Most packaging decisions were made years ago and have not been revisited since. Over time, costs shifted, carrier rules tightened, and sustainability became a genuine business requirement. But the packaging stayed the same.
For many companies, the result is packaging that quietly costs more than it should. Too much material, the wrong material, or both. The costs do not appear as a single obvious line item. They hide across freight invoices, damage claims, and void fill expenses, spread out enough that no single number triggers a review.
This article breaks down what packaging material optimization actually means, where those hidden costs tend to accumulate, and how an engineering-led approach can help you reduce cost, improve performance, and ship smarter.
Packaging material optimization is the process of evaluating and improving the materials used across your packaging to reduce cost, improve performance, and minimize waste. It works through three main levers:
Reducing the total amount of material used: less corrugated, less foam, less void fill.
Substituting materials for lighter or less expensive alternatives.
Right-sizing containers to fit products more precisely, eliminating the empty space.
Optimization does not always mean cheaper. The goal is to find the right balance of cost, performance, and sustainability for a specific product and operation, not to reduce spend at the expense of everything else. Material optimization also applies across all three packaging layers: primary, secondary, and tertiary, with the largest opportunities typically found at the secondary and tertiary levels where freight impact is greatest.
When packaging materials are properly optimized, the benefits compound across the business:
Reduced material use directly lowers per-unit packaging spend.
Lighter and smaller packaging reduces freight charges and improves pallet density.
Right-sized containers reduce product movement in transit, lowering damage rates and reverse logistics costs associated with returns.
Better-fitting packaging also moves more smoothly through fulfillment systems, reducing labor and handling time at packing stations.
Less material means a smaller carbon footprint: fewer truck miles, fewer replacement shipments, and less waste generated at the point of packing.
Cost savings can represent better margins or pricing competitiveness, passing it on to customers to strengthen market position
These benefits are interconnected. A change that reduces material cost often also reduces transportation cost. A reduction in damage rates also improves sustainability. Addressing one inefficiency rarely stays contained to one area.
Inefficient packaging persists because its costs are distributed across multiple budget lines. A few of the most common places they hide:
Excess void fill, which is usually a symptom of a box that is too large. The void fill itself has a cost, and so does the labor to apply it, but neither constitutes a packaging inefficiency on its own.
Substrate choices that were never revisited. A corrugated grade specified years ago for a heavier product may still be in use long after the conditions that justified it have changed.
Damage rates. It usually feels like an acceptable cost of doing business, but it often stems from packaging that does not hold the product securely in transit.
Oversized shipments. They reduce pallet efficiency without anyone connecting it back to a packaging decision.
These inefficiencies compound. One poorly sized container can simultaneously drive up material spend, inflate freight costs, reduce pallet density, and increase damage rates.
There are five main levers packaging engineers use, often in combination:
Right-sizing adjusts container dimensions to match the product, eliminating void space and reducing both material use and dimensional weight charges.
Lightweighting and down-gauging switch to a thinner corrugated flute or lighter substrate that still meets performance requirements.
Substrate substitution replaces one material with another that performs equally well at a lower cost or weight.
Void fill reduction redesigns the interior structure to hold the product securely without relying on excessive filler material.
Right-size automation builds boxes on demand around the product, eliminating fixed box inventories and reducing material waste at scale.
The right combination depends on the product, the volume, and the operation, which is why an engineering audit is always the starting point.
A packaging engineer designs, tests, and produces protective, cost-effective, and sustainable packaging solutions. Their job is not to sell a specific material; it is to solve a specific problem using whatever material is best suited to the task.
The process starts with an audit of existing packaging across all three layers, identifying inefficiencies in dimensions, materials, and performance requirements. From there, engineers develop recommendations, prototype alternatives, and conduct testing—drop tests, vibration tests, compression tests—to validate that a proposed design meets performance requirements before any changes go into production.
What distinguishes a packaging engineer from a standard supplier is the absence of material bias. Working with a material-agnostic engineer means the solution is always driven by what is right for the product and the operation, not by what is most convenient to manufacture or sell.
Transportation savings are often the fastest and most measurable return from a material optimization project.
Lighter packaging reduces actual weight charges. Smaller packaging reduces dimensional weight, the metric carriers use to charge for the space a shipment occupies, regardless of how light it is. Right-sizing a box to fit the product more precisely can lower freight costs on every single shipment.
Better-fitting packaging also improves pallet density. More units per pallet means fewer pallets per shipment and fewer truck loads required to move the same volume, a compounding return that grows with scale. For companies shipping in bulk, pallet optimization alone can justify a full packaging review.
Packaging exists in layers, and each presents its own optimization opportunities.
Primary packaging: the material in direct contact with the product (bottles, bags, blister packs, pouches). Optimization at this level is often constrained by product-specific requirements, but material substitutions and right-sizing can have a meaningful impact at high volumes.
Secondary packaging: the container that holds and groups primary packages (boxes, cartons, trays). This is typically where the largest opportunities exist because it directly drives dimensional weight charges, pallet efficiency, and void-fill requirements. Right-sizing, down-gauging, and substrate substitution at this level tend to deliver the fastest returns.
Tertiary packaging: the outer layer used for bulk handling and transport (corrugated shippers, pallets, stretch wrap). Improvements at this level often create automatic gains as well. Right-sized secondary packaging stacks more efficiently, which reduces pallet count and stretch wrap usage per shipment.
Changes at one layer affect the others, which is why a full audit should consider all three together rather than in isolation.
Corrugated board consists of two flat linerboards with a fluted inner sheet sandwiched between them. The size and shape of those flutes vary significantly, and those variations have direct implications for cost, weight, and performance.
The most common types are:
A-flute, which offers the highest cushioning and is used for fragile or heavy products
C-flute, the most widely used grade, which balances strength and cushioning for general shipping applications
B-flute, which is thinner with good puncture resistance
E-flute, which is lightweight with a smooth surface suited for retail packaging and high-quality printing
Microflutes, which are extremely compact and durable, ideal for space-sensitive applications.
Down-gauging means switching to a thinner flute that still meets performance requirements and is one of the most commonly overlooked optimization levers. Many companies default to a higher grade than their product actually requires, either out of caution or because the specification was set early and has never been updated. Switching to a lighter flute reduces material costs and shipping weight and can improve print quality on the outer surface.
Every packaging decision involves a trade-off between cost, performance, and sustainability. Finding the right balance requires an honest evaluation, and that is only possible when the person doing it has no stake in the outcome.
A single-material supplier will tend to solve packaging problems with the material they manufacture. A material-agnostic engineering partner has no such constraint. They can specify corrugated, paperboard, foam, molded pulp, film, or any other substrate, because their goal is the best solution for the application, not the most convenient one for their product line.
At Smurfit Westrock Packaging Solutions, our engineers bring decades of experience in designing and sourcing packaging across all major substrates and industries. Our material-agnostic approach, combined with one of the broadest supplier networks in the industry, means we can find the right balance of cost, performance, and sustainability, and back it up with engineering and testing before anything goes into production.
If your packaging has not been reviewed by an engineer recently, there is a good chance it is costing more than it should. Contact our packaging engineers to schedule a material optimization analysis and identify opportunities.