SupplierWiki curates detailed articles to help suppliers win at retail.

Don't let Walmart Post-Audits catch you off guard in 2025. Join Allie and Bekah to learn best practices for preventing and disputing Post Audits.

Prepping for Walmart Audits

Post Audits are preventable and disputable! Join Allie and Bekah to learn how to best prepare for Walmart Post Audits.

Articles

KeHE Price Protection Claims Explained for Suppliers 

If you take a scroll through the latest 

 (effective July 1, 2026), you might come across a little blip in the 

 section titled “Price Protection” (4.8). But don’t let its small real estate fool you: Understanding price protection is an important part of protecting your margins as a KeHE supplier.  

 is a contractual mechanism that ensures KeHE is compensated for decreases in the landed cost of products that the food distributor has already purchased. Unlike other chargebacks that function as penalties, it's more accurate to think of price protection chargebacks as true-ups.  

However, honest mistakes happen, and price protection chargebacks can end up functioning as penalties if they’re erroneously applied to your payment.  

This article answers the following questions:

What Is a Price Protection Claim at KeHE? 

According to section 4.8 in KeHE’s Supplier Policies and Procedures, price protection “means a credit to KeHE for the difference between KeHE’s previous landed cost and KeHE’s new lower landed cost for all supplier product in KeHE’s inventory .... [including] price decreases that result from delivery method changes.” In such cases, the document continues, “KeHE will charge back the supplier the price protection credit based on the lost inventory value as of the effective date of any price change.”  

Or to put it more simply, a protection claim is triggered when: 

Price protection chargebacks aren’t penalties or extra charges. They’re a form of 

. KeHE is simply receiving a credit for the difference between the previous landed costs and the new lower landed costs. KeHE funds this credit by giving the supplier a chargeback.  

 as the “supplier’s most recent price submitted to KeHE, plus all applicable freight and handling charges, fees, and expenses associated with moving the products into KeHE DCs.” Or if a formula is more helpful, 

Landed cost = product cost + shipping + customs + risk + overhead

As the KeHE Supplier Policies and Procedures document outlines, suppliers must include all product-related costs in their product price. Otherwise, KeHE will not pay them. This includes: 

KeHE defaults to designating suppliers as KeHE Pick Up (aka collect shipping) unless otherwise communicated and agreed upon. However, suppliers are required to provide KeHE distribution centers with pricing for both FOB origin (KeHE Pick Up) and FOB destination (supplier delivered), as well as a pick-up allowance.  

KeHE says that it “may change a supplier’s delivery method at KeHE’s discretion with ninety (90) days’ written notice to the supplier.” Returning to the definition of price protection, you’ll see that it can be triggered by delivery method changes. Thus, there’s a chance that KeHE could make a change resulting in a price protection credit. 

What are KeHE’s price change guidelines?  

KeHE’s rules for price changes — both decreases and increases — are also laid out in the Supplier Policies and Procedures document. KeHE suppliers must: 

Following the steps above isn’t a guarantee that your price change will be accepted. KeHE may reject your submission if it determines that the increase is “unreasonable” when comparing it to information from the marketplace or competing product pricing. 

 Keep your price change documentation. KeHE can audit up to two (2) years of transactions, including price changes. 

Can I Dispute a Price Protection Chargeback at KeHE? 

If a price protection charge is valid, there is no reason to dispute it. However, if you think a price protection charge has been made in error, you can dispute it in K-Solve, a financial account tool within the KeHE CONNECT Supplier® portal. 

Disputes must be submitted within 180 days of the original invoice date to be considered. KeHE advises allowing up to three weeks for the distributor to respond.  

How Does SPS Commerce Support KeHE Suppliers? 

You don’t have to navigate complex distributor requirements alone. Explore these tools that are setting up KeHE suppliers for success: 

Why New Supplier Activation Is a Growth Gamble for Midmarket Retailers 

Finding the right new supplier is the part of merchandising that buying teams are good at. Getting that supplier floor-ready fast enough to matter is a different problem entirely. Most midmarket buying teams have no consistent way to solve it.

You know the scenario. You find a supplier that fits a category gap you have been watching. The product is right. The relationship feels solid. You commit. Then the clock starts. The path from "we signed this supplier" to "this product is actually on the floor and selling" turns into something you have to rebuild from scratch, every time. 

