This paper examines the relationship between the product lifecycle and supply chain management, arguing that supply chain configuration must align with the lifecycle stage of the product being supplied. Drawing on Fisher's (1997) framework distinguishing innovative from functional products, and Aitken et al.'s (2003) stage-by-stage supply chain recommendations, the paper traces how appropriate supply chain strategies shift from flexible, design-and-build approaches during development and introduction, through material requirements planning (MRP) during growth, to kanban systems at maturity, and finally toward renewed flexibility during decline. The Apple outsourcing model is used to illustrate how firms with multiple fast-moving products manage this complexity in practice.
The paper demonstrates synthesis of multiple academic sources to build a coherent argument. Rather than summarizing each source independently, the student weaves Fisher (1997) and Aitken et al. (2003) together to show how product type and lifecycle stage jointly determine the optimal supply chain configuration. This is a hallmark of strong undergraduate business writing.
The paper opens by framing the research question, then provides background on the product lifecycle before introducing Fisher's framework as the analytical lens. The core argument maps specific supply chain strategies — design-and-build, pull-based outsourcing, MRP with push systems, kanban — onto successive lifecycle stages. A concluding section uses Apple as a practical illustration before summarizing the overall argument. The structure is linear and well-signposted, making it easy to follow the progression of ideas.
The management of the supply chain is an important element of operations. The supply chain configuration — including issues such as make-or-buy decisions and the type of supply chain deliveries — needs to match the products being supplied, and may be heavily influenced by the lifecycle stage and the type of demand and production that emerges during its different stages (Aitken et al., 2003). To consider this fully, it is necessary first to examine the product lifecycle and then to explore how it may impact supply chain management.
The lifecycle is traditionally presented as having five stages: development, introduction, growth, maturity, and decline (Kotler and Armstrong, 2013). The development stage precedes the product's release to market. Introduction is the period when the product reaches the market and sales begin, but remain slow. Growth sees the pace of sales increase and may be sub-divided into early growth and later growth. Maturity is reached when the market has achieved its full potential and sales peak; after this, sales levels fall and the market is said to be in decline.
For many products, manufacturers will seek to renew the product lifecycle during or just before maturity in order to prevent decline from being reached. It is also important to note that the length of the product lifecycle can vary greatly — for some fashion items it may be a few months, while for other items it may be years or even decades (Kotler and Armstrong, 2013).
The challenge in supply chain management is that the ideal goals associated with cost, quality, service, and lead time cannot all be satisfied by the same strategies. There will always be a need for some concessions in order to optimize the supply chain characteristics that are most important for operations (Aitken et al., 2003). The first consideration is the type of product being produced, which matters because the same product may be perceived differently during the various stages of its lifecycle (Aitken et al., 2003).
Fisher (1997) divided products and their supporting manufacturing and supply chain operations into two categories: products were either innovative or functional. Manufacturing processes — and therefore the supporting supply chain activities — could then focus on either efficiency or responsiveness, since a process cannot be fully optimized for both simultaneously. Fisher argued that innovative products require a responsive supply chain, whereas functional products, which are associated with mass markets, require a focus on efficiency. If the opposite were true in either case, a strategic mismatch would result (Fisher, 1997).
This indicates that products at the beginning of a lifecycle are often innovative — they are new and may need to be adapted or changed — and as such, the processes, including the supporting supply chain, need to be flexible (Fisher, 1997). As the product moves toward greater sales volume and mass production becomes necessary, a focus on efficiency allows economies of scope and scale to be realized (Fisher, 1997).
Therefore, it can be seen that while there are many supply chain choices available, the product lifecycle will significantly impact on the appropriate supply chain strategy. From flexible design-and-build approaches in the early stages, through MRP-driven push systems during growth, to kanban at maturity, and renewed flexibility during decline, each stage calls for a distinct supply chain configuration aligned with the nature and volume of demand.
Aitken, J., Childerhouse, P., & Towill, D. (2003). The impact of product life cycle on supply chain strategy. International Journal of Production Economics, 85, 127–140.
Fisher, M. (1997). What is the right supply chain for your product? Harvard Business Review, 75, 105–116.
Kotler, P., & Armstrong, G. (2013). Principles of Marketing. Pearson.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.