul vs local delivery
• base rate vs fuel vs accessorials
• waiting time rules
• redelivery rules
• minimums and surcharges
• peak capacity pricing mechanics

Step 4: Evaluate on more than price

For freight, “cheapest” can become “most expensive” quickly if performance drops.

Consider:

• on-time performance history and capacity commitments
• claims process maturity
• visibility and tracking capability
• network coverage and subcontractor control
• safety and compliance posture

Step 5: Negotiate the terms that actually matter

In transport, value often sits in:

• fuel index mechanics
• accessorial definitions
• volume commitments and rate review triggers
• performance regimes (credits, incentives, escalation)
• dispute resolution and claim timelines

Step 6: Plan transition like a project, not a handover

Transport changes fail when:

• customer service isn’t briefed
• dispatch processes don’t change
• labels and manifests aren’t tested
• carriers don’t have onboarding time
• sites keep using old booking methods

A proper transition plan includes:

• cutover approach (phased vs big bang)
• system and label testing
• site training
• operational playbooks
• performance tracking from week one

The biggest mistakes in network optimisation (and how to avoid them)

Mistake 1: Modelling without understanding the warehouse operation

A model might say “one DC is optimal” while the real world says “that DC can’t physically process the peak”.

Fix: build capacity assumptions with operational validation—docks, labour, shift design, congestion, inbound scheduling.

Mistake 2: Treating inventory as an afterthought

Network changes alter safety stock, lead times, and availability. Ignoring inventory can turn savings into service failures.

Fix: include inventory impacts in every scenario—duplication, replenishment cadence, and working capital.

Mistake 3: Choosing sites based on rent alone

Property cost matters, but labour availability, transport lanes, and site access often matter more.

Fix: use a balanced decision framework: labour, accessibility, growth, compliance, and total cost-to-serve.

Mistake 4: Retendering without fixing scope and data

Bad data produces bad bids. Vague scope produces expensive risk pricing.

Fix: invest time in lane cleansing, scope clarity, and comparability schedules.

Mistake 5: Finishing the tender, then “hoping” implementation works

Hope is not a transition plan.

Fix: design mobilisation, cutover, and governance upfront—include transition capability in the evaluation.

Quick wins: what you can do in 30–60 days before a full strategy study

If you need momentum fast, these actions are typically worthwhile:

• Build a baseline cost-to-serve view (warehousing + transport)
• Identify top lanes and top accessorials driving freight cost
• Review carrier performance and claims process
• Assess DC capacity constraints and peak bottlenecks
• Tighten dispatch discipline: cut-offs, wave planning, dock scheduling
• Review packaging and cube utilisation (often a freight multiplier)
• Map contracts and expiry dates (3PL, transport, leases)
• Establish a weekly performance cadence with your 3PL/carriers if one doesn’t exist

Quick wins won’t replace strategy—but they reduce leakage and create immediate control.

How Trace Consultants can help with DC strategy, 3PL reviews and transport tendering

Network optimisation sits at the intersection of operations, finance, customer experience, technology, and procurement. It needs both modelling capability and operational realism.

Trace Consultants supports Australian and New Zealand organisations with practical, end-to-end programs across warehouse and transport network optimisation, including:

1) Warehouse & transport network strategy

• baseline and cost-to-serve analysis
• scenario design and evaluation (centralised/hybrid/decentralised)
• inventory and service trade-off modelling
• feasibility assessment and implementation roadmap

2) Distribution centre (DC) strategy and operating model design

• defining DC roles, service promise, and cut-offs
• capacity planning and peak management
• warehouse process design and productivity uplift
• technology considerations (WMS/TMS requirements and integration needs)

3) 3PL review and sourcing support

• performance and commercial health checks
• contract and rate card structure review
• governance and KPI design
• 3PL tender support: RFP documentation, evaluation, negotiation, mobilisation planning

4) Transport optimisation and tendering

• lane and shipment profile cleansing
• transport strategy (linehaul vs last-mile, metro vs regional segmentation)
• tender design, evaluation and negotiation support
• carrier onboarding and transition program management

5) Implementation and benefits realisation

• transition planning and cutovers
• operational playbooks and training
• KPI dashboards and governance cadence
• benefits tracking aligned with Finance

Most importantly: Trace’s approach is designed to reduce operational risk. Network change is disruptive if it’s done in isolation. Done properly, it becomes an orderly program with clear decision gates, measurable outcomes, and a transition plan that your sites can execute.

What to prepare if you’re considering a network review or tender

If you’re ready to move quickly, assemble:

Data

• shipment history (origin/destination, weight, cube, mode, service level)
• warehouse volumes (inbound/outbound, order profiles, peak factors)
• current warehousing and transport costs (including accessorials)
• inventory positioning and turns
• performance data (DIFOT/OTIF, claims, stock accuracy, lead times)
• contract details and expiry dates (3PL, transport, leases)

Stakeholders

• operations leaders (DC and transport)
• customer service/fulfilment owners
• procurement (tender governance)
• finance (benefits validation)
• IT (WMS/TMS/integrations)
• risk and safety (compliance, Chain of Responsibility)

The bottom line: optimise the network, then tender with purpose

If your warehouses are constrained, freight is blowing out, or service is slipping, a network optimisation program is often the fastest way to reset cost and performance at the same time. But the real value comes when strategy turns into procurement action—3PL reviews, transport tendering, and transition planning that actually deliver.

If you’re considering a DC strategy refresh, a 3PL review, or a transport tender, Trace Consultants can help you move from “we think we have a network problem” to a defensible plan and a controlled implementation—without gambling with service.

‍

Implementation is Everything: Why Strategy Fails Without Follow-Through

Co-authored by Tim Fagan (Senior Manager) and Shanaka Jayasinghe (Partner), Trace Consultants

There’s a familiar moment in too many organisations: the strategy deck gets approved, the steering committee congratulates itself, and then… everyone goes back to their day jobs.

Not because people don’t care. Not because the strategy is bad. But because the organisation hasn’t built the machinery to follow through—to turn intent into operating rhythms, behaviours, decisions, capability, and measurable outcomes.

In our work across Australia and New Zealand, we see it in every corner of the service and supply chain landscape: procurement transformation plans that never shift buying behaviour, workforce strategies that don’t change rostering on the floor, technology roadmaps that create more tools than adoption, and operating model designs that look tidy on a slide but collapse under Monday-morning reality.

The key takeaway is blunt by design:

Strategy fails without follow-through. The differentiator isn’t who can write the smartest recommendations—it’s who can help the organisation do the work. That bias to “doing” rather than “advising” is exactly where boutique specialised firms like Trace can add outsized value.

This article is a practical guide to closing the strategy-to-implementation gap. No hype. No magic frameworks. Just the disciplines that consistently separate strategies that sit on shelves from strategies that change performance.

The uncomfortable truth: execution is where strategies go to die

Harvard Business Review has long pointed out that two-thirds to three-quarters of large organisations struggle with execution—even when their strategy is sound.  That’s not a niche problem. It’s the default risk profile of change.

McKinsey’s work on transformations echoes the same theme: success remains elusive, and leaders often “lose from day one” when they don’t lock in the conditions that realise benefits.

Put simply: strategy is necessary, but it’s not sufficient.

In fact, a great strategy can make execution harder if it:

• creates too many initiatives at once
• spreads accountability thin
• assumes behaviour will change because a document says so
• depends on capabilities the organisation doesn’t yet have
• underestimates the operational drag of “business as usual”

The gap isn’t between thinking and doing. It’s between deciding and delivering.

Why strategy execution fails in the real world

Most post-mortems blame vague things: “lack of alignment”, “change resistance”, “competing priorities”.

Those are symptoms. The underlying failure modes are usually more specific and fixable.

1) No single owner is accountable for outcomes

A strategy may have “sponsors”, “stakeholders”, and “workstreams”—but if nobody owns a measurable outcome end-to-end, delivery becomes everyone’s problem and nobody’s job.

2) The organisation confuses activity with progress

Milestones get ticked off (workshops held, papers written, systems configured), while service levels, cost-to-serve, lead times, compliance metrics, or workforce stability barely move.

3) Coordination breaks down across functions

HBR’s work highlights a common myth: execution isn’t simply about vertical alignment; it’s about coordination across units that rely on each other.  That’s where strategies quietly unravel—handoffs, dependencies, and “someone else needs to do that part first”.

4) The plan ignores operational reality

Strategies often assume:

• perfect data
• stable demand
• ample change capacity
• cooperative stakeholders
• uninterrupted funding
• available talent
• time for training

Then reality shows up.

5) Change is treated as communications

A few emails and a town hall do not change behaviour. Kotter’s classic work on why transformation efforts fail lays out predictable pitfalls—like not creating urgency, not building a guiding coalition, and not anchoring changes into culture.

6) Benefits are not owned, measured, or protected

Even when early wins appear, they leak away because:

• definitions aren’t agreed
• baselines aren’t credible
• operational leaders aren’t accountable
• tracking becomes optional
• improvements aren’t embedded into standard work

McKinsey notes that certain actions are especially predictive of realising financial benefits—meaning benefits don’t happen by accident.

If any of this feels familiar, it’s because most organisations have built strong muscles for analysis and planning—and weaker muscles for disciplined delivery.

Implementation is not “the next phase”. It’s the strategy.

Here’s the mindset shift we want leaders to make:

Strategy is not a document. It’s a set of choices plus a delivery system.

If the delivery system is weak—governance, ownership, capability, cadence, measurement—then even brilliant choices fade into the background noise of BAU.

