Old Navy’s Size-Assortment Challenge: A Procurement Reading

The documented event

In its 26 May 2022 results release, Gap Inc.: First Quarter Fiscal 2022 Results reported Old Navy quarterly net sales of $1.8 billion, down 19% year over year. The company identified size and assortment imbalances, inventory delays and product acceptance issues in some categories as negative factors. This is a summary of the issuer’s disclosure, not our audit of its operations.

The disclosure does not provide a controlled experiment isolating any one factor. It does not authorize a conclusion that a particular body size, customer group or inclusive principle caused the decline.

What can be learned without overclaiming

An assortment is a system of styles, colours, sizes, channels and timing. An imbalance in one part can coexist with unavailable stock elsewhere. A buyer should therefore distinguish the breadth of an offer from the depth and availability of each combination.

This is our procurement interpretation, not a description of private Old Navy planning decisions. We have not inspected its supplier records, fit tests or internal forecasts. The public case is useful because it prompts better questions, not because it supplies a complete operational explanation.

Translate the lesson into a smaller order

Before placing an opening buy, map which combinations you intend to offer and how much evidence supports each. Ask what happens if a key size arrives late or a colour is unavailable. Avoid judging demand only from the units sold when some combinations had little opportunity to sell.

For a hypothetical small brand, a controlled first assortment may be easier to learn from than many shallow variants. That is not an argument for excluding customers. It is an argument for making a feasible promise and planning how availability will improve.

Keep product acceptance in the review

A size label alone does not make a garment desirable or suitable. Review design, fit, material, price position and presentation together. If a style underperforms, do not assign the cause to sizing without checking these other possibilities.

Collect fit-related feedback respectfully and distinguish it from preference. A request for a different sleeve or fabric is not necessarily a complaint about the customer’s body or the availability of a size.

Build a replenishment decision

Define the evidence that would trigger another order: sales adjusted for availability, retailer requests, resolved fit concerns and feasible repeat production. Confirm the material and sample references so a replenishment does not silently become a different garment.

FORMIVA’s catalogue MOQ of 100+ pcs and custom OEM/ODM MOQ of 150+ pcs and project-specific mixing conditions should be checked against the proposed repeat. A theoretically attractive replenishment plan may not work if the material or quantity requirements have not been discussed.

Limits of this case

The event is from 2022, not a current market forecast. The reported sales movement belongs to Old Navy, not FORMIVA and not the entire plus-size industry. We make no claim of a supplier relationship or access to internal project evidence.

The practical takeaway is to ask how assortment, availability and product acceptance interact in your own business. Keep that learning separate from unsupported declarations that one strategy always succeeds or fails.

Read the disclosure as a multi-cause business account

A public company’s performance discussion reflects a particular period, operating model and set of management explanations. It should not be reduced to a simple lesson that inclusive sizing succeeds or fails. The useful procurement question is how assortment decisions, availability and product acceptance interact, and which of those relationships a smaller buyer can monitor.

Keep the company’s reported observations separate from your interpretation. This article does not have access to internal allocation records, customer-level evidence or the full reasoning behind each decision. It therefore cannot assign a precise share of the reported outcome to any one cause. A responsible case analysis makes that boundary visible.

Also avoid assuming that a large retailer’s solution transfers directly to a small wholesale brand. Store networks, replenishment systems and buying scale differ. The case can inspire a question about size-level availability without prescribing the same assortment structure or inventory commitment.

A transferable size-availability review

For a hypothetical buyer, build a review that records units available as well as units sold by size. Add the timing of stockouts and relevant return reasons. This does not eliminate uncertainty, but it prevents the team from treating low sales during low availability as clear evidence of low demand.

Compare similar periods and styles cautiously. A different material, silhouette or launch timing may change the interpretation. If the buyer lacks enough information, state that limitation instead of treating a small sample as a stable market rule. Decide what additional observation is needed before changing the next allocation.

The transferable method is disciplined investigation: identify competing explanations, gather relevant evidence and document the decision. It is not a promise that a particular ratio will prevent stock imbalance. Old Navy is discussed here as a public industry example, not as a FORMIVA customer, partner or endorsement.

Decision checklist

Frequently asked questions

Sources & scope

• Gap Inc.: First Quarter Fiscal 2022 Results

  Historical public company disclosure; not a FORMIVA client or a controlled experiment. Source date: 2022-05-26. Checked 23 October 2026.