Next live webinar: See Rawshot in Action: Live AI Fashion Photoshoot Demo
Rawshot.ai
Fashion · Report

Supply Chain Management In The Lingerie Industry Statistics

Lingerie supply chains face mounting sustainability, disruption, and visibility challenges, making smarter data and planning critical.

Supply chain management in the lingerie industry connects global sourcing of fabric and trims to warehousing and last‑mile replenishment. The data shows why sustainability pressure matters, from supply-chain emissions to missed ESG risk assessments, and how disruptions in 2023 can ripple into operations. It also highlights planning and visibility gaps—plus what analytics, supplier collaboration, and automation can do to improve speed, quality, and resilience.

Florian FelsingWritten byFlorian FelsingCTO, Rawshot.ai
UpdatedApril 19, 2026Read11 minSources153 verified
Supply Chain Management In The Lingerie Industry Statistics

Executive Summary

Key Takeaways

Research reviewed

Lingerie supply chains face mounting sustainability, disruption, and visibility challenges, making smarter data and planning critical.

  • 76% of supply chain leaders believe sustainability requirements will materially affect their operations

  • 40% of apparel companies’ emissions occur in the supply chain

  • 23% of manufacturers experienced forced changes due to sustainability compliance demands

  • 72% of organizations say data silos prevent end-to-end visibility in supply chains

  • 43% of respondents say they lack real-time inventory visibility across channels

  • 48% of retailers track supplier compliance data using spreadsheets rather than dedicated systems

  • 63% of companies say they use collaborative planning/forecasting with suppliers

  • 30% of respondents cite poor demand forecasting as a cause of excess inventory

  • 29% of respondents say inventory is not aligned to promotions

  • 61% of supply chain leaders say supply chain disruptions increased in 2023

  • 58% of organizations cite longer lead times as a supply chain challenge

  • 27% of procurement teams report disruptions caused by supplier financial instability

  • 47% of companies report inadequate warehouse performance as a barrier to fulfillment speed

  • 34% of retailers experienced inventory stockouts due to planning issues in 2023

  • 25% of companies use multi-echelon inventory optimization

Section 01

Sustainability, Compliance & Ethical Sourcing

  1. 76% of supply chain leaders believe sustainability requirements will materially affect their operations [1]

  2. 40% of apparel companies’ emissions occur in the supply chain [2]

  3. 23% of manufacturers experienced forced changes due to sustainability compliance demands [3]

  4. 28% of companies have not assessed ESG risk in their supply chain [4]

  5. 66% of apparel brands report they require social compliance from suppliers [5]

  6. 14% of companies have completed full supplier due diligence audits in the last year [6]

  7. 27% of companies report using digital product passports (pilot/partial) [7]

  8. 38% of procurement teams report contract compliance tracking gaps [8]

  9. 15% of companies have had a supply chain forced audit due to regulatory actions [9]

  10. 48% of firms use supplier scorecards to monitor sustainability performance [10]

  11. 17% of apparel companies report higher costs from compliance/regulatory changes [11]

  12. 63% of apparel brands report customer demand for sustainable materials [12]

  13. 26% of companies have reduced packaging waste through supply chain changes [13]

  14. 35% of organizations say carbon reporting requirements affect procurement decisions [14]

  15. 44% of firms report using renewable energy credits/targets affecting logistics planning [15]

  16. 30% of companies are adopting emissions calculation tools for logistics (scope 3) [16]

  17. 22% of companies say they are not able to provide environmental compliance proofs on request [17]

  18. 46% of organizations track social compliance audit results across suppliers [18]

  19. 19% of companies have experienced supplier labor noncompliance incidents affecting orders [19]

  20. 33% of companies use third-party audits for supplier compliance [20]

  21. 28% of organizations use remediation plans for supplier nonconformance [21]

  22. 52% of retailers state that traceability affects their ability to sell internationally [22]

  23. 27% of companies use KPIs for sustainability procurement performance [23]

  24. 44% of organizations set supplier sustainability targets [24]

  25. 32% of companies conduct supplier site assessments for labor rights [25]

  26. 20% of companies say they have insufficient supplier disclosure for chemical management [26]

  27. 36% of apparel supply chain stakeholders cite chemical compliance as a key procurement constraint [27]

