Case Study
Facilities Needs Assessment & Manufacturing Strategy – 77% Space Reduction
4,200 square feet down to 925 – without changing a single product spec
The Challenge
A bioprocessing company scaling capital equipment manufacturing through contract manufacturing partnerships faced a question that looked simple but wasn’t: how much space do we actually need? The initial estimate, based on raw materials packaging as received from suppliers, pointed to 4,200 square feet of pallet storage. At launch volumes, that was manageable. At growth volumes, it was a constraint that would become expensive to resolve.
What made the question harder than it appeared: space requirements weren’t fixed. They were outputs of strategic decisions about packaging, materials flow, and where in the value chain specific activities happened. Getting the answer right required analyzing the entire manufacturing workflow, not just counting pallets.
- Industry: Bioprocessing / Manufacturing Operations
- Services: Facilities Assessment, Manufacturing Strategy, Workflow Optimization, Space Planning, Contract Manufacturing Analysis
- Timeline: 2-month assessment
- Client Profile: Bioprocessing supplier scaling capital equipment manufacturing through CMO partnerships; preparing for commercial volume growth
Our Approach
01 | Full Value Chain Assessment
Rather than calculating space requirements from current packaging configurations, we mapped the entire manufacturing workflow from raw materials receipt through finished goods delivery. For each activity, we documented space requirements, environmental control needs, materials handling patterns, quality control touchpoints, and personnel requirements — examining four distinct flow types across the supply chain, from raw materials receipt through CMO assembly to finished goods shipment.
02 | What the Assessment Found
Packaging, not product volume, turned out to be the primary driver of space requirements. Raw materials had been arriving in configurations optimized for supplier operations, not for the client’s own storage and handling — redesigning that packaging reduced the pallet footprint by 77% without changing a single product specification.
The multi-directional materials flow was also creating cost and risk that didn’t need to exist. Materials were shipping from client to CMO for assembly, then back to client for final operations — adding handling steps, transportation cost, and transfer risk at every leg. Establishing a unidirectional flow eliminated the intermediate holding step entirely.
A third finding reframed the CMO relationship itself: its primary value was manufacturing space, not manufacturing expertise, since all tooling and equipment was custom-designed by the client. That reframe carried a longer-term strategic implication — that bringing manufacturing in-house as volumes matured would capture value currently flowing to the CMO.
03 | Pre-Fabrication Strategy
We also recommended pre-fabricating critical components ahead of demand rather than manufacturing them on-demand through the CMO, storing them in the newly optimized packaging configurations. This improved order response time and reduced dependency on CMO scheduling.
The Impact
77% space reduction — 4,200 sq ft to 925 sq ft
Storage costs dropped and growth headroom was created without facility expansion, eliminating a constraint before it became binding.
Operational workflow streamlined
Unidirectional materials flow removed an entire handling step, reducing cost, transfer risk, and operational complexity.
CMO value clarified
Strategic decisions about the CMO relationship could now be grounded in accurate analysis instead of assumption.
In-house manufacturing roadmap established
The client later implemented the recommendation to bring manufacturing in-house as the product matured — the strategic analysis held up when it mattered.
Facing a similar challenge?
Let’s discuss how we can help.