Client 

Client 

Small and mid-sized manufacturers who needed practical quality accountability without heavy bureaucracy.

The challenge 

Many SMEs either have no non-conformance process, or they have a process that is too complex to maintain. The result is repeat issues and a familiar pattern: “We had this problem before. What did we do last time?” 

What we did 

We implemented a lightweight non-conformance and corrective action workflow that teams could actually sustain. Depending on the environment: 

• In some systems, the native quality app was used for logging 

• In other cases, a controlled Excel-based log was implemented where it was the most practical option 

What ‘good enough’ looked like 

• Basic logging of issues 

• Tracking of resolutions 

• Clear accountability through assigned owners and follow-up 

Results 

• Clearer accountability 

• Faster containment and resolution 

• Reduced repeat issues because previous actions were visible and searchable 

Why it matters 

A simple quality workflow that gets used beats a perfect workflow that gets ignored. The goal is not paperwork. The goal is learning and repeatability. 

Client 

Physical product businesses with manufacturing and warehousing operations. 

The challenge 

Obsolete and slow-moving inventory quietly consumes cash and warehouse capacity. In many businesses, items remain “kept alive” because the finished product is still in the range, even if sales have dropped and consumption is minimal. 

What we did 

We identified slow-moving and obsolete stock and helped the business reduce it in a controlled way. 

How we identified inventory to act on 

We used practical signals that owners and teams can understand and maintain: 

• Reduced sales numbers 

• Low consumption over time 

Actions taken 

• Sale and sell-down strategies for finished products 

• Discontinuation of low-performing product ranges 

• Reduction of associated raw materials that were only being held because the finished product remained active 

Results 

• Approximately 5% of rack space was freed up 

• The business was able to introduce new products without increasing warehouse footprint 

• Overall inventory reduced, not only in finished goods but also in raw materials that were no longer justified 

Why it matters 

Inventory reduction is not just a finance exercise. When done properly, it creates physical capacity, reduces complexity, and improves future purchasing discipline. 

The challenge 

Annual stocktakes are disruptive and expensive. At the same time, many businesses still experience stockouts caused by incorrect stock levels, not true shortages. When inventory accuracy is unreliable, planning and purchasing become guesswork. 

What we did 

We implemented a practical cycle counting cadence that improved inventory accuracy while keeping operations running. 

The program design: 

• Weekly cycle counts • 20–30 SKUs per cycle 

• Counts performed by the people closest to the inventory location (warehouse staff for warehouse locations, shopfloor staff for shopfloor locations) How we handled discrepancies 

To keep the process credible and prevent “paper fixes,” we used simple, enforceable controls: 

• Four-eyed counts (a second person verifies) 

• Recounts triggered when discrepancies exceeded 10% 

• Official reporting and follow-up for discrepancies larger than 10% by cost or quantity 

Results 

• Stockouts caused by incorrect stock levels reduced significantly 

• Inventory became trusted enough to support better purchasing and planning decisions 

• The business reduced reliance on disruptive full stocktakes by building accuracy continuously 

Why it matters 

Cycle counting works when it is operationally owned, consistent, and tied to clear discrepancy rules. The outcome is not just better numbers in the system. It is fewer surprises and more predictable fulfilment. 

Client 

Multiple businesses across chemical manufacturing, furniture, building supplies, and small retail. 

The challenge 

These businesses had an ERP in place, but replenishment still behaved like a manual process. Stock decisions were often driven by gut feel, firefighting, or whoever noticed a problem first. 

That created predictable symptoms: 

• Stockouts and backorders that disrupