The Packaging Problem: It’s ….. Complicated!

During the past weeks, I have shared with you a number of ideas and approaches, through this collection of ideas: The Packaging Problem! This will be the last one of the series, as I want to start focusing on a more positive narrative regarding the packaging activity and strategy setting.

Over the past couple months, while I was writing, or investigating and putting my thoughts together however, in each instalment, I was faced with an abundance of choices, on what to talk about and how to approach each matter. The difficulty was not, and is not, to find things to talk about packaging. It is just that it is even easier to talk about its failures. And everyone seems to be doing so!

It is almost impossible to fix something in packaging without having a knock on effect somewhere else in the value chain. And yet, we always try to fix and maintain our focus on the box.

That box however, has an impact on our transport. And if we take that into account and get a solution in place to address that, then a handling issue may come up. If that gets sorted, then logistics, manufacturing, H&S, ergonomics, quality, customer perception and expectations and so on, will have to be taken into account. Following that, it needs to fit with the sustainability agenda, finance and budget allocations, marketing message where applicable, technology and so forth. The list seems endless doesn’t it??

Although everyone is aware that, if the change is not properly evaluated and implemented, the effects will certainly be negative, it does not stop us from constantly asking packaging to provide “quick wins” (or cut costs as is the actual translation). That in turn however, causes more headaches and resources demanded, escalating to a point where packaging is getting again the blame and so on.

An endless, ongoing cycle, that is true in any industry or business, at different levels of occurrence and impact.

Sometimes, most often than not, packaging is even used as a scapegoat to hide or mask failures of the processes in other areas of activity within the supply chain, internal operations or the business itself.

Unfortunately those working on packaging, are so overwhelmed with the plethora of accusations and faults attributed to them, that they rarely have real time to assess the situation and bring forward the much needed solutions. The pressure is so high, that seldom are packaging professionals allowed breathing space and time to initiate almost anything.

It is really a habitual “firefighting” culture that surrounds the profession.

To add to the problem, most improvement projects are actually run and initiated by other departments. As if the people, who are actually doing the job, are not capable of running and initiating their own improvement projects or evaluate and propose how to solve their issues, and what information, resources, infrastructure etc. they lack in order to successfully counter the challenges they face.

It is this lack of confidence on the ability of the packaging professionals that is possibly the most striking and hurting.

Imagine yourself, who has years of experience and expertise in your line of work and profession how overwhelming it would be, if randomly people from other random departments come and tell you (in regular intervals): “We think you have a problem and we will sort it for you. We just need you around in our meetings, to tell you how bad you are, and then you can go out and do as we say. Oh, and if the change we try to impose on you does not work, well… you know.. It is on you!”

Tip: Most packaging professionals know what the problem is. Have you cared to ask them what they need to solve it? And most importantly, have you cared to listen?

Why I am raising this, comes down to a few meetings I had over the past three months, where I was surprised at how much ignorance still exists with regards to packaging and how to deal with it, despite many humming and drumming about how important it is to them.

Here are some examples I think are representative of the general consensus:

1.??????I was asked by an OEM to offer them an overview of my research on Packaging Strategy. They are running a project, where they want to redefine their approach to the activity. Based on what they shared with me, I offered my opinion on where to target their focus. But that did not hit the mark. Possibly because there is no golden bullet to “fix” packaging and letting people know, they get often disappointed. But it is the truth.

Furthermore, in this case, the project seems to be led or managed by the purchasing department as is often and common amongst many businesses.

That alone screams that this will be yet another attempt to run a cost down exercise. They seem to be preparing it in a bigger scale than usual, but a cost down attempt none the less. And those never end up well! For two main reasons:

a.??????Cost down exercises, consider packaging as a cost and a commodity. They largely fail to take into account the benefits of the packaging, its successes and its potential contribution to the business competitiveness and advantage in the marketplace.

b.?????It waters down the standards, creating quality problems in the medium to long run

2.??????During another conversation, I was offering my insights to a MD of a T1 supplier about some concerns they had with regard to their packaging performance. This was mostly focussed towards the impact on their logistics and transport operation. A subject I am well familiar with. Through improving packaging they wanted to improve their efficiency. Great! That is exactly how packaging should be considered and used. Identify possible improvement opportunity, prepare the business case, test and implement, establish and control the new process.

While on first glance it seemed as a promising project, the problem in this case, was more about the approach. It sounded dangerously close, to ending up being about how to improve the packaging design, instead of improving the processes and operations that caused the inefficiencies in the first place. Instead of packaging supporting the change, it will turn out to be the only activity changed. The inefficiencies though will not just go away because one redesigns the packaging. Short term benefits will be gained. But for a long term and sustainable solution the whole operation needs to be evaluated, or more resources will be needed at regular intervals to address what the change project did not. Bad cycle.

3.??????On another front, I was discussing with a packaging supplier. They have identified a great opportunity in the market, created a solution (and patented it) and now they try to market it. Good news! More entrepreneurs are needed in the packaging landscape as breakthrough Innovation is a lacking discipline unfortunately in the profession, despite and in contrast with the abundance of creativity.

However, there are a number of hoops this new packaging has to jump through before it gets a wider acceptance. And that is despite the solution actually addressing some of the different industries major problems such as flexibility, sustainability, IoT and so on. The most striking of them all is the reluctance of businesses (customers) to invest in new technologies coming from the packaging industry. Digging deep into this unwillingness to invest, lays wide open the culture approach towards packaging.

No-one wants to pay!

More specifically, any change in your packaging requires a combination among others of:

a.??????Change in processes

b.?????Systems Upgrades-Updates

c.??????Possible change in machinery and other infrastructure improvements

d.?????Training of employees

e.?????Change in Operations

Among all these the key is Change. And that is the most frightening bit, because that combines Time, Money, Resources and so on, all of which is translated and treated as costs when it comes to packaging.

In contrast, the requirement from any other business activity of this list of changes and more, is treated as investment.

The trouble lies on the attempt to keep it simple, to keep the focus and address a specific area of the packaging concern. Then when we solve that, we turn our backs, until the next bit bites us and we have to deal with the same problem, from another angle, or a bigger problem which has built up over time.

No wonder businesses, are not fond of packaging. But this endless cycle of fail and blame and short term fixes, is their own doing.

Those businesses that work on their packaging keep on reaping the benefits over a very long period. Their packaging complements their products or services and further enhances their brand image. Retail and consumer facing products and services are filled with such examples. Think of Coca-Cola, Apple, Walkers, Tiffany & Co., Toblerone, Amazon and so many others. ?

What have they done different than you have? They started by focussing on functionality, impact and product protection and presentation first.

On the industrial front, we rarely hear of similar success stories. They are less visible. But think who of your suppliers are the most reliable and you will probably notice their packaging is the one really fit for purpose compared to the rest of their competition. That reduces substantially your downtime, your allocated resources and so on. That is a good for business.

Packaging is not a simple activity. Second only to the product itself, it is the most challenging and skill demanding activity that runs throughout the whole of business, its operating environment and its supply chains.

Packaging requires the appropriate attention, level of engagement and respect for its impact on your business. If it is not given the appropriate courtesy, it will hurt the business, and keep hurting it until it is properly and adequately dealt with.

But most importantly, packaging is not some kind of monster, or bad apple in the business. It is in fact the most promising, unexplored area, with plenty of potential.

So, what is all the fuss about then?

Well, it’s…. Complicated!