Sometimes it goes fine. Sometimes it takes four months when you needed eight weeks. You rarely know which it will be until you are already in it. 

That unpredictability is not a sourcing problem. The sourcing call was good. It is an activation problem. And for most midmarket buying organizations, activation has no repeatable process behind it. 

The Part of Merchandising That Runs on Hope

The buying calendar has structure. Line reviews have a cadence. Trend analysis has a methodology. New supplier activation, for most midmarket retailers, has none of these things. What it has is a collection of steps that need to happen: item setup, routing requirements, compliance documentation, system testing, order transmission. These get handed off informally between the buying team and whoever owns vendor onboarding in that quarter. The buying team knows the commercial side of the relationship. Operations knows the technical side. The two rarely meet formally until something has already gone wrong. 

In between, the supplier is waiting for guidance that may or may not arrive clearly, working from documentation that may or may not reflect the buying organization's current requirements, and building toward a production and shipping schedule based on a go-live date that no one has formally committed to. 

 reported struggling with merchandise assortment planning, with execution gaps between what gets bought and what arrives on the floor among the most cited contributors. The activation process is where a meaningful share of those execution gaps are born. 

Most buying teams accept new supplier activation variability as a fact of life. Some suppliers take longer. Some go smoothly. You manage it. 

What is harder to see is what that variability costs at the category level, because the cost arrives quietly and gets attributed somewhere else. 

When a new supplier takes twelve weeks to activate instead of six, the category that depended on them launches late into its selling window. The floor sets without the product, or with placeholder depth from a secondary supplier that was not the right call. The trend signal that made the sourcing decision look smart in January looks weaker by April because the product hit the floor in March instead of February. 

The margin plan for that category was built on a full-window sell-through. The late activation meant a shorter window. The markdown that follows is attributed to demand forecasting or trend timing. The activation delay that actually drove it is not in the post-mortem because there is no metric that captures it. 

 Christmas season found that a single supplier was responsible for 39% of peak-season lost sales, with late delivery as the primary driver. The supplier had not been flagged as high-risk before the season. The operational readiness data, had it been visible, would have surfaced the risk early enough to act on it. 

The reason new supplier activation is a gamble is not that buying teams make bad sourcing calls. It is that the activation process has no institutional memory. 

When a buying team onboards a new supplier, the people running that process are drawing on whatever they remember from the last time, whatever documentation exists in a shared drive somewhere, and whoever in operations is available to help. That combination produces inconsistent outcomes because it is a different combination every time. 

The institutional knowledge of what a good activation looks like lives in individuals: which steps take the longest, which supplier types need more lead time, what goes wrong most often, what needs to be verified before the first order is placed. When those individuals change roles or leave, the next person starts learning from scratch. 

For a midmarket buying organization adding suppliers to respond to trend signals, expand private label, or reduce sourcing concentration, that is a structural problem. Every new supplier is a growth bet. The activation process is the mechanism that decides whether the bet pays off on the timeline the category needs. 

What a Repeatable Activation Path Changes

The buying teams that have reduced their activation variability did not solve it by hiring a dedicated onboarding team. At midmarket scale, that is not the answer. They solved it by treating activation as a defined process with a documented path, rather than an informal handoff between people who are all trying to figure it out in parallel. 

That requires a standard sequence: when the commercial relationship is confirmed, the activation clock starts with a defined set of steps, clear ownership for each, and milestones the buying team can actually track. This sequence is not a spreadsheet that someone updates when they remember to. Rather, it’s a process that the organization runs the same way every time, with the supplier knowing exactly what is expected of them and when. 

When activation is repeatable, the buying team can make sourcing commitments with realistic timelines rather than optimistic ones. Category plans can be built around go-live dates that reflect the actual activation path, not aspirational ones. And when a supplier is running behind, it surfaces early enough to adjust the plan rather than discovering it at the floor set. 

Category risk does not disappear. Consumer trends shift. Suppliers underdeliver for reasons no process can prevent. But the variability that comes from having no consistent activation path, the kind that costs margin quietly and gets blamed on something else, is solvable. Most midmarket buying organizations have simply never treated it as a process problem. 

