Omnichannel fulfillment impacts much of the decision-making in retail operations. Retailers have been growing order channels and the fulfillment avenues necessary to get products into the hands of customers. Among orders, inventory, and delivery, there’s an expanding scope of variables governing every order — all computed within an order management system (OMS). But as omnichannel sales become increasingly complex, many retailers are finding their monolithic OMS simply cannot keep pace.
The main problems with a monolithic OMS can be found in its description: monolithic. There’s a lack of flexibility and agility and the inability to tinker with one part of the system for fear of bringing down the entire system. Instead of making true upgrades and improvements, most retailers are stuck cobbling together stopgap solutions to facilitate increasing omnichannel operations. This results in delays, errors, and general inefficiencies.
As retailers find themselves playing a game of cat and mouse — modernizing one part of the OMS to the detriment of interwoven services — the prospect of re-platforming becomes appealing. Unfortunately, it’s often not viable.
Re-platforming or migrating completely to a new OMS is a complex process with several challenges. Implementing an entirely new system requires significant technology, infrastructure, and personnel investments. Moreover, re-platforming is bound to disrupt ongoing business operations, causing short-term productivity losses and potential long-term revenue impacts. This doesn’t even account for IT infrastructure, business processes, and data systems — all of which must be migrated, adapted, or redeveloped.
In managing a monolithic OMS, retailers are stuck choosing between two less-than-ideal choices: a hodgepodge system with more patches than processes or a huge investment with significant tech debt. Thankfully, microservices offer a common-sense middle ground.
A microservices architecture acts as a collection of loosely coupled services, each performing a specific business function. They utilize well-defined application programming interfaces (APIs) to synchronize and facilitate all necessary OMS functions. Think bricks layered together vs. a big stone slab (monolith). By breaking down an OMS into smaller, self-contained services, microservices make it easier for retailers to manage and manipulate specific components — without disrupting the entire system.
In delegating each OMS function to its own microservice, retailers can redevelop a traditional OMS without completely re-platforming. This architecture solves almost every problem presented by a monolithic OMS while providing retailers with benefits for an omnichannel-focused future, such as:
Adapting an existing OMS to a microservices architecture involves a few key steps to ensure a smooth and successful implementation. Here’s what a typical playbook might look like for retailers:
Areas to consider when starting the process include order management, inventory management, and payment processing — all of which are crucial for omnichannel success. These areas also typically involve complex business rules and requirements benefiting from the flexibility and modularity of microservices.
Omnichannel retail will continue to evolve and present new challenges, opportunities, and considerations. Moving from one monolithic OMS to another isn’t the answer for every business. A microservices-based architecture offers solutions to satisfy the need for better oversight now while leaving room for future adaptivity.