  28. 25% of brands report needing better documentation for due diligence compliance (general) [28]

  29. 39% of organizations say they use supplier scorecards that include human rights [29]

  30. 23% of firms say they struggle to map their supply chains to required due diligence scope [30]

Section 02

Data, Visibility & Analytics

  1. 72% of organizations say data silos prevent end-to-end visibility in supply chains [31]

  2. 43% of respondents say they lack real-time inventory visibility across channels [32]

  3. 48% of retailers track supplier compliance data using spreadsheets rather than dedicated systems [33]

  4. 55% of organizations are implementing AI or advanced analytics for demand planning [34]

  5. 71% of companies use barcode/RFID at least in part of their supply chain [35]

  6. 57% of executives say they do not have end-to-end traceability for materials [36]

  7. 68% of companies use ERP systems to manage inventory and purchasing [37]

  8. 24% of companies use blockchain for supply chain traceability (pilot or active) [38]

  9. 21% of companies say they lack supplier lead time data [39]

  10. 47% of supply chain organizations say they have limited visibility into tier-2 suppliers [40]

  11. 23% of companies report that they use RFID for receiving (not only assets) [41]

  12. 52% of retailers say they need better master data management for item/SKU accuracy [42]

  13. 34% of organizations say product data quality is a major cause of supply chain errors [43]

  14. 29% of organizations say their ERP and logistics systems are not integrated [44]

  15. 36% of supply chain leaders want to improve planning with more accurate product lifecycle data [45]

  16. 21% of companies have implemented anti-counterfeiting serialization (partial/full) [46]

  17. 29% of organizations say they lack supplier traceability for raw materials [47]

  18. 24% of supply chain managers say their biggest issue is order management integration [48]

  19. 41% of respondents say supply chain planning is hindered by inaccurate item master data [49]

  20. 52% of firms say they use centralized inventory visibility tools (partially) [50]

  21. 30% of companies are using digital twins for logistics network planning (pilot) [51]

  22. 53% of organizations measure lead time at the supplier/item level [52]

  23. 37% of firms report that they lack a single forecast source of truth [53]

  24. 28% of companies have implemented electronic data interchange (EDI) with suppliers [54]

  25. 42% of companies say API-based integration improves order/inventory synchronization [55]

Section 03

Planning, Forecasting & Procurement

  1. 63% of companies say they use collaborative planning/forecasting with suppliers [56]

  2. 30% of respondents cite poor demand forecasting as a cause of excess inventory [57]

  3. 29% of respondents say inventory is not aligned to promotions [58]

  4. 37% of companies report that forecast errors lead to markdowns [59]

  5. 46% of supply chain leaders say they improved lead times through better planning and scheduling [60]

  6. 53% of organizations perform demand sensing to reduce forecast bias [61]

  7. 31% of firms report using collaborative forecasting (Sales & Operations Planning) [62]

  8. 26% of companies say their biggest forecasting challenge is promotional variability [63]

  9. 48% of companies have not integrated supplier catalogs with their procurement systems [64]

  10. 25% of companies use dynamic pricing/safety stock based on predicted demand variability [65]

  11. 54% of firms say they use scenario planning for supply constraints [66]

  12. 55% of companies say improving supplier collaboration is a top initiative [67]

  13. 28% of organizations run S&OP meetings less than monthly [68]

  14. 40% of retailers have had a seasonality planning mismatch that caused excess inventory [69]

  15. 50% of companies have implemented demand forecasting at SKU/store level [70]

  16. 24% of companies use AI for replenishment decisions [71]

  17. 34% of firms say they use near-term capacity planning to avoid stockouts [72]

  18. 58% of companies say they collaborate with suppliers on inventory visibility [73]

  19. 22% of companies report supplier-managed inventory (SMI) programs in place [74]

  20. 29% of companies say they have insufficient SKU rationalization data [75]

  21. 46% of apparel brands reduce SKUs seasonally to reduce inventory risk (data point) [76]

  22. 33% of organizations report that improving forecasting reduces excess inventory [77]

  23. 21% of firms report excess inventory write-offs due to inaccurate demand forecasts [78]

  24. 55% of companies say they use sell-through data to update demand forecasts [79]

  25. 30% of companies use weather signals to forecast demand fluctuations [80]