Implementation requires deliberate design:

• what will change (process, tech, roles, behaviours)
• who will own it (clear accountability, not committees)
• how work will be delivered (delivery engine and cadence)
• how change will stick (capability, incentives, standards)
• how value will be proven (benefits tracking and course-correction)

This is where boutique specialised firms can differentiate. It’s not that “big firms can’t implement”. It’s that many large programs become optimised for producing recommendations, artefacts, and governance rituals—rather than accelerating decisions and embedding change into operations.

The most valuable partners are the ones who roll up sleeves and help teams do the work: design, build, test, train, deploy, stabilise, improve.

The follow-through playbook: how to make strategy real

Below is a practical, repeatable approach we use in implementation-heavy work (supply chain, procurement, workforce, service operations, enabling technology). It’s not glamorous. It’s effective.

1) Translate strategy into a small number of “moves”

The fastest way to kill execution is to pursue everything.

A strategy should become a handful of moves that can be explained without slides. For example:

• redesign demand planning and inventory policies
• standardise procurement categories and contract governance
• optimise warehouse operating model and workforce standards
• uplift rostering capability to stabilise service and labour cost
• modernise reporting and operational control towers
• digitise specific workflows that reduce admin load and rework

Each move needs:

• a measurable outcome
• a target date (and interim measures)
• a clear owner
• the minimum scope required to move the metric

If you can’t articulate the moves, you don’t have an executable strategy—you have a wish list.

2) Build a delivery backbone (the “engine room”)

Strategies commonly rely on hope: “people will just do it.”

Instead, create a delivery backbone that answers:

• what are we delivering, this week?
• who is accountable?
• what decisions are needed, by when?
• what blockers exist, and who removes them?
• how are we tracking outcomes, not just tasks?

This can be a lightweight PMO or a transformation office, but the key is discipline, not bureaucracy.

A good delivery backbone:

• protects focus (fewer priorities, clearer sequencing)
• accelerates decisions (short cycles, documented trade-offs)
• makes progress visible (simple dashboards, honest status)
• keeps the organisation aligned (one narrative, one plan)
• prevents “quiet failure” (where programs drift without anyone saying it)

3) Design the operating model before you configure systems

A common trap: buy or configure technology, then try to force the operating model to fit the tool.

Implementation works better when you lock in:

• roles and accountabilities
• decision rights
• standard work (what good looks like)
• escalation paths
• performance metrics

Then configure technology to support that model—rather than hoping technology will create it.

This applies whether you’re implementing an ERP module, a planning system, a rostering platform, a procurement suite, or a low-code workflow.

4) Treat change as capability building, not messaging

If you want different results, people need:

• new skills
• new routines
• new tools they trust
• support while learning
• reinforcement (standards, coaching, consequences)

Kotter’s eight-step logic still lands because it focuses on building momentum through urgency, coalition, wins, and culture—rather than assuming change happens because leaders announced it.

Pragmatically, this means:

• train people in the work they actually do (not generic system training)
• embed “super users” and frontline champions
• run simulations and dry runs before go-live
• remove admin steps that compete with adoption
• set up a hypercare period with real support
• make new ways of working the default, not optional

5) Make benefits real, measurable, and owned

If benefits aren’t owned, they’re imaginary.

Effective benefits realisation includes:

• a baseline agreed with Finance and operations
• a clear definition (what counts, what doesn’t)
• leading indicators (early signs of movement)
• owners who can actually influence outcomes
• regular review where leaders act on what they see

McKinsey’s research reinforces that benefits realisation is tied to specific actions and conditions—meaning it needs active management, not passive reporting.

6) Run implementation in thin slices—prove value, then scale

Long, monolithic programs tend to:

• delay value
• increase risk
• exhaust stakeholders
• amplify scope creep

A better approach is to deliver in thin slices:

• pick one site, one workflow, one category, one roster cohort
• implement, stabilise, measure
• refine the model
• scale what works

This is how you build confidence and momentum without betting the farm.

“Doing” is the differentiator: why boutique specialised firms win in implementation

There’s a reason boutique firms can punch above their weight in delivery-heavy work:

We stay close to the operational detail

Implementation succeeds in the gritty details: how a planner actually forecasts, how a warehouse shift hands over, how a nurse in charge redeploys staff during a surge, how a buyer uses contracts, how exceptions are managed.

We bridge strategy, operations, and enabling tech

Most programs fail at the seams—between the “strategy people”, the “process people”, and the “systems people”. Boutique specialists can integrate these perspectives without turning every handoff into a new meeting series.

We build capability, not dependency

The goal isn’t to run your business forever. It’s to transfer a workable model, the tools to manage it, and the routines to sustain it.

We bias toward practical outcomes

Less theatre. More traction. The bar is simple: does this change improve service, cost, compliance, or workforce sustainability in a measurable way?

