Businesses that ship products or materials have an important decision to make – whether to outsource logistics to a third-party logistics (3PL) provider or handle logistics in-house. There are pros and cons to each approach, and the right choice depends on the company’s specific needs and capabilities. This article examines the key differences between 3PL and in-house logistics across critical factors like cost, flexibility, technology, and more.
Overview of 3PL and In-House Logistics
Before diving into the details, let’s define what we mean by 3PL and in-house logistics:
Third-Party Logistics (3PL): A company that provides outsourced logistics services for shippers. Common services include warehousing, transportation, freight forwarding, customs brokerage, and supply chain management.
In-House Logistics: When a shipper manages all logistics activities internally with their own staff and assets. All warehouses, trucks, systems, etc. are owned and managed by the shipper.
Shippers must weigh whether the pros of outsourcing to specialists (3PL) outweigh the extra cost and lack of control compared to keeping logistics in-house. As we’ll see, each model has advantages depending on the shipper’s goals and constraints. First, let’s examine some key cost considerations.
Comparing 3PL and In-House by Cost
For many shippers, the most important factor in deciding between 3PL and in-house logistics is cost. What option offers better value and return on investment (ROI)?
3PL Leverages Economies of Scale
A key advantage of a 3PL logistics software development company is economies of scale – they spread costs across multiple customers. With a larger operation, they can secure better asset rates, technology, and people than a single shipper could afford alone.
For example, a 3PL with 100 customers can optimize routes across all those shipments, lowering miles traveled. In contrast, an in-house fleet only sees one company’s volume. The 3PL’s scale translates to lower costs per shipment.
This advantage applies to other assets like warehouse automation and transportation fleets. The 3PL shares the benefits among all users.
In-House Can Customize to Exact Needs
However, an in-house operation designed specifically for a shipper’s requirements can optimize costs in a different way. For example, a company handling its own logistics can customize warehouse layouts, systems, and processes to match its product mix, volumes and workflows.
So, while the 3PL benefits from scale, an optimized in-house operation reduces waste and supports the ideal workflow for that specific shipper. For some companies, this customization provides better ROI than conforming to the 3PL’s more “one-size-fits-all” solution.
3PL Markups Can Erode Savings from Scale
Shippers must also consider the 3PL’s markup. Just because a large 3PL has lower internal costs does not always mean the savings get passed on. Profits, overhead, and margin requirements add to the fees that 3PL charges clients.
So, if the 3PL’s economies of scale provide a 20% internal cost advantage, that does not equate to 20% savings for the shipper after the markup. The cost difference between outsourced and in-house logistics may be smaller than initially assumed.
Hybrid Model: Insourcing Core Functions
Some shippers take a hybrid approach. They outsource ancillary functions but keep core operations like warehousing or fleet in-house. This lets them control key functions directly while still leveraging the 3PL scale for the rest.
For example, a manufacturer might use an internal fleet for regular milk runs between factories while outsourcing over-the-road loads to a 3PL. Or a distributor might keep warehousing in-house but use a 3PL for customer shipping.
This balances customization and control over critical areas with 3PL economies of scale, where it adds the most value. We’ll explore such hybrid models more later.
Assessing Flexibility and Scalability
In addition to cost efficiency, companies must consider supply chain flexibility and scalability – how easily operations adapt to changing requirements.
3PLs Offer Quick Scaling
A key advantage of 3PLs is their fast scalability in meeting spikes in volume or rapid growth. Because they serve other clients with fluctuating needs, 3PLs maintain extra capacity and can allocate resources quickly.
In contrast, in-house operations only plan for one company’s forecast. Expanding warehouses, systems, and transportation fleets internally often requires large capital investments and lead times.
For example, if a shipper lands a major new customer driving 30% order growth, partnering with a 3PL means they can tap into flexible resources and scale up faster. The 3PL has existing capacity, and they can immediately shift to the growing client.
In-House Offers More Control
However, relying on 3PL capacity also has downsides. The shipper may lose priority access or customization capabilities when the provider reallocates assets to other clients. Peak period shortages can jeopardize orders and service levels.
Under an in-house model, the shipper retains full control to assign resources according to internal priorities rather than competing needs. This leads to more flexibility, ensuring high-priority SKUs or customers get served first.
So, in-house logistics enables better demand shaping, while outsourcing creates some control over how orders are prioritized within shared capacity.
Insourcing Core Offerings, Outsourcing the Rest
Once again, leading players often take a selective approach – keeping core logistics functions in-house while outsourcing ancillary areas. For example, a company might use owned or leased fleets for regular delivery routes then utilize 3PLs for overflow needs.