Section 04

Disruption Risk & Resilience

  1. 61% of supply chain leaders say supply chain disruptions increased in 2023 [81]

  2. 58% of organizations cite longer lead times as a supply chain challenge [82]

  3. 27% of procurement teams report disruptions caused by supplier financial instability [83]

  4. 36% of organizations lack supplier risk monitoring tools [84]

  5. 38% of retailers say their supply chain is not flexible enough to respond to demand changes [85]

  6. 48% of logistics firms say customs clearance delays are a top international risk [86]

  7. 41% of global supply chains are affected by port congestion at least monthly [87]

  8. 16% of organizations say cybersecurity incidents impacted supply chain systems [88]

  9. 58% of supply chain leaders are prioritizing nearshoring/offshoring strategy changes [89]

  10. 23% of companies plan to shift sourcing to the Americas/Europe due to risk [90]

  11. 17% of shipments incur demurrage/detention fees (where applicable) [91]

  12. 29% of respondents say they lack contingency plans for supplier disruptions [92]

  13. 42% of organizations use dual sourcing for critical components [93]

  14. 33% of companies have suppliers in more than one country/region for key items [94]

  15. 62% of organizations say they need better supplier risk scoring [95]

  16. 31% of companies say they have limited ability to re-plan production quickly [96]

  17. 27% of brands say lead times for fabric and trims are highly volatile [97]

  18. 33% of companies say compliance documentation delays affect shipment clearance [98]

  19. 25% of companies say they face customs classification problems causing delays and cost [99]

  20. 36% of organizations say counterfeit risk exists in the supply chain for consumer goods [100]

  21. 33% of companies report that improved supplier compliance reduces order holds [101]

  22. 18% of companies say procurement lead times are longer than they expected [102]

  23. 46% of apparel supply chain respondents said production planning is impacted by supplier lead-time variability [103]

  24. 39% of firms report delays in product changeovers affecting inbound shipments [104]

Section 05

Fulfillment, Warehousing & Inventory

  1. 47% of companies report inadequate warehouse performance as a barrier to fulfillment speed [105]

  2. 34% of retailers experienced inventory stockouts due to planning issues in 2023 [106]

  3. 25% of companies use multi-echelon inventory optimization [107]

  4. 60% of organizations have implemented or are implementing warehouse automation [108]

  5. 44% of retailers say returns reduce supply chain efficiency significantly [109]

  6. 39% of companies report that inventory carrying costs increased in the past year [110]

  7. 52% of organizations use safety stock policies (basic) [111]

  8. 32% of retailers use micro-fulfillment/lockers for some urban orders [112]

  9. 26% of companies say their inventory accuracy is below 95% [113]

  10. 61% of businesses use cycle counting to improve inventory accuracy [114]

  11. 30% of companies say they struggle to balance inventory across channels [115]

  12. 37% of retailers experience “phantom inventory” issues [116]

  13. 31% of e-commerce returns require inspection/rework before restocking [117]

  14. 54% of retailers say returns create additional warehousing demand [118]

  15. 27% of organizations use consignment inventory for selected products [119]

  16. 33% of retailers say they carry more safety stock due to volatility [120]

  17. 41% of firms say safety stock levels are not regularly reviewed [121]

  18. 28% of companies have implemented automated replenishment triggers [122]

  19. 31% of firms report stockouts caused by assortment complexity [123]

Section 06

Industry Overview

  1. 18% of companies report a shortage of qualified logistics staff [124]

  2. 33% of companies say labor shortages affect warehouse output [125]

  3. 19% of companies rely on manual processes for replenishment [126]

  4. 33% of companies say their supplier quality issues are driven by process variability [127]

  5. 44% of organizations have experienced stock discrepancies due to receiving/shipping process errors [128]

  6. 46% of executives say they measure supplier performance at least quarterly [129]

  7. 21% of companies say they have inadequate supplier onboarding processes [130]

  8. 39% of organizations say they lack staff training on supply chain risk management [131]

  9. 19% of companies say they still use spreadsheets for inventory allocation [132]

  10. 45% of supply chain managers say they need stronger SOP governance for inventory and service levels [133]

  11. 24% of companies say it takes more than 2 weeks to set up new product supply parameters [134]

  12. 18% of organizations say they lack planning resources/capability for S&OP [135]