That last point matters in Australia and New Zealand right now. Organisations are operating in a tighter environment—labour cost pressure, service expectations rising, and constrained change capacity. The partners who can help you do the work (not just describe it) are the ones who create value.

What implementation looks like across common transformation areas

To make this tangible, here are examples of how “follow-through” plays out in areas Trace is often engaged in. (No made-up case study figures—just the types of work that move outcomes.)

Supply chain and logistics strategies

A strategy might call for “improved service, lower cost-to-serve, and reduced inventory”.

Follow-through looks like:

• defining service policies and inventory settings that match customer promise
• standardising planning cadences (S&OP/IBP routines)
• redesigning warehouse operating models (waves, pick paths, replenishment disciplines)
• clarifying roles (who owns forecast, who owns bias, who owns exceptions)
• implementing reporting that operational leaders actually use
• training teams in new ways of working and stabilising the change

Procurement transformation

A strategy might call for “category management uplift and savings”.

Follow-through looks like:

• building category pipelines with accountable owners
• improving data and spend visibility (definitions matter)
• standardising sourcing and contract governance
• embedding compliance into daily buying workflows
• establishing supplier performance routines (not occasional reviews)
• creating tools/templates that reduce cycle time and lift consistency

Workforce planning and rostering

A strategy might call for “meeting service targets while controlling labour costs”.

Follow-through looks like:

• demand and workload modelling (not just averages)
• defining staffing standards and skill mix requirements
• clarifying decision rights (who approves overtime, agency, surge changes)
• implementing scheduling tools aligned to operating model
• building fairness and transparency into rostering rules
• improving real-time visibility so leaders can act early

Enabling technology and workflow automation

A strategy might call for “digitisation and efficiency”.

Follow-through looks like:

• selecting high-value workflows (not platform sprawl)
• designing minimum lovable workflows (adoption-first)
• integrating lightly but intentionally
• building support models so tools don’t become shelfware
• measuring the reduction in admin time, rework, delays, and errors

This is the point: implementation is not a generic phase. It’s the craft of converting intent into a working system.

The implementation checklist leaders can use tomorrow

If you’re leading a strategy right now, ask these questions:

1. What are the 3–5 moves we’re actually making?
   If it’s 12 moves, it’s probably 3 moves pretending to be 12.
2. Who owns each outcome end-to-end?
   Not “supports”. Owns.
3. What will be different on the frontline in 30, 60, 90 days?
   If you can’t answer, you may be building artefacts, not change.
4. What’s our delivery cadence?
   Weekly rhythm, decision points, escalation mechanism.
5. What capabilities must change for this to work?
   Skills, routines, standards, tools.
6. How will we measure progress in outcomes (not activity)?
   Baselines, leading indicators, benefits owners.
7. What will we stop doing to make room for this?
   Implementation fails when it’s added on top of BAU with no trade-offs.

These questions sound simple. They’re hard because they force clarity.

How Trace Consultants can help

Trace is a boutique, specialised advisory firm—but our edge is not the advice. It’s the follow-through.

We help organisations across Australia and New Zealand bridge the gap between strategy and delivery by focusing on what actually drives outcomes: operating models, process discipline, enabling tech that gets adopted, and governance that accelerates rather than slows.

Here are common ways we support clients:

1) Strategy-to-implementation mobilisation

• translate strategy into a small set of executable moves
• define scope, sequencing, and resourcing
• establish governance that supports decisions and delivery
• set up benefits frameworks with Finance and operations

2) Program delivery and PMO support

• build a practical delivery backbone (cadence, reporting, escalation)
• manage dependencies across functions and vendors
• maintain focus on outcomes and risk reduction
• provide hands-on project and change resources where capacity is tight

3) Operating model and process implementation

• design standard work and role clarity
• embed routines (planning cycles, performance cadence, decision rights)
• support frontline adoption through training, coaching, and hypercare

4) Technology enablement with adoption at the centre

• requirements grounded in real workflows
• vendor and solution evaluation support
• implementation planning that protects time-to-value
• post go-live stabilisation and continuous improvement

5) Benefits realisation and performance uplift

• define measurable outcomes and baselines
• track leading indicators and embed accountability
• course-correct early (before “quiet failure” sets in)

We’re at our best when the job is not just to recommend—but to deliver, embed, and transfer capability. That’s the “doing” that makes boutique specialised firms valuable.

Closing thought: follow-through is the real strategy

Most strategies don’t fail because the analysis was wrong. They fail because the organisation didn’t build the conditions to execute—ownership, delivery rhythm, capability, adoption, measurement.

That’s why implementation is everything.

If you’re about to launch (or rescue) a transformation—supply chain, procurement, workforce, service operations, enabling tech—Trace can help you turn the plan into a working system and measurable outcomes.

Because at the end of the day, nobody rewards a beautiful strategy deck.

They reward results.

