I’ve spent the last few years watching warehouse robotics go from cutting-edge to common, and I’ve seen the full range of outcomes, from impressive transformation to costly disappointment. Robotics has promise, no doubt. But it’s not a silver bullet.
For warehouse and logistics leaders, the challenge isn’t deciding whether to automate, it’s working out where and how it adds value. Because when robotics doesn’t deliver, it’s rarely about the tech itself. It’s almost always a planning problem.
It’s easy to get caught up in the excitement. Trade shows. Sales decks. Industry panels promising round-the-clock operations, reduced headcount and instant ROI. The hype has been loud—and to be honest, a bit misleading.
What we’ve seen in practice is very different. I’ve encountered situations where businesses, eager to modernise, end up shoehorning automation into processes it wasn’t designed to optimise. Some operations invest millions in robotics, only to see productivity stall or even go backwards. One client installed a high-speed robotic picking system that could handle 30 totes a minute—but the downstream conveyor was only built for 15. The result? A beautifully engineered bottleneck.
This isn’t an argument against robotics. It’s a reminder that automation has to be strategically aligned with your operation, or it simply won’t work.
The most common reason robotics projects fail? Businesses try to retrofit tech before defining the problem. The first question I think needs to be asked is: What are we trying to solve here? Automation can solve many issues, but it’s not always the most appropriate solution.
Take a recent example from one of our clients: they were struggling to meet order volume during seasonal peaks, yet they had an automation strategy focused on handling steady-state operations. The issue wasn’t about speed; it was about throughput variability. A better solution might have been to invest in a more flexible system or adjust staffing models during peak periods. Instead, they invested in robotics, hoping it would fix everything. But the system only worked well during the off-season and broke down under pressure during peak demand.
Before jumping into robotics, businesses need to define their problem clearly. Do they need faster processing, lower costs, or better scalability? Only then should they explore automation as part of the solution.
Every successful deployment we’ve seen starts with a clearly defined operational need. That becomes your anchor. Every automation decision gets measured against that one outcome.
Robots are very good at doing very specific things. They don’t adapt on the fly like people do. If the surrounding systems—software, infrastructure, inventory processes—aren’t ready, then even the smartest robot becomes a liability.
I’ve seen automated storage and retrieval systems (ASRS) implemented into warehouses with no real-time inventory visibility. The result? The robots are fast, but they’re often being instructed to try and pick items that have already sold through. That kind of disconnect is expensive—and completely avoidable.
Integration matters. Your robotics system needs to “talk” to the rest of your tech stack. It needs to be matched to your order profile. And it needs to suit the physical layout and pace of your facility. Otherwise, you’re just shifting bottlenecks around the floor.
Integration should always be approached from a business perspective. How will the new technology complement existing workflows? What data needs to flow between systems? These are the questions that drive successful automation projects.
One of the most overlooked aspects of automation is its impact on staff. Robotics don’t replace 100% of people; it changes the way they work. This is where most businesses fall short. They don’t consider the need for training and role adaptation as part of the automation journey.
I’ve worked with clients where the human element was treated as an afterthought. When the robotic system went live, staff were unprepared, and morale took a hit. But when we involved employees in the planning process—explaining how their roles would change, what new skills they’d need to develop, and how they would work alongside robots—the implementation was far smoother.
In one warehouse, we saw staff shift from routine picking and packing to roles involving system oversight and troubleshooting. Not only did this improve operational efficiency, but it also led to a more engaged workforce, with employees appreciating the opportunity to develop new skills. The key takeaway here is that the transition needs to be well-managed, with adequate training and support in place.
Let’s be clear: not every business should dive into robotics. For some, the complexity and variability of their operations make automation impractical or inefficient. Robotics excels in environments where product variation is low, and processes are highly predictable.
But there are success stories – and they all have a few things in common.
In my experience, businesses that succeed with robotics are those that align the technology with their strategic goals rather than letting the technology drive the strategy. Before looking at automation, take the time to understand your operations, define your problems, and build a business case.
Take the example of a client in retail distribution. They had a seasonal product line with massive spikes during the holiday season. By carefully analysing their order profile, they designed a system that supported peak demands without unnecessary over-investment in infrastructure.
Robotics performs best in environments with low variability. Consistent SKUs, predictable flows, and minimal exceptions. If your operation is full of edge cases, people will still do the heavy lifting.
I saw this firsthand within the food production industry. One client had a product line where every item was uniform in size, shape, and weight. The robotic system was able to perform tasks at an incredibly high efficiency because the variation in the work was minimal. In contrast, in a warehouse that handled a diverse range of items, from small components to large, irregularly shaped products, the robotics implementation struggled to keep up, often requiring manual intervention.
If your operations involve a lot of variation, robots may not be the answer. That doesn’t mean automation is off the table, but it does mean you need a tailored, flexible approach.
They bring in robotics that are matched to that specific challenge. They take integration seriously. And they involve people early—across departments, not just operations and IT. Finance, HR, even legal all have a stake in how automation plays out.
One of the best examples I’ve seen involved cross-functional simulation months before rollout. It slowed the installation process, but saved time, money and frustration in the long run. Everyone knew what was coming and how it would affect their part of the business.
Five years ago, robotics felt out of reach for most operations. Unless you were a national chain with deep pockets, it just wasn’t an option. That’s changed. The technology is more accessible now – and that’s a good thing.
But here’s the thing; successful robotics integration isn’t about the technology itself. It’s about how well that technology is applied to solve a real business challenge. To get it right, businesses must start with a clear problem definition, integrate robotics into existing workflows, and ensure that staff are equipped for the changes ahead. Robotics can offer incredible efficiency, but only when the right strategic framework is in place.
My advice? Don’t get distracted by the flash. Focus on the basics. And bring your people with you. That’s how you make robotics work for you—not the other way around.