Having a system does not automatically mean having operational control.
In this scenario, a manufacturer uses ERP for day-to-day transactions. Production, logistics and administration also maintain their own Excel files. Each file serves an immediate need, but definitions, update times and responsibilities differ.
To prepare a report, someone exports data, fills in missing information and reconciles discrepancies. When that person is absent, the process is hard to reproduce. The full information flow needs to be understood.
Where does trust in the data break down?
Before changing the system, we would follow one complete workflow: from recording a stock movement to the report used by management.
- Definitions: what does “available stock” mean to each department?
- Identifiers: do item codes use the same format in ERP and exports?
- Timing: are transactions recorded when they happen or later?
- Ownership: who corrects the data and validates the report?
A code stored as text in one file and interpreted as a number in another can prevent a match in Excel. It is a useful technical example, but it does not explain every inventory or reporting discrepancy.
Stabilise before automating.
Clarify the workflow and reference source
Document where each piece of information comes from, who records it and which calculation rules the report uses.
Validate a sample of data
Check formats, codes, units of measure and missing entries. Keep exceptions visible rather than concealing them through automatic completion.
Align reporting with ERP
Identify what can be obtained reliably from the system and what additional processing is still needed. Define explicit rules for that processing.
Test and transfer the workflow
Repeat the reporting process with key users, document the steps and check that another person can perform them.
What would remain within the organisation.
- A concise map of the data flow and responsibilities.
- A register of discrepancies and confirmed causes.
- Validation rules for codes, formats and transactions.
- A reporting procedure that can be repeated and checked.
- A prioritised improvement list, separate from immediate fixes.
How we would check progress.
Criteria and baselines would be agreed at the start of a real engagement. Possible measures include:
| Measure | How to check it |
|---|---|
| Report preparation time | Time the same workflow across comparable reporting periods. |
| Unexplained discrepancies | Maintain an exception register with owners and causes. |
| Manual corrections | Record adjustments made after export. |
| Dependency on one person | Have a backup user repeat the process. |
These are proposed criteria, not achieved results. No percentage reductions or time savings are attributed to an unmeasured project.