For a long time, 3PL integration was seen as a purely technical topic. Connecting an ERP to a WMS and exchanging a few EDI messages was often considered sufficient to label an integration as “functional.”
In reality, this vision is now outdated. EDI-based exchanges, still the standard in many logistics networks, are often slow, expensive, and complex to implement. Each new technical connection requires weeks of configuration, testing, and maintenance, significantly reducing operational agility.
As supply chains become more fragmented and the number of stakeholders increases, this rigid approach no longer meets the requirements of modern logistics networks. Integration must go far beyond basic system connectivity: it needs to be fluid, fast, and native like the connectors developed by Spacefill, designed to simplify and automate collaboration between logistics partners.
Traditional 3PL connectors are typically built on point-to-point integrations.
They are designed to connect:
In most cases, these integrations focus solely on data transmission.
Their typical characteristics include:
This model can work in simple environments, but it quickly reaches its limits as logistics operations grow more complex.
As logistics networks expand, complexity increases rapidly and often uncontrollably.
The most common breaking points include:
Each new partner adds another integration layer that must be maintained. Over time, the system becomes fragile, expensive, and difficult to evolve.
At this stage, connectors stop being enablers and become real operational bottlenecks.
Spacefill was not designed as a simple connector. From day one, the platform was built as a logistics integration and collaboration solution.
Instead of connecting systems one by one, Spacefill creates a centralized integration hub positioned between internal tools and external logistics partners.
This architectural difference fundamentally changes how integration is used.
Spacefill focuses on:
Integration becomes an operational lever rather than a technical constraint.
| Capability | Traditional Connectors | Spacefill |
|---|---|---|
| Integration architecture | EDI | Centralized hub |
| Multi-3PL management | Limited | Native |
| Multi-WMS compatibility | Complex | Standardized |
| Order processing | Manual or scripted | AI-assisted |
| Data normalization | Partial | Built-in |
| Operational visibility | Fragmented | Centralized |
| Incident management | External tools | Integrated |
| Scalability | Low to medium | High |
This comparison highlights the shift from a purely technical integration model to an operational orchestration approach.
APIs facilitate data exchange, but they do not solve operational complexity.
In real-world logistics environments, challenges arise when:
Spacefill addresses these challenges by adding intelligence and structure on top of technical connectivity.
This includes:
Integration supports operations instead of slowing them down.
The impact of Spacefill goes far beyond technical efficiency.
Typical operational improvements include:
By centralizing integrations and workflows, Spacefill allows logistics teams to focus on performance rather than problem-solving.
In addition, for 3PLs, reliance on EDI also represents a structural limitation. Due to its complexity and cost, EDI integrations are often reserved for large accounts, leaving a significant portion of the client portfolio disconnected from information systems. As a result, exchanges with these clients still rely heavily on manual processes, leading to errors, delays, and limited operational visibility.
Organizations that gain the most value from Spacefill include:
Traditional connectors mainly answer the question:
“How do systems exchange data?”
Spacefill answers a broader and more strategic question:
“How can logistics operations involving multiple partners and systems run efficiently?”
This shift in perspective explains why Spacefill is now seen as a logistics integration platform rather than a simple connector.