Jessie Schwartz shares practical perspectives on packaging strategy, engineering, and sustainability. Their LinkedIn posts examine how packaging choices affect costs, shipping, product performance, shelf presentation, and regulations such as extended producer responsibility (EPR).
They are most useful for expert-led B2B education on packaging strategy, total delivered cost, sustainability, and EPR compliance.
Best for
Fits a B2B thought-leadership webinar for CPG packaging, sustainability, and operations leaders.
Not for
Does not fit mass-market DTC campaigns seeking unboxing videos, promo codes, or Gen Z impulse purchases.
Key takeaways
A $105 to $27 per package example pairs a more expensive insulated mailer with slower shipping.
EPR compliance work is not the same as building a system for escalating requirements.
Oregon recycling modernization shows design decisions must account for real collection and sorting systems.
Check first: Confirm LinkedIn demographics and recent EPR post or webinar performance data before contacting them.
Main ideas
The cheapest package can make for the most expensive delivery · EPR is a business redesign, not a reporting exercise · Packaging has to work for the people and systems that handle it
Jessie Schwartz writes about packaging strategy through the practical decisions packages have to survive: shipping, manufacturing, retail, consumer use, and changing regulations.
Their LinkedIn posts focus on how packaging choices affect the whole system, not just material cost or appearance.
They are especially known for connecting packaging and supply-chain costs with sustainability and EPR compliance.
Schwartz makes trade-offs concrete.
In one post, a comparison of fulfillment approaches puts numbers to the difference between minimizing packaging expense and minimizing total delivered cost: the example moves from $105 to $27 per package by pairing a more expensive insulated mailer with slower shipping.
Other posts widen the lens: a compact paper battery pack may reduce shipping space as well as plastic, while Oregon recycling investments could change which packaging designs work in practice.
Schwartz also notes limits to simple solutions: lightweighting can create performance risks, and a package that looks clear in a design file may be stocked upside down on a store shelf.
That mix of cost comparisons, operational details, and real-world exceptions gives readers a useful way to question single-metric claims about packaging.
The posts offer grounded explanations of how packaging decisions connect to business costs, product performance, sustainability, and regulation.
Jessie Schwartz treats packaging as a business system rather than a design artifact.
Read more
The recurring test is total fit: whether a package lowers total delivered cost, survives real handling and infrastructure, meets enforceable regulation, and solves more than one business problem at once.
They pair cost math with close observation of retail shelves, recycling systems, and shipping constraints.
A consistent priority is to connect packaging data and decisions across engineering, finance, legal, procurement, sustainability, and logistics instead of optimizing a single line item.
The cheapest package can make for the most expensive delivery
Schwartz argues that packaging should be priced by total delivered cost, not by the unit cost of the mailer or shipper.
Read more
In a direct-to-consumer cold-chain example, a $2 bubble mailer with $3 gel packs and $100 two-day shipping totals $105 per package.
A $6 insulated mailer with the same gel packs and $18 three-day shipping totals $27.
The extra $4 in packaging enables slower shipping and saves $78 per package.
They also compare a $4–7 insulated shipper with an $18 failed delivery, noting that one missed doorstep erases the packaging savings on several orders.
The $105-versus-$27 comparison makes the case: spending more on packaging allows slower, cheaper shipping and cuts total fulfillment cost by 74%.
EPR is a business redesign, not a reporting exercise
After brands register, report, and pay EPR fees, Schwartz hears a common question: “Now what?”
Read more
Meeting the first reporting deadline does not build a system for escalating requirements, multiple states, or finance scrutiny.
They say organizations making progress connect packaging data across engineering, finance, legal, procurement, and sustainability, moving from historical compliance snapshots to forward-looking scenario modeling and cost reduction.
Schwartz hosted a LinkedIn Live titled “Beyond Reporting: How Leading Brands Turn EPR Compliance into Enterprise Strategy” and framed the choice as data first, technology second, with cross-functional governance.
A spreadsheet-bound EPR strategy is the counterexample: technology cannot fix bad packaging data, and keeping compliance in one department misses the chance to use that data in business decisions.
Packaging has to work for the people and systems that handle it
Schwartz evaluates packages beyond the design file—through manufacturing, distribution, stocking, merchandising, dispensing, and consumer use.
Read more
A Kinder display example makes the point: two similar products had different closures and prices, but what stood out was one bottle stocked upside down, making the product name hard to read.
Label orientation and container shape can suggest shelf placement, but they do not guarantee execution when someone is stocking quickly or choosing the most stable position.
In cold chain, they add, insulated packaging is not like corrugated: stock sizes are built around pharma and meal-kit companies, and custom sizes carry four-to-eight-week lead times and volume commitments.