‍

Network Optimisation and Strategic Warehouse Reviews

A practical Australia–New Zealand guide to lowering logistics cost, lifting service, and future‑proofing your supply chain

If your supply chain feels like it’s working harder than it should, you’re probably right. In Australia and New Zealand, distance is unforgiving, freight markets can turn quickly, and warehouse labour and industrial property constraints don’t politely wait for your next budgeting cycle. Add customer expectations for faster delivery, channel complexity, and constant disruption—from weather events to port variability—and suddenly “the network” isn’t just a diagram on a slide deck. It’s your margin.

That’s where network optimisation and strategic warehouse reviews come in.

Done well, they’re not academic exercises or software-only projects. They’re practical, decision-ready programs that answer questions like:

• Are we holding inventory in the right places for the way customers buy today (and will buy tomorrow)?
• Do we have the right number of warehouses—and are they in the right locations?
• Are we using our existing sites as effectively as we could, or are we paying for inefficiency twice (labour and space)?
• What service levels can we realistically promise by region—and what do they cost?
• How do we plan for growth, volatility, sustainability targets, and risk without overbuilding?

This article breaks down what network optimisation and strategic warehouse reviews actually involve, common traps organisations fall into, and a clear pathway to decisions you can implement. It’s written for leaders who need outcomes, not buzzwords—whether you’re a COO, supply chain director, logistics manager, CFO, or property and procurement lead.

Why this topic matters right now in Australia and New Zealand

There’s a reason “we should review the network” keeps resurfacing in leadership meetings: small inefficiencies compound fast in ANZ.

A few realities tend to hit at once:

1) Geography makes mistakes expensive
In Australia, sending freight the wrong way—especially across long east–west corridors—turns into real dollars quickly. In New Zealand, inter-island movements, terrain, and the concentration of population in a handful of centres create their own set of trade-offs.

2) Customer expectations have shifted (and don’t shift back)
Even in B2B, lead times are compressing. In B2C, next-day delivery expectations vary by region, but the direction of travel is clear: customers want speed, accuracy, and visibility.

3) Warehousing constraints are structural, not temporary
Labour availability, automation lead times, and industrial property realities mean you can’t “just add a shift” or “just lease another building” without consequences. Capacity planning has to be deliberate.

4) Inventory is a service lever—and a cost sink
Network decisions directly drive inventory positioning and safety stock. A network that looks cheap on transport can quietly blow out working capital and obsolescence.

5) Resilience and sustainability have moved from nice-to-have to board-level
The network you design needs to cope with disruption and support emissions reduction efforts—without sacrificing service.

In short: network and warehouse decisions are no longer periodic tidy-ups. They’re strategic.

What network optimisation actually means (beyond the buzzword)

Network optimisation is the disciplined process of designing (or redesigning) how product flows from suppliers to customers across your distribution footprint—balancing service, cost, inventory, risk, and constraints.

It typically covers:

• Warehouse locations and roles (national DC, regional DCs, cross-docks, forward stocking locations, micro-fulfilment, etc.)
• Customer allocation rules (which customers ship from which sites, and when that changes)
• Transport mode and lane strategy (linehaul, metro, regional carriers, intermodal/rail where applicable, coastal shipping, direct-to-store, etc.)
• Inventory positioning and policy (cycle stock vs safety stock; postponement; decoupling points)
• Capacity planning (space, docks, automation throughput, labour, peak handling)
• Service design (lead times by region, cut-off times, delivery frequency, DIFOT targets)
• Constraints and realities (property, labour, technology readiness, transition risk, supplier lead times)

A key point: optimisation doesn’t mean chasing the mathematically cheapest network. It means selecting the best network for your strategy—and being explicit about trade-offs.

For example, an “optimal” model might suggest consolidating warehouses to reduce fixed cost. But if that adds two days to regional delivery and triggers lost sales, the cheapest network on paper becomes the most expensive decision you can make.

The best network work brings the full picture together: cost, service, inventory, and risk—then turns it into a decision leaders can back.

What a strategic warehouse review is (and why it’s not just a site walk-through)

A strategic warehouse review looks at each facility (and your portfolio overall) and asks: Is this warehouse fit for purpose today, and will it still be fit for purpose in three to five years?

It’s broader than operational auditing. It typically considers:

1) Role clarity: what is this site meant to do?

• Is it a national reserve and replenishment hub, or a fast-response regional node?
• Is it bulk storage, pick/pack, kitting, returns processing, or value-added services?
• Is the operating model aligned to demand and order profiles?

2) Capacity and constraints

• Storage capacity (pallet positions, racking, floor utilisation, height use)
• Throughput constraints (receiving, replenishment, picking, packing, dispatch)
• Dock and yard capacity
• Peak management readiness (seasonal volumes, promotions, project work)

3) Layout and flow

• Do travel paths make sense, or has the site evolved into a patchwork?
• Are fast movers genuinely “fast” in layout placement, or just fast in the ERP?
• Are you balancing efficiency with safety and congestion risk?