New supplier relationships are where category growth either gets captured or quietly lost

. SPS Commerce works with midmarket retailers to build the repeatable activation infrastructure that closes the gap between a good sourcing call and a supplier that is actually floor-ready when the category needs them. Learn how SPS Commerce helps 

Why Promotional Stockouts Keep Happening at Midmarket Retailers  

Promotional stockouts at midmarket retail are often blamed on demand planning. The actual cause usually starts earlier, in supplier data. Here is what operations leaders can look for. 

Picture the week before a major promotional launch. The ops team is pulling together everything they can find on inbound supply. Someone is calling vendors directly to verify quantities. Someone else is building a spreadsheet from three different data sources that do not quite agree. The inventory picture looks fine, but nobody can say it with confidence. 

The promotion runs. The sell-through looks good on day one. By day three, a handful of high-velocity SKUs are out of stock. The post-mortem conversation starts with demand forecasting. 

Why Demand Planning Gets the Blame It Did Not Earn

Demand planning is a reasonable place to look. When a promotion underperforms due to stockouts, the gap between what was expected and what was available looks like a planning error. And sometimes it is. 

But in midmarket retail operations, a meaningful share of promotional stockouts trace back to a different origin: suppliers who were not fully ready to execute the volume, timing, or item mix the promotion required, and a supply picture built on data that was either incomplete, stale, or interpreted differently by the operations team than by the supplier. 

The scale of the stockout problem in retail makes the misattribution costly. A 

 study found that retailers lose approximately 4% of annual sales to stockouts, with nearly half of intended purchases abandoned outright when a product is unavailable. For a midmarket retailer generating $100 million in sales, that is roughly $4 million a year — and a portion of those losses are occurring during the promotional windows that were supposed to drive incremental revenue, not erode it. 

The reason this gets misattributed is timing. The data problem exists weeks before the launch. The stockout shows up days into the run. By the time the post-mortem happens, the connection between supplier execution in the lead-up and shelf availability during the event is not obvious. The incident report documents what happened to inventory. It does not go back far enough to document what was happening to supplier data accuracy before the launch. 

Most midmarket operations leaders track on-time in-full (OTIF) rates across their supplier base. That number is useful. It tells you, after each transaction, whether a supplier met the timing and quantity requirement. 

What OTIF does not tell you is where in the relationship the failure originated. A supplier who ships on time and in full for routine replenishment orders can still underperform on a promotional order if the promotional requirements were not communicated clearly, were not the same as the standard routing requirements, or were confirmed verbally rather than in the data exchange. 

OTIF is a trailing indicator. It records the outcome. The input that determines that outcome — including whether the supplier had a complete, accurate picture of what was expected before they committed to the order — lives upstream of the metric. 

For promotions specifically, the lag matters. A 90-day promotional calendar creates a narrow window for suppliers to plan production, stage inventory, and coordinate shipping. If the data exchange that governs that window is ambiguous or incomplete, OTIF will eventually reflect the problem. It will reflect it after the promotion has already run. 

The Visibility Gap That Keeps Recreating the Problem

There is a structural reason why this cycle repeats. At midmarket scale, the operations team and the buying team often work from different pictures of supplier performance. Operations tracks OTIF, receiving accuracy, and exception volume. Buying tracks fill rates and item availability. Neither picture is wrong. Neither is complete. 

When a promotional launch underperforms, the operations view says the OTIF looked acceptable heading into the event. The buying view says the fill rate dropped during the event. Both are accurate. Neither identifies the upstream data accuracy issue that connected them. 

The conversation that would surface the root cause requires a shared view of supplier execution across the full order cycle, not just the last-mile metrics each team tracks independently. In most midmarket buying organizations, that shared view does not exist as a standing practice. It gets assembled after something has already gone wrong. 

What Operations Leaders at Peer Organizations Do Differently

The midmarket operations leaders who break this cycle are not necessarily the ones with better forecasting tools. They tend to share one practice: they treat supplier data accuracy as a pre-promotional check, not a post-promotional finding. 

Before a major promotional event, they verify not just whether the supplier has committed to the volume, but whether the data exchange governing that commitment is clean, the item setup is current, the routing requirements the supplier is working from match what the warehouse is expecting, and whether the ASN timing and format are agreed upon before the first order is placed. 

That kind of pre-promotional readiness check is not complicated. It does not require a new system. It requires treating supplier data as part of the promotional execution plan, not as background infrastructure that is assumed to be working. 

Operations teams that build this habit find that their post-promotional post-mortems get shorter. Not because demand forecasting improved, but because the number of surprises that were actually supplier execution problems gets smaller. 