The practical move is to design product packaging around available insulated formats and involve shipping partners before dimensions are fixed.
The upside-down Kinder bottle shows how a package that looks intuitive in development can fail at the shelf. The same logic applies to cold-chain shipping: design around the insulated formats that actually exist.
Recycling infrastructure sets the design constraints
Schwartz argues that recyclability and source-reduction decisions must account for real collection methods, sorting equipment, material recovery capabilities, end markets, and EPR economics—not a theoretical system.
Read more
After Oregon’s first year under its Recycling Modernization Act, producer funding supported more than 36,000 recycling carts, 11 collection trucks, 34 RecycleOn Centers, and $30 million in sorting-facility upgrades.
They say those investments can change the engineering trade-offs.
Lightweighting may reduce material and EPR fees, but not if it hurts compression strength, barrier performance, machinability, or damage rates.
A material change may improve recyclability only if the package can actually be collected, sorted, and processed at scale.
Oregon’s infrastructure numbers show how improving collection and sorting can shift practical design constraints, creating opportunities for formats that did not make sense under the previous system.
Lightweighting should start with performance requirements
Schwartz describes lightweighting as one of five source-reduction pathways: reduce plastic without changing the format or consumer experience.
Read more
Typical moves include thinner rigid-container walls, thinner film that still meets specs, or less plastic label coverage.
They say lightweighting often causes the least disruption because the product looks and ships the same, but thinner structures can create vulnerabilities.
A gauge reduction that works on the line may not survive distribution, and a small spec-sheet change may require full qualification.
Teams that do it well start with what the package must do, then work backward to the minimum material.
The qualification gap is the lesson: a change that looks minor in a specification can fail once the package goes through distribution.
Look for several business wins in one package change
Schwartz resists judging a package through one lens.
Read more
In a Duracell comparison, the paper-based format removes plastic, but they focus on the smaller footprint: the old blister pack had dead air space above the batteries, while the new format appears designed around the product.
A smaller package can use materials more efficiently, improve cube utilization, put more product on a pallet or truckload, reduce transport costs, and lower EPR fees in some jurisdictions.
In a Kraft Heinz example, reformulating familiar products for lactose-free, gluten-free, or plant-based diets also changes what the package must communicate while maintaining brand recognition and operational requirements.
The Duracell paper pack is the strongest example: the sustainability change also brings logistics and cost benefits that are easy to miss if the package is judged only on plastic reduction.
Packaging regulation is becoming enforceable product law
Schwartz frames the EU’s Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation as a philosophical shift: packaging is now a regulated product with specific, enforceable criteria, not a question of whether it is “sustainable enough” by internal standards.
Read more
The regulation applies directly across all 27 member states.
They list immediate changes: conformity assessment and technical documentation for packaging placed on the EU market; an A-to-E recyclability grade with minimum requirements phasing in from 2030; e-commerce void-fill limits so empty space cannot exceed 40% of the parcel; and PFAS restrictions on food-contact packaging.
They warn North American brands that the PPWR, California’s SB 54, and the patchwork of US state EPR programs are moving in the same direction, so packaging decisions cannot be made as separate regional problems.
The 40% void-fill limit turns an e-commerce packing habit into a regulated design constraint.
The post compares the delivered cost of two fulfillment options.
Read more
A cheaper bubble mailer paired with expensive two-day shipping costs $105; an insulated mailer with three-day shipping costs $27, reducing fulfillment expense by 74%.
For brands planning a campaign
Use this case study to anchor a webinar on why CPG brands should shift from minimizing component spending to maximizing economic efficiency across the supply chain.
The author argues that after meeting initial EPR reporting requirements, companies should turn EPR from a compliance exercise into an enterprise-wide business strategy.
Read more
That means linking packaging data across traditionally siloed departments: Engineering, Finance, Procurement, Legal, and Sustainability.
For brands planning a campaign
This content frames a thought leadership webinar around “Business Transformation” rather than “Regulatory Reporting.”
Examining recycling-system modernization in places like Oregon, the post shows why packaging evaluation must account for real-world collection methods, sorting equipment, and material recovery capabilities.
Read more
A package that works on paper may fail in practice because of collection or sorting limitations. Decisions about material changes or lightweighting need to reflect those constraints.
For brands planning a campaign
Case-based evidence of systemic constraints shows the depth of the technical consulting and grounds strategic discussion in practical detail.
Comparing an older blister pack with a newer paper-based format, the post identifies benefits beyond plastic reduction.
Read more
The more compact paper format improves cube utilization, increases product per pallet, enables transportation savings, and reduces EPR fees. It shows how packaging can address multiple business challenges at once.
For brands planning a campaign
The post illustrates how sustainability innovations can yield efficiency gains, making it a useful example of holistic problem-solving for the thought leadership webinar.