4) Labour model and productivity

• Shift design and coverage
• Indirect vs direct labour mix
• Training and cross-skilling
• Labour availability risk by region

5) Technology, data, and control

• WMS capability and configuration
• Slotting logic and replenishment rules
• RF discipline and inventory accuracy
• Visibility and reporting that supports daily management

6) Automation and mechanisation options (where appropriate)

A review should be practical: what is feasible in your building, with your workforce, and with your volume profile—not “automation because it’s trendy”.

7) Property and compliance

• Lease terms, expansion options, and landlord constraints
• Building suitability (clear height, column spacing, sprinkler, floor load)
• Safety, chain of responsibility, and site compliance requirements
• Sustainability opportunities (energy efficiency, solar readiness, waste management)

The output of a strong warehouse review is not a generic scorecard. It’s a set of prioritised initiatives, a capability roadmap, and clear recommendations on whether to fix, reconfigure, expand, relocate, or exit.

Network optimisation vs warehouse reviews: which comes first?

This is where many organisations get stuck.

Here’s a practical way to think about it:

• If you suspect the number and location of warehouses is wrong, start with network optimisation. Otherwise you risk spending money improving a site you shouldn’t keep long-term.
• If you’re confident the footprint is broadly right but performance and capacity are off, start with a strategic warehouse review to unlock improvements quickly.
• If you have significant change ahead (new channels, acquisitions, major growth, new service promise), do them as a combined program: network scenarios inform the role of each site, and warehouse reviews confirm feasibility and investment needs.

In many ANZ organisations, the best approach is iterative: model network options, pressure-test them with site reality, then refine.

Common triggers that signal it’s time for a review

If any of these feel familiar, you’re in the zone where network optimisation and warehouse review work pays off:

• Freight cost has crept up faster than sales growth—and no one can point to one clear cause.
• Service is inconsistent by region (metro is fine; regional is a constant firefight).
• You’re expediting more often “to protect the customer experience”.
• Inventory is rising, but availability still isn’t where it needs to be.
• Warehouses feel full all the time (or swing between empty and congested).
• You’ve added channels (e-commerce, marketplaces, wholesale, projects) and the operating model hasn’t caught up.
• Your 3PL arrangement is up for renewal, or performance has plateaued.
• You’re facing a lease expiry or a property constraint and need a decision, not a debate.
• Leadership wants resilience—yet the network depends heavily on one site or one corridor.

These triggers are rarely solved with a single initiative. They’re symptoms of a network that has drifted away from the current business reality.

A practical framework: how to run network optimisation and warehouse reviews that lead to decisions

Below is a proven, decision-focused pathway. It works whether you’re running the work internally, partnering with a specialist, or blending both.

Step 1: Define the outcomes (and the non-negotiables)

Start by making trade-offs explicit.

• What service levels matter—and where?
• What cost categories are in scope (transport, warehousing, inventory, capex)?
• What constraints are fixed (must keep a site, must maintain 2-day service, union requirements, automation already ordered)?
• What’s the planning horizon—3 years, 5 years, 10 years?
• What risks are unacceptable (single points of failure, change complexity, transition downtime)?

This is where alignment happens. Without it, teams build models to answer different questions and argue about “the numbers” instead of making decisions.

Step 2: Build a baseline you can trust

A baseline is the “current state” that the model and recommendations anchor to.

You’ll usually need:

• Customer order history (by region, channel, order lines, cube/weight)
• SKU velocity profiles and storage requirements
• Inventory policies and stockholding by site
• Transport spend by lane and mode (including accessorials)
• Warehouse costs (labour, occupancy, fixed vs variable, 3PL charges where relevant)
• Service performance data (OTIF/DIFOT, lead times, fill rates)

A common pitfall: organisations start scenario modelling before baseline validation. If the baseline is wrong, every scenario becomes a debate.

Step 3: Identify scenarios that reflect real strategic choices

Good scenarios are not “move DC from Sydney to Melbourne because the map looks neat.”

They reflect genuine options, such as:

• Consolidation vs regionalisation
• One national DC + cross-docks vs two national DCs
• Dedicated e-commerce fulfilment vs shared facilities
• Direct-to-store vs hub-and-spoke replenishment
• Increased use of intermodal for long-haul lanes (where feasible)
• Changes to delivery frequency and cut-off times
• Forward stocking for critical SKUs in remote regions
• Alternative property choices if a lease is expiring

Scenarios should be limited enough to be decision-ready—typically a handful of credible options plus a stretch scenario for learning.