The Upstream Problem Behind the Downstream Pattern

Promotional stockouts at midmarket retail are a real and recurring problem. The challenge is that most operational investment goes into the demand side: better forecasting models, safety stock policies, more conservative initial orders. That effort is not wasted. But it addresses the wrong rate limiter for a meaningful portion of the problem. 

McKinsey research has estimated that the U.S. food retail industry alone loses $15 to $20 billion in sales annually from out-of-stocks and unsaleable inventory. The demand planning tools designed to address that number have improved significantly. The supplier execution infrastructure that determines whether the right product actually arrives has not kept pace at midmarket scale. 

The part that does not get solved by better forecasting is the supplier execution gap. And that gap, for most midmarket buying organizations, is a function of how well the operational infrastructure running the supplier relationship scales with the size of the supplier network.

If the pattern of promotional underperformance has started to feel operational rather than just a planning problem, the answer is likely upstream

 build the operational infrastructure to run larger supplier networks without paying for the same data quality problems twice. 

ERP Integration: What Most Businesses Get Wrong Before Go-Live

ERP Integration: What to Get Right Before Go-Live

 A successful ERP go-live does not automatically mean your supply chain is connected. Most UK and Irish businesses running Microsoft Dynamics, NetSuite, SAP, or Sage discover this gap after the project closes. This article explains what trading partner connectivity means in practice, how the main ERP systems handle it natively, and what questions to answer before your implementation is finished.

What Does "Connected" Really Mean for Your Supply Chain?

When an ERP project team talks about integration, they usually mean connecting internal systems: finance talking to warehouse, purchase orders flowing into accounts payable, inventory syncing with sales.

Trading partner connectivity is different. It means your ERP can send and receive the right documents, in the right format, to meet the specific requirements of each retailer or supplier you trade with.

That sounds like a small addition. In practice, it is a separate project.

A UK grocery retailer like Sainsbury's or Tesco does not just need a purchase order. They need it in a specific EDI format, with exact field values mapped to their current spec, sent within a defined time window, and confirmed with a specific acknowledgement. The same is true for invoices, advance ship notices (ASNs), and every other document in the order cycle.

Each major retailer has their own version of these requirements. They update them independently. And when they do, every supplier connected to them needs to reflect the change.

That is what "connected" means for supply chain automation. Not just data flowing, but the right data, in the right format, on the right timeline, for every trading partner at once.

What Your ERP's Native EDI Integration Covers

Microsoft Dynamics, NetSuite, SAP, and Sage all include some level of EDI capability as part of their standard functionality. The scope varies by system, but the core limitation is consistent: your ERP's native EDI gives you the infrastructure to exchange documents. It does not manage the ongoing relationship with each trading partner's specific requirements.

Here is how the main ERP systems compare at a high level:

 has strong native data exchange capabilities but relies on your team or implementation partner to map and maintain each trading partner's specific EDI specs. Business Central includes EDI apps via its marketplace, but spec management remains your responsibility.

 offers native EDI through SuiteCommerce and partner apps, with good flexibility for custom mapping. As with Dynamics, the spec knowledge for each trading partner needs to be built and maintained inside your implementation.

 has some of the most mature native EDI tooling of any ERP, particularly in S/4HANA through the Integration Suite. For large enterprises with dedicated EDI teams, SAP's native capability can be sufficient. For mid-market businesses, the overhead of managing individual trading partner specs in SAP is significant.

 (including Sage 200, Sage X3, and Sage Intacct) handles EDI through partner connectors rather than native tooling. Sage ERP integration in the UK almost always require a third-party EDI integration layer from the start.

The common thread: every system can technically send and receive EDI documents. The question is who manages the spec knowledge for each trading partner, and what happens when those specs change.

Why Retail Requirements Create a Specific Gap

Retail in this region creates a specific challenge that generic EDI documentation does not cover well.

Major grocery and retail chains here update supplier requirements more frequently than in many other markets. A retailer may update their ASN specification, change a required field in their purchase order acknowledgement, or revise their invoice format. They communicate these changes through compliance bulletins and supplier portal updates. The expectation is that suppliers reflect the change before it affects live transactions.

For a supplier managing five or six retail accounts, that means monitoring five or six separate portals for updates, translating each update into a change inside their ERP integration, testing the change, and deploying it without disrupting live orders.