Total Delivered Cost Analysis: Why Packaging Must Be Linked to Shipping Strategy3
Designing Against Real-World Infrastructure and Regulations3
Moving Beyond Compliance: Transforming EPR into Enterprise Strategy2
Lightweighting as a Strategic Reduction Pathway2
Moving Beyond Compliance: Transforming EPR into Enterprise Strategy
Many brands struggle to move beyond the initial reporting requirements of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR).
Read more
Schwartz argues that progress means treating EPR not as a static compliance task but as a business transformation that integrates packaging data across Engineering, Finance, Legal, and Procurement.
For brands planning a campaign
Ideal for brands seeking strategic guidance on moving from compliance checklists to creating operational value within regulatory frameworks.
Total Delivered Cost Analysis: Why Packaging Must Be Linked to Shipping Strategy
Schwartz challenges brands to look beyond packaging’s unit price.
Read more
In Direct-to-Consumer (DTC) logistics, they note, fulfillment costs often far exceed packaging costs. Investing in higher-performing packaging can significantly reduce total shipping and fulfillment expenses.
For brands planning a campaign
For CPG and DTC brands looking to improve unit economics, reduce failed deliveries, and justify higher material costs through supply-chain savings.
Designing Against Real-World Infrastructure and Regulations
Packaging decisions cannot be made in isolation.
Read more
Schwartz emphasizes designing for existing systems, from current recycling infrastructure (e.g., Oregon's modernization) to limited insulated shipping availability. Regulatory shifts, such as the EU’s PPWR, require brands to anticipate real-world constraints.
For brands planning a campaign
For companies in CPG, e-commerce, or manufacturing looking to future-proof designs against changes in infrastructure, regulation, and collection capabilities.
Both connect sustainability commitments to operational data and decisions, writing for organizations moving from reporting to practical action.
Read more
Brown’s posts focus on travel emissions and conference engagement for universities and business; Schwartz’s focus on packaging design, EPR compliance, and cold-chain cost.
For an EPR webinar aimed at CPG packaging and sustainability teams, Jessie Schwartz’s LinkedIn presence is better suited to a specialist-audience channel than a mass-reach buy.
Read more
The only measured audience figure is 4,981 LinkedIn followers as of 8 October 2026.
Their posts repeatedly address EPR compliance, PPWR, source reduction, cold-chain shipping, and packaging cost trade-offs, making the topical fit for an EPR strategy webinar clear.
Before committing, ask for LinkedIn follower demographics and recent performance data for EPR-focused posts or webinar promotions with a comparable format and date range.
No formal creator sponsorship program, rate card, or booking process is documented in the reviewed LinkedIn posts.
Read more
Jessie Schwartz writes as part of Strategic Packaging Partners and uses packaging analysis to invite conversations with packaging, operations, and sustainability teams.
The clearest promotional format is a Jessie-hosted LinkedIn Live session on turning EPR compliance into enterprise strategy, announced with a topic outline and registration link.
Posts also mention meeting teams at PACK EXPO and MD&M Midwest.
A buyer planning a webinar can evaluate the EPR session as a relevant expert-led format.
Ask for pricing, audience size, deliverables, exclusivity, and lead times.
Expert-led LinkedIn Live session
Buyer requirement
The post announces a Jessie-hosted LinkedIn Live on EPR strategy with a defined topic outline.
Confirm whether a brand can co-host or sponsor a similar session, which LinkedIn page hosts it, how registrations and attendee data are handled, and what follow-up content is delivered.
Ask for pricing, audience size, and booking terms.
A packaging consultancy wants to run a B2B thought-leadership webinar for CPG packaging, sustainability, and operations leaders on moving EPR compliance from reporting to enterprise strategy.
Read more
This is a strong fit.
Jessie Schwartz's posts speak directly to that buyer problem: one asks what comes after teams have registered, reported, and paid EPR fees, and argues that compliance work is not the same as building a system for escalating requirements and cross-functional pressure.
Another announces their LinkedIn Live on connecting packaging data to finance, procurement, legal, and engineering.
The work examples also give the webinar concrete teaching material: the $105 versus $27 total delivered cost comparison links packaging choices to fulfillment economics, and the Oregon recycling modernization post shows why design decisions must account for real collection and sorting systems.
The audience details support a specialist B2B channel rather than mass reach: their LinkedIn posts showed 4,981 followers as of 8 October 2026.
The fit is strongest when the need is expert-led education for packaging and sustainability teams, not a broad consumer awareness buy.
Before booking, ask for audience demographics and whether a brand can co-host or sponsor a similar session.
When to choose a specialist
A mass-market DTC snack brand wants a high-reach consumer influencer campaign with short unboxing videos and promo codes to drive impulse purchases among Gen Z shoppers.