This allows them to cost-optimize daily routes under direct control while accessing quick scalability from 3PLs for volatility, promotions, and seasonal peaks. The internal team owns reliability for core products or regions, while the 3PL offers flexible overflow capacity.
Prioritizing control over certain “crown jewel” customers, lanes, or products/services is often worth the tradeoff of reduced flexibility in other areas.
Technology and Logistics Innovation
Logistics technology and innovation represent huge opportunities for improvement – as well as major cost and risk. This is another key area where 3PL vs in house logistics models diverge.
3PL Tech Delivers Proven Solutions
Leading 3PLs make enormous investments in logistics technology and specialized expertise – far beyond what an in-house team can access. They deploy the latest systems across their whole client base, leveraging scale into major value.
By partnering with an innovative 3PL, shippers gain proven, advanced solutions without large capital outlays or technology risks. And the systems are already configured for logistics processes versus internal business needs.
In-House Enables Competitive Advantage
However, in-house operations retain control over proprietary data, designs, and processes. Logistics can become a core competitive advantage rather than a commodity outsourced to all competitors.
Internal staff managing logistics can provide unique supply chain capabilities that can provide strategic differentiation and customer loyalty compared to rivals relying on common 3PL vendors.
For example, Amazon’s fast shipping and logistics innovations have been crucial strategic assets powering its e-commerce dominance. Much of this advantage would be lost by outsourcing to external providers used by competitors.
Insourcing Core Innovations, Outsourcing the Rest
In this technology dimension, many leaders again take a selective “best of both” approach. Key innovations or proprietary concepts remain in-house, while proven solutions come via 3PL partnerships.
For example, a consumer goods maker might develop a custom direct-to-consumer e-commerce supply chain in-house for competitive advantage while outsourcing traditional distribution logistics to an innovative 3PL. This balances strategic control in the core business with accessing specialist innovation elsewhere.
Evaluating 3PL vs In-House Logistics by Industry
The 3PL vs. in-house logistics decision often comes down to specific supply chain requirements by industry.
Raw Materials and Industrial Transport Favor 3PLs
Businesses handling raw materials, chemicals or freight not requiring specialization often find the most value from 3PLs. In these sectors, distribution competes mostly on cost, reach and flexibility – all advantages of scale.
For example, oil and gas companies outsource tanker shipments or specialty hauls of large equipment to tap into proven 3PL networks. The key need is simply getting materials safely from point A to point B cost-effectively.
Retail and e-Commerce Lean In-House
Retailers and e-commerce platforms competing on customer experience often keep logistics in-house. Differentiators like omnichannel options, fast shipping, and visibility require proprietary data flows and tight integration best managed internally.
For example, Amazon handles logistics end-to-end from suppliers to end customers. This enables innovations like Prime shipping that competitors can’t match using standard 3PLs. Walmart is similarly expanding in-house transportation and online order delivery to control customer experience.
CPG and Food Value Security and Quality
Consumer packaged goods and food companies can’t risk delegating custody of goods to outside parties – product integrity is paramount. Strict processes for storage, handling, and contingency planning require internal control.
For example, produce distributors run owned cold storage and fleets to ensure perfect conditions from farm to store. Any failure under a 3PL risks significant brand damage and liability. Customization also ensures that specialized products have tailored workflows.
Medical Products Need Specialization
Pharmaceutical and medical supply chains demand precise adherence to strict regulations, protocols, and product requirements – needs best met by specialized 3PLs. Most health organizations lack the competencies to handle complex medical logistics and compliance in-house.
As we can see, assessing 3PL vs handling logistics internally depends greatly on the specific company and products involved. The “right” choice hinges on aligning supply chain capabilities against strategic business priorities.
Key Takeaways: Choosing Between 3PL and In-House Logistics
Deciding whether to outsource logistics to a 3PL or manage in-house should factor in cost, flexibility, technology, and organizational considerations while ultimately supporting the industry’s core competitive advantages.
Key advantages of 3PL logistics include:
- Access to economies of scale
- Ability to scale operations faster
- Proven solutions and innovation from logistics specialists
Benefits of insourcing logistics include:
- Customization to exact requirements
- More control over priorities and capacity
- Protect and extend proprietary sources of differentiation
Leading players increasingly take a hybrid approach – outsourcing secondary functions while keeping core areas like warehousing or fleets in-house for customization and control.
By leveraging both specialized 3PL innovation and targeted insourcing of strategic logistics capabilities, shippers can build more agile, differentiated, and optimized supply chains.
The choice between “In-house logistics vs. 3PL” ultimately depends on each company’s unique business model, priorities, and constraints. However, assessing the trade-offs outlined here provides a framework for making the smartest decision.
Discussion about this post