Multiply that across a growing retailer base and the maintenance burden becomes a full-time job inside your IT team.

Post-Brexit cross-border requirements add to this.

 Businesses moving goods between Great Britain and the Republic of Ireland, or into EU markets, now carry customs documentation requirements that sit alongside their standard EDI flows. Businesses that scoped their ERP integration before 2021 often find that the cross-border piece was never properly built in.

Three Ways to Connect Your ERP for Supply Chain Automation

When you scope your ERP integration for supply chain connectivity, there are three main approaches. Each has different implications for your IT team, your go-live timeline, and your ongoing maintenance burden.

You map each trading partner's EDI requirements directly into your ERP. Your IT team or implementation partner owns the spec knowledge, builds the transformations, and maintains them when trading partners update their requirements.

This gives you full control. The cost is ongoing: every retailer spec change requires an internal change request, testing, and deployment. For businesses with a small number of stable trading partners, this can work. For businesses with a growing retailer base or frequent spec changes, the maintenance overhead compounds quickly.

2. Use your ERP vendor's EDI module or marketplace app

Most ERP vendors have their own EDI tooling or approved partner apps. These reduce the build burden but do not fully remove the spec management problem. You still own the trading partner relationships and are responsible for keeping mappings current.

The advantage is tighter integration with your ERP's native data model. The limitation is that the spec knowledge for UK and Irish retailers still needs to be maintained somewhere, usually by your team or your implementation partner.

3. Connect through a managed trading partner network

A managed EDI network carries pre-built EDI connectors and maintained spec knowledge for major UK and Irish retailers. When you connect your ERP to the network, you get access to current specs for your trading partners without building or maintaining them yourself.

When a retailer updates their requirements, the network reflects the change centrally. Your integration does not need an internal change request for each update. New trading partners go live faster because the spec knowledge already exists in the network.

The trade-off is that you rely on the network provider to keep specs current and accurate. For businesses with complex, bespoke retailer relationships, some custom mapping may still be required.

What to Include in Your ERP Project Scope: Trading Partner Connectivity

ERP implementation supply chain decisions are easiest to make during the project itself. Retrofitting EDI integration after go-live is more disruptive, more expensive, and often means running manual processes for longer than planned.

These are the questions worth answering before your project closes:

Who are your top 10 trading partners, and what do they each require?

 Get the current EDI spec documents from each retailer or supplier before your integration work begins. 

 At minimum: purchase orders (850), purchase order acknowledgements (855), advance ship notices (856), and invoices (810). 

 Assign this before the project closes. If it is not, it defaults to whoever has capacity and usually gets missed.

Does your implementation partner have UK and Irish retail network knowledge?

 Generic EDI experience and regional retail expertise are different things. The team that builds your integration should understand how major retailers here communicate requirement changes.

Is post-Brexit cross-border documentation in scope?

 If you move goods between Great Britain and Ireland or trade with EU partners, confirm your ERP integration covers customs-adjacent documentation, not just the standard retail EDI flow.

ERP projects have a natural close point: the go-live date. After that, the implementation team moves on, the budget is spent, and any gaps in scope become operational problems rather than project tasks.

Trading partner connectivity is one of the most common gaps. It feels like an integration detail during the project. After go-live, it becomes a manual process that your operations team absorbs, often without anyone formally recognising the cost.

The businesses that handle this well address it as a defined workstream inside the ERP project, with the same rigour as any other integration. They document their trading partner requirements, assign ongoing ownership, and choose an approach that matches their retailer base and their team's capacity to maintain it.

If your ERP project is still in scope, that conversation belongs in the room now.

If you want to explore what pre-built EDI integration looks like for Microsoft Dynamics, NetSuite, SAP, or Sage, 

 for businesses are a practical starting point.

Choosing an EDI Provider: A Buyer's Guide for New Retail Suppliers 

__________________________________________________________________________________________

After months of pitches, samples, and negotiations, a major retailer has agreed to carry your product. But as the initial celebration fades, reality sets in. Your new trading partner has handed over a thick routing guide and a deadline — usually between 30 and 90 days — to become EDI compliant. 