Step 4: Evaluate scenarios on total value, not a single metric

A strong decision framework looks across:

• Transport cost (linehaul + last mile)
• Warehousing cost (fixed + variable)
• Inventory impact (safety stock changes, working capital)
• Service impact (lead times by region, ability to meet cut-offs)
• Resilience (single points of failure, disruption exposure)
• Practicality (property availability, transition risk, implementation time)

The key is to present outcomes in a way leaders can weigh, not just a “winner” declared by a model.

Step 5: Conduct strategic warehouse reviews to validate feasibility

This is the bridge between modelling and reality.

For shortlisted networks, warehouse reviews confirm:

• Can the site physically handle the new role and throughput?
• What capex or reconfiguration is required?
• What changes to process, labour model, or automation are needed?
• What’s the transition pathway without breaking service?

This is also where hidden constraints surface—dock congestion, yard limitations, unsafe flows, or WMS limitations that a spreadsheet won’t tell you.

Step 6: Build a business case that survives scrutiny

A decision-ready business case should include:

• Clear assumptions and sensitivity testing (fuel, labour, demand growth)
• One-off transition costs (dual-running, relocation, fit-out, redundancy, onboarding)
• Capex and payback where relevant
• Risks, mitigations, and a realistic timeline
• A phased roadmap if full change is too risky to execute at once

Leaders don’t just approve a network design. They approve change. So the path matters.

Step 7: Implementation planning (the part most programs underestimate)

Even the best design fails if implementation is vague.

Implementation planning should cover:

• Property strategy (search criteria, lease negotiation support, fit-out requirements)
• 3PL strategy (tendering, contracting, governance)
• Systems and data readiness (WMS/TMS impacts, master data, slotting)
• People and change management (roles, training, safety, consultation requirements)
• Cutover planning (inventory migration, parallel runs, contingency plans)
• KPI framework (what success looks like in the first 90 days and the first year)

ANZ-specific considerations that materially change network decisions

Network models can look clean until the local realities show up. In Australia and New Zealand, several factors commonly influence the “right” answer:

Australia: distance, state-based realities, and east–west trade-offs

• East coast density vs national reach: Many networks are naturally biased toward the east coast. But national customers (or mining, projects, and remote accounts) force a different calculus.
• Perth and WA: Servicing WA from the east can be viable for some SKUs and service promises, but it can also create persistent cost and service pain if expectations aren’t aligned.
• Regional and remote delivery: Lead times, carrier availability, and delivery frequency constraints can change what “good service” means outside metro corridors.
• Intermodal and linehaul strategy: There are cases where shifting mode or redesigning linehaul schedules is more valuable than moving warehouses.

New Zealand: concentration, inter-island complexity, and resilience

• Population concentration: Demand clustering can support fewer sites, but service expectations and geography still require careful planning.
• North vs South Island strategy: Inventory positioning and inter-island movements need to be deliberate—especially if you serve time-sensitive customers.
• Resilience considerations: Business continuity planning can have a stronger influence when geographic separation and disruption risk are factored in.

Trans-Tasman supply chains

If your supply chain crosses the Tasman, the network conversation becomes not just “where are the warehouses?” but:

• where do you decouple inventory,
• how do you manage lead times and variability,
• and what service promises are achievable without carrying excessive buffer stock.

These are design questions, not firefighting questions—so they’re best addressed through structured network work.

What “good” looks like: signs you’ve got the right network and warehouse strategy

When network optimisation and warehouse reviews have been done properly, you typically see:

• A clear definition of warehouse roles (and fewer “hybrid” sites doing everything poorly).
• Fewer urgent expedites and less reactive freight spend.
• Improved service consistency by region, even if absolute lead times vary.
• Inventory positioned intentionally, with clearer policies and fewer “just-in-case” decisions.
• A realistic capex roadmap—targeted investment rather than scattered fixes.
• Better cross-functional alignment: supply chain, sales, finance, and property all working from the same design logic.
• KPIs that connect network decisions to customer outcomes, not just internal efficiency.

Common mistakes (and how to avoid them)

Mistake 1: Optimising transport in isolation

Transport-only optimisation can accidentally increase warehouse handling, inventory, or service failures. The network must be evaluated end-to-end.

Mistake 2: Treating warehouse constraints as “operational issues”

If a site cannot physically meet future throughput, no amount of process discipline will fix it. That’s a strategic constraint, not a coaching opportunity.

Mistake 3: Overbuilding complexity

More nodes can improve service—but they can also increase inventory, management overhead, and execution risk. A simpler network that’s well-run often beats a complex network that’s fragile.

Mistake 4: Underestimating transition risk

Moving inventory, onboarding a new 3PL, or changing site roles can temporarily degrade service. Transition planning and dual-running costs must be included.

Mistake 5: Letting property drive the strategy

Cheap rent isn’t cheap if it adds linehaul cost, increases labour turnover, or forces poor warehouse flow. Property is part of the solution—not the strategy.

