The 'January Returns' Myth: It’s Not a Logistics Problem, It’s a Buying Pro
As we wade through the inevitable tidal wave of January returns, the immediate focus in most boardrooms is on the logistical cost: processing, repackaging, and the margin hit of reverse logistics.
This perspective, while understandable in the heat of the moment, is fundamentally flawed. It treats returns as an operational illness rather than a symptom of an upstream commercial failure.
A high return rate in January is rarely the fault of the supply chain or the customer. It is the ultimate lagging indicator that something went wrong months ago in the Buying and Merchandising function.
If we look closely at the reasons for returns right now—poor fit, the fabric feeling cheaper than it looked online, the colour not matching the website image—these are not supply chain issues. They are failures in product specification, quality assurance, or accurate product description at the point of purchase.
The P&L damage didn't happen when the customer dropped the parcel off yesterday. It happened six months ago when an under-trained buyer approved a sample that wasn't fit for purpose, or a merchandiser pushed volume into a line that didn't warrant it.
To protect margin in 2026, we must stop viewing returns solely as a cost centre to be managed by Operations. We need to trace the financial accountability back to the commercial teams who made the initial decisions and ensure they have the skills to prevent the issue at source.
If you would like to explore how to build commercial capability in your buying teams to reduce future returns, you can find detailed frameworks in our Retail and Consumer Goods Industry WIKI.
-
Posted by Martin Dugan
10th January 2026