For many founders and operations leads, this is the moment where the pressure mounts. You need a way to receive purchase orders (POs, EDI 850) and send invoices (EDI 810) and advance ship notices (ASNs, EDI 856) without getting buried in manual data entry or hit with massive compliance fines. Under this kind of deadline pressure, it is tempting to treat selecting an EDI provider like a simple procurement task: Find the vendor with the lowest upfront cost that clears the retailer's minimum technical specifications. 

However, buying EDI is a multi-year operational commitment, not a one-time software purchase. The provider you choose today will determine how much time your team spends on manual work, how quickly you can scale to a second or third retailer, and how many thousands of dollars you might lose to chargebacks that your provider failed to catch. 

Reframe the Decision: Operational Health Over Procurement Price 

The most expensive EDI solution is the one that is cheap on day one but fails on day 100. The real cost of EDI shows up in scaling pain, integration debt, and compliance penalties, not the upfront invoice. 

 enforcement has grown significantly stricter in recent years. Major players like Walmart and Target utilize automated systems to track every case, pallet, and shipment. If your ASN is late or contains a single data mismatch, you can expect a deduction that eats directly into your margins. Treating EDI as a checkbox allows these errors to slip through the cracks. Instead, you should view your EDI provider as the operational infrastructure that protects your bottom line. 

To make an informed choice for an EDI provider in a fragmented market, you need to understand which category of provider fits with your current internal resources as well as with your growth trajectory. There are a few different types of providers you can choose from.  

These providers act as an extension of your operations team. They handle the heavy lifting of implementation, mapping updates, and trading partner communication. While the service fee may be higher, the trade-off is a significant reduction in manual labor and chargeback risk. 

This type of EDI provider is often the best fit for: 

These are lighter-touch software tools that give you the portal to manage EDI yourself. They are often a viable starting point for suppliers with very low transaction volumes or a narrow retailer mix. However, the burden of maintaining compliance and troubleshooting errors falls squarely on your team. 

 players often offer EDI as an add-on to their broader system-connecting capabilities. While attractive for tech-heavy teams that want to centralize everything, these modules sometimes lack the deep, retailer-specific expertise required to manage the nuances of complex grocery or big-box routing guides. 

 is rarely advisable for modern retail suppliers. The sheer volume of mapping updates required when retailers change their specifications makes this a massive drain on engineering resources. 

The Evaluation Criteria That Actually Matter 

When you are reviewing quotes and watching demos, look beyond the user interface. You need to pressure-test the provider against an operational framework that considers your long-term success. 

Retailer Coverage and Mapping Breadth  

Does the provider already have an active relationship with your specific retailer? A provider that understands the unique requirements of a grocer like KeHE or UNFI can get you live much faster than one that has to build a new connection from scratch. Ask how many thousands of trading partner requirements they already have mapped in their network. 

ASN Accuracy and Chargeback Prevention  

. Your provider should be able to do more than just transmit the data. Rather, they should have built-in validation rules that catch errors — like a missing pallet ID or an incorrect item count — before the document ever reaches the retailer. 

Retailers change their EDI specifications frequently. You need to know how the provider handles these updates. Is it a managed service they perform automatically for all customers on their network, or is it a professional services project they will bill you for every time a retailer changes a data field? 

Manual data entry is the enemy of scaling. Even if you start with a web portal, your provider should have the capability to integrate EDI directly into your ERP, WMS, or accounting software (like Shopify, QuickBooks, or NetSuite) as your volume grows. 

To get past the marketing polish, ask these direct questions during your evaluation: 

Identifying Red Flags and Walk-Away Signals 

You should be wary of any provider that gives vague answers regarding implementation timelines or treats mapping updates as billable professional services hours. A major red flag is a pricing structure that scales punitively with transaction volume. You don't want to be penalized for being successful. If a provider has no clear escalation path for support or cannot provide visibility into how they prevent chargebacks, they are likely not equipped to handle the rigors of modern retail. 

Most buyers compare the upfront price tag, but the real comparison is the total cost over three to five years. To calculate your true TCO, you must include the cost of internal labor to manage the system, the potential professional services fees for adding new retailers, and the cost of chargebacks absorbed due to provider gaps. 

Consider insurgent brands like those on 

. Many of these fast-growing companies choose providers that offer scalability because they know that the cost of migrating EDI systems mid-flight is far higher than the price difference between a budget provider and a full-service leader. For example, some brands have reported cutting 60 hours of manual work weekly after moving to a more automated system, allowing them to redirect those resources toward growth rather than troubleshooting data errors. 