Read more
This is a poor fit.
The posts are technical B2B packaging analysis written for packaging, operations, sustainability, and compliance teams.
They discuss EPR reporting, PPWR conformity, lightweighting, cold-chain shipping costs, shelf execution, and recycling infrastructure.
They do not show consumer-facing entertainment, unboxing content, promo-code distribution, or mass-reach lifestyle promotion.
Jessie Schwartz's LinkedIn posts showed 4,981 followers, a specialist-channel signal rather than evidence of mass consumer reach.
A consumer brand could still use Jessie as a technical packaging expert in a narrow educational segment, but that would be a different need from a broad Gen Z impulse-purchase campaign.
A worked campaign example
Worked campaign angle for Brief A: frame the webinar as "Beyond Reporting: Turning EPR Data into Margin Decisions."
Open with the question their post surfaces: teams have registered, reported, and paid, so what now?
Then make the business case with the total delivered cost example: a cheaper mailer paired with two-day shipping totals $105, while a higher-cost insulated mailer paired with three-day shipping totals $27.
Use that to show why EPR data should connect to finance and operations, not sit in a compliance spreadsheet.
Add a segment on cross-functional governance across engineering, finance, legal, procurement, and sustainability.
Ground the discussion in real systems with the Oregon recycling modernization example and the PPWR requirements, so attendees see that packaging data must reflect collection, sorting, and regulatory constraints.
Close with a practical 30-day action list: identify the packaging data owner, map the cross-functional review group, and model one product line's total delivered cost.
The format should be a 45-minute LinkedIn Live presentation plus 20-minute Q&A, with registration and follow-up handled through an agreed process.
Ask Jessie whether a brand can co-host or sponsor the session, how registrations and attendee data are managed, and what follow-up content is delivered.
Choose Dan Brown when the webinar is aimed at sustainability and operations leaders in large organizations, and the buyer problem is turning reported emissions or travel data into decisions people will adopt.
Read more
His posts show him speaking to university sustainability teams at EAUC and to business leaders at the UN Global Compact summit, with a clear reporting-to-action frame around Scope 3 travel, finance, procurement, estates, and staff engagement. He is the stronger pick when the webinar needs a sustainability-led change story rather than a packaging-compliance story.
The tradeoff is topic depth.
Brown’s work focuses on travel emissions and sustainability decision-making, not EPR packaging rules, packaging design, or CPG packaging operations.
A brand choosing Brown for an EPR webinar would gain a sustainability audience and a reporting-to-action narrative, but lose Jessie’s specific packaging, PPWR, lightweighting, and cold-chain examples.
Ask whether the webinar can broaden from EPR packaging to sustainability action, or whether Brown should be paired with a packaging specialist.
Choose Allen Jacques when the webinar is aimed at supply-chain, operations, and finance leaders, and the teaching goal is to show how inventory, shelf life, and long-range planning affect business outcomes.
Read more
His posts give concrete examples from pharma and biopharma: safety stock eating into shelf life before a product reaches the customer, quality defects found downstream, new-product launches delayed by excess inventory, and supply chain being brought into 10-year planning as a builder rather than a late validator. He is the stronger pick when the webinar needs an operational cost and planning story that supply-chain leaders will recognize.
The tradeoff is sector and regulatory fit.
Jacques’s posts focus on pharma and biopharma supply chains, not CPG packaging or EPR compliance.
A brand choosing him for an EPR webinar would get sharper supply-chain and inventory reasoning, but not packaging-specific regulatory guidance, packaging design examples, or a CPG packaging audience signal.
Ask whether the focus can shift to supply-chain planning and total cost, or whether Jacques should share the session with someone who can cover the EPR and packaging detail.
Choose Matt Houldsworth when the webinar is aimed at retail operations and technology leaders, and the buyer problem is the risk hidden inside long-life store systems.
Read more
His posts show a concrete retail estate example: a Sainsbury’s self-checkout displaying an old Windows build, an outdated SQL Server service pack, and 2014-era hardware, followed by a broader argument about software lifecycle, maintenance ownership, and the cost of unpatched systems. He is the stronger pick when the webinar needs a technology-risk and estate-lifecycle story that retail and operations teams will act on.
The tradeoff is distance from EPR packaging requirements.
Houldsworth’s work focuses on retail cybersecurity and technology estate risk, not packaging EPR, packaging design, or CPG sustainability.
A brand choosing him for an EPR webinar would gain a sharper risk-and-lifecycle narrative and a retail technology audience, but lose Jessie’s direct EPR, PPWR, lightweighting, and cold-chain examples.
Ask whether the focus can shift to retail technology resilience, or whether Houldsworth should be paired with a packaging or sustainability specialist.