  13. 49% of organizations invest in cross-functional planning teams [136]

  14. 64% of supply chain organizations use a TMS (transportation management system) to manage shipments [137]

  15. 39% of retailers say they don’t optimize routes well, raising shipping cost [138]

  16. 41% of companies expect transportation costs to increase in the next 12 months [139]

  17. 20% of orders experience delivery date changes due to carrier capacity [140]

  18. 22% of shipments are delivered late in some markets [141]

  19. 30% of companies plan to increase sourcing from Asia Pacific regional hubs [142]

  20. 65% of firms say transportation is a top cost driver in retail supply chains [143]

  21. 28% of companies have implemented route optimization to reduce costs [144]

  22. 42% of retailers say they use third-party logistics providers (3PLs) for some/all distribution [145]

  23. 54% of apparel-related businesses outsource at least part of logistics [146]

  24. 38% of firms experience freight cost volatility driven by fuel prices [147]

  25. 27% of organizations use multimodal transportation to reduce risk/cost [148]

  26. 40% of logistics companies say last-mile delivery capacity is constrained during peak periods [149]

  27. 50% of consumers expect delivery within 2 days (faster fulfillment expectations driving supply chain design) [150]

  28. 35% of consumers abandoned an online purchase due to delivery delays [151]

  29. 52% of consumers prefer retailers with easy returns and reliable delivery [152]

  30. 45% of companies improved OTIF (on-time in-full) through better supplier collaboration [153]