Choosing an EDI provider is your first major operational test as a new retail supplier. By shifting your focus from cheap software to a reliable operational partner, you set your brand up to build a lasting, profitable relationship with your retailers. Don't let a compliance deadline force you into a decision that you will have to undo eighteen months from now when your growth outpaces your infrastructure. 

As you scale your volume and add new channels, fulfillment naturally becomes more complex. 

 is built to help your team stay aligned with partner requirements, reduce exceptions, and move every order forward with confidence. With a network that understands thousands of trading partner requirements and handles over 750 million transactions annually, we provide the automation and visibility needed to protect your bottom line. Whether you are launching with your first big-box retailer or managing a massive omnichannel expansion, SPS Fulfillment is designed to grow with you. 

Setting Up Your Operations Team Before Your First PO 

____________________________________________________________________________________ 

When the hard work finally pays off, culminating in a “yes” from a retail giant like Target or Walmart, the excitement can wear off as the dream quickly morphs into a logistical nightmare.  

The reasons are predictable: A founder or general manager assumes that their existing, lean team can absorb the operational load. But within two weeks of the arrival of their first purchase order (PO), the team is drowning in advanced shipping notice (ASN) errors, missed appointment windows, and a flurry of retailer portal notifications they don't know how to interpret. By the time they realize they need more help, they’ve already absorbed thousands of dollars in chargebacks and potentially burned through the "honeymoon phase” of credibility with their new buyer. 

Setting up your operations team should be a pre-launch discipline, not a post-launch reaction. To succeed, suppliers must move beyond the 

 and treat retail operations as an entirely new discipline. discipline. 

The Operational Functions That Must Have an Owner 

Before that first PO hits your inbox, every operational function needs a clear owner. This doesn't necessarily mean you need ten different employees, but it does mean you need a documented person responsible for each of the following workflows. 

Order Management and EDI Document Flow 

Successful operational function starts with 

. This involves continuous monitoring and processing of EDI documents and ensuring that every PO is acknowledged and every invoice is sent correctly. 

. If your dimensions, weights, or SKU details are off in the retailer’s system even by a fraction, it can trigger automated receiving exceptions and fines. 

You must decide which warehouse gets what stock and when. In retail, unlike DTC, you can't simply go out of stock without serious repercussions for your fill rate and future shelf space. 

Warehouse and Fulfillment Coordination 

Whether you are self-manufacturing, providing your own 

, and/or using a 3PL, someone must ensure that the physical product matches the digital order exactly. 

Every retailer has a routing guide, which is a complex rulebook for how and when they want their products shipped. Violating these rules is the fastest way to accrue compliance chargebacks. 

If an ASN doesn't arrive before the truck, or if the data doesn't match the physical pallet, the shipment may be rejected. 

Receiving Exception and Chargeback Monitoring 

Someone must be watching for deductions and fines from day one. If you wait until the end of the quarter to look at your checks, the money may be gone for good. 

Lessons from the Field: OLIPOP and Liquid Death 

While many brands treat operations as a figure-it-out-as-we-go, back-office task, the most successful insurgent brands treat it as a strategic advantage. 

, for example, expanded into mass retail channels like Target and Walmart

 their success was both commercial and operational. They recognized early on that succeeding in these channels required a deliberate operational buildout that matched their marketing ambition. This recognition prompted them to scale both their sales team and their discipline.  

 provides a masterclass in operational staffing. Rather than hiring generalists and hoping for the best, they made a point of bringing in veteran operators — people who had spent years at legacy giants like Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, and Fiji Water. These hires brought with them the pattern recognition necessary to navigate the complexities of mass fulfillment and retailer-specific requirements from the jump. They understood that while the brand's voice was irreverent, their operations had to be institutional. 

How you staff these functions depends on your scale and resources. There is no one-size-fits-all org chart, but there are three distinct models that tend to work. 

This model is common for brands who are just entering their first major retailer. 

This model works best for brands that are scaling into multiple retailers or high-volume categories. 

This model is most commonly adopted by brands that have reached national distribution and want total control. 

The Gaps That Surface in the First 90 Days 

When a team isn't structured before the first PO, specific failure modes almost always emerge within the first 90 days.  

Articles

SupplierWiki curates detailed articles to help suppliers win at retail.

Prepping for Walmart Audits

Overview

Articles