2. Speeding Up But Still Slow

The time-to-market and chase timelines presented in the reports and calls represent real progress. However, they are still too slow to support the goals of more newness and full-price sales.

The mainline product development timeline once ran 18 to 24 months, which is shockingly high on its own. It is now down to 15 to 16 months, with a goal of 12 to 14. We think it should be compressed more aggressively, closer to 10 months, so the brand can read the current season’s feedback before placing orders for the next one.

Assuming that all new styles run through the mainline development calendar, the math gets harder. A high newness quotient demands speed, and we are not sure if there is enough of it yet. So the questions we would press on include: How far does digital sampling actually reach? Is there a pre-approved materials library doing real work to shorten the front end? And how often are teams reworking and revisiting decisions, quietly adding time back?

Lululemon is also leaning on chase to respond faster to guests, with chase volume projected to rise 20%. Chase, along with fast-tracks and postponement for replenishment and/or reacting to market signals is an excellent approach. But the chase timeline currently sits at six to eight weeks. The brand should stive to push to three weeks to better insulate against unplanned markdowns.

As such, the question worth asking: what can be learned from the likes of Inditex and other fast-fashion players about building better processes?

The answers will be useful for Lulu.