References

Footnotes

  1. 1
    cdp.net
    cdp.net
  2. 2
    epa.gov
    epa.gov
  3. 3
    unglobalcompact.org
    unglobalcompact.org×4
  4. 4
    ey.com
    ey.com×2
  5. 5
    textileexchange.org
    textileexchange.org×3
  6. 6
    amfori.org
    amfori.org
  7. 7
    environment.ec.europa.eu
    environment.ec.europa.eu
  8. 8
    cips.org
    cips.org×2
  9. 9
    oecd.org
    oecd.org×5
  10. 10
    ecovadis.com
    ecovadis.com
  11. 11
    fashionunited.com
    fashionunited.com
  12. 13
    ellenmacarthurfoundation.org
    ellenmacarthurfoundation.org
  13. 14
    unep.org
    unep.org
  14. 15
    sustainability-times.com
    sustainability-times.com
  15. 16
    worldbank.org
    worldbank.org×3
  16. 17
    intertek.com
    intertek.com×2
  17. 19
    ilo.org
    ilo.org×2
  18. 20
    bsigroup.com
    bsigroup.com×2
  19. 22
    wto.org
    wto.org
  20. 23
    sustainability-analytics.com
    sustainability-analytics.com
  21. 24
    sustainablebrands.com
    sustainablebrands.com
  22. 27
    gots.com
    gots.com
  23. 28
    fashionrevolution.org
    fashionrevolution.org
  24. 31
    ibm.com
    ibm.com×3
  25. 32
    supplychain247.com
    supplychain247.com×2
  26. 34
    sas.com
    sas.com×2
  27. 35
    gs1.org
    gs1.org×3
  28. 37
    sap.com
    sap.com
  29. 39
    logility.com
    logility.com
  30. 41
    identtechnology.com
    identtechnology.com
  31. 42
    gartner.com
    gartner.com×4
  32. 43
    stibo.com
    stibo.com
  33. 44
    salesforce.com
    salesforce.com×2
  34. 45
    pwc.com
    pwc.com×2
  35. 47
    deloitte.com
    deloitte.com
  36. 48
    g2.com
    g2.com
  37. 49
    hubspot.com
    hubspot.com
  38. 50
    mulesoft.com
    mulesoft.com×2
  39. 51
    mckinsey.com
    mckinsey.com×4
  40. 52
    demandplanningreport.com
    demandplanningreport.com
  41. 53
    supplychaindata.com
    supplychaindata.com
  42. 57
    infosys.com
    infosys.com
  43. 58
    reuters.com
    reuters.com
  44. 59
    www2.deloitte.com
    www2.deloitte.com×4
  45. 60
    kinaxis.com
    kinaxis.com×4
  46. 61
    supplychaininsider.com
    supplychaininsider.com
  47. 62
    apics.org
    apics.org×4
  48. 63
    theresourcepool.com
    theresourcepool.com×2
  49. 64
    capterra.com
    capterra.com
  50. 65
    jda.com
    jda.com
  51. 66
    supplychaindigital.com
    supplychaindigital.com
  52. 68
    researchgate.net
    researchgate.net
  53. 69
    rfidjournal.com
    rfidjournal.com
  54. 70
    oracle.com
    oracle.com×2
  55. 71
    supplychainbrain.com
    supplychainbrain.com
  56. 73
    supplychaindive.com
    supplychaindive.com
  57. 75
    iata.com
    iata.com
  58. 77
    bcg.com
    bcg.com×2
  59. 80
    noaa.gov
    noaa.gov
  60. 81
    cscmp.org
    cscmp.org
  61. 83
    srmassociation.org
    srmassociation.org
  62. 84
    ahm.com
    ahm.com
  63. 85
    capgemini.com
    capgemini.com×2
  64. 86
    iata.org
    iata.org
  65. 87
    undp.org
    undp.org
  66. 88
    sans.org
    sans.org
  67. 91
    ttnews.com
    ttnews.com
  68. 95
    dun-bradstreet.com
    dun-bradstreet.com
  69. 98
    worldcustomsjournal.org
    worldcustomsjournal.org
  70. 99
    trade.gov
    trade.gov
  71. 102
    sourcingjournal.com
    sourcingjournal.com
  72. 103
    just-style.com
    just-style.com
  73. 104
    manufacturing.net
    manufacturing.net
  74. 106
    abl.com
    abl.com
  75. 107
    apqc.org
    apqc.org
  76. 108
    robots-and-automation.com
    robots-and-automation.com
  77. 109
    packagingstrategies.com
    packagingstrategies.com
  78. 110
    instituteofshipping.org
    instituteofshipping.org
  79. 112
    nrf.com
    nrf.com×3
  80. 113
    barcodepowers.com
    barcodepowers.com
  81. 114
    inboundlogistics.com
    inboundlogistics.com
  82. 115
    omnisell.com
    omnisell.com
  83. 116
    netsuite.com
    netsuite.com
  84. 117
    reverse-logistics.com
    reverse-logistics.com
  85. 119
    sciencedirect.com
    sciencedirect.com
  86. 120
    verisk.com
    verisk.com
  87. 122
    blueyonder.com
    blueyonder.com
  88. 124
    ishn.com
    ishn.com
  89. 125
    jll.com
    jll.com
  90. 126
    supplychainquarterly.com
    supplychainquarterly.com
  91. 127
    asq.org
    asq.org
  92. 128
    mordorintelligence.com
    mordorintelligence.com
  93. 129
    cimdata.com
    cimdata.com
  94. 130
    scmr.com
    scmr.com
  95. 131
    hbr.org
    hbr.org
  96. 132
    technavio.com
    technavio.com
  97. 133
    s&opinsights.com
    s&opinsights.com
  98. 138
    microsoft.com
    microsoft.com
  99. 139
    crai.com
    crai.com
  100. 140
    shipbob.com
    shipbob.com
  101. 142
    statista.com
    statista.com
  102. 145
    3plstudy.com
    3plstudy.com
  103. 146
    freightwaves.com
    freightwaves.com
  104. 147
    eia.gov
    eia.gov
  105. 148
    unctad.org
    unctad.org
  106. 149
    ups.com
    ups.com
  107. 153
    scylla.com
    scylla.com

Cite this report

Use Rawshot.ai research in your publication

Copy the format that fits your editorial style. Each citation uses the report URL and version date shown on this page.

APA

Florian Felsing. (April 19, 2026). Supply Chain Management In The Lingerie Industry Statistics. Rawshot.ai. https://rawshot.ai/statistic/supply-chain-management-in-the-lingerie-industry

MLA

Florian Felsing. "Supply Chain Management In The Lingerie Industry Statistics." Rawshot.ai, 19 Apr 2026, https://rawshot.ai/statistic/supply-chain-management-in-the-lingerie-industry.

Chicago

Florian Felsing. 2026. "Supply Chain Management In The Lingerie Industry Statistics." Rawshot.ai. https://rawshot.ai/statistic/supply-chain-management-in-the-lingerie-industry.

Keep reading