How Trace Consultants can help

Network optimisation and warehouse reviews sit at the intersection of strategy and execution. The value comes from making the right calls—and then making them real without breaking service.

Trace Consultants supports organisations across Australia and New Zealand to design, validate, and implement distribution and warehousing strategies that balance cost, service, inventory, and risk.

Here are the practical ways Trace can help:

1) Network strategy and scenario optimisation

• Clarifying your service promise by channel and region
• Building a baseline you can trust (cost-to-serve, freight, warehousing, inventory)
• Designing and testing credible network scenarios
• Translating outputs into leadership-ready trade-offs and decisions
• Sensitivity testing so you’re not hostage to a single assumption set

Outcome: a network direction you can confidently take to the executive team—supported by logic, not just instinct.

2) Strategic warehouse reviews that link operations to strategy

• Assessing whether existing sites are fit-for-purpose for current and future roles
• Identifying throughput constraints and practical improvement options
• Developing a targeted capex and operational improvement roadmap
• Validating feasibility of proposed network scenarios in the real world

Outcome: clear recommendations on where to invest, where to reconfigure, and where a site is simply the wrong tool for the job.

3) Business case development and investment planning

• Building a robust financial model including transition costs and benefits
• Creating staged roadmaps (e.g., quick wins now, footprint changes later)
• Supporting board-ready documentation and investment logic

Outcome: decisions that survive finance scrutiny and translate into action.

4) 3PL and operating model support (where relevant)

If your network direction involves outsourcing changes or new capabilities, Trace can support:

• Defining requirements and service levels
• Running tender and evaluation processes
• Designing governance and performance frameworks that stick

Outcome: a partner model that supports performance, not just contract compliance.

5) Implementation support—turning the design into reality

• Transition planning (inventory migration, cutover design, contingency planning)
• Process and layout redesign
• KPI frameworks and operational cadence design
• Change management support, ensuring teams can adopt new ways of working

Outcome: benefits realised in operations, not parked in a PowerPoint file.

The best time to involve support is often earlier than you think—before teams become committed to a preferred answer based on partial data, or before property deadlines force rushed decisions.

Practical questions to ask before you start

If you’re scoping network optimisation or a warehouse review, these questions will save time (and rework):

1. What decision do we need to make in the next 3–6 months?
   Be specific: renew a 3PL, choose a new DC, redesign service promise, plan capex, etc.
2. Which KPI are we trying to change—and what’s the current baseline?
   Cost-to-serve, OTIF/DIFOT, lead time, inventory days, pick rates, damage, claims.
3. Where do we believe the biggest lever is—transport, warehousing, inventory, or service design?
   Often it’s a mix, but one area usually drives the need.
4. What constraints are real and fixed vs assumed?
   A “must keep this site” assumption often turns out to be negotiable—or time-bound.
5. What does success look like operationally after the change?
   New network design without an operating model is just a map.

FAQ: Network optimisation and warehouse reviews

How often should we review our distribution network?

Many organisations benefit from a light-touch network refresh annually (to keep assumptions current) and a deeper review every 2–3 years, or whenever major triggers occur (growth, channel change, lease events, acquisition, sustained service issues).

What data do we need to start network optimisation?

At minimum: shipment history by customer and location, order profiles, SKU velocity, freight spend and lane data, warehouse cost and capacity data, inventory positioning, and service performance expectations. The best programs focus first on baseline accuracy, then scenarios.

Can we optimise the network without changing warehouses?

Yes—sometimes the biggest wins come from changing allocation rules, linehaul schedules, delivery frequency, inventory policies, or warehouse roles. But if a site is fundamentally constrained emphasising throughput or property suitability, footprint change may be unavoidable.

How do sustainability goals fit into network decisions?

Sustainability can be addressed by modelling emissions alongside cost and service, selecting lower-emission transport options where feasible, reducing unnecessary kilometres, and right-sizing inventory and warehousing energy profiles. The key is to include it as a decision criterion early—not as an afterthought.

What’s the difference between a warehouse audit and a strategic warehouse review?

An audit often checks compliance and operational performance against standards. A strategic review connects site reality to future business needs: role clarity, capacity, expansion feasibility, technology and automation readiness, and whether the site belongs in the future footprint at all.

Closing thought: the best networks are designed, not inherited

Most distribution networks aren’t intentionally designed end-to-end. They evolve—one new customer, one warehouse extension, one “temporary” overflow site that becomes permanent.

Network optimisation and strategic warehouse reviews give you a chance to step back and ask: What network do we actually need now—and what will we need next? Then they give you a way to make those decisions with confidence.

If your organisation is facing property deadlines, rising logistics costs, inconsistent service, or growth that your current footprint can’t comfortably absorb, it’s worth taking a structured look. And if you want that work to lead to practical, implementable decisions—Trace Consultants can help you move from analysis to action, with an approach grounded in the realities of Australian and New Zealand supply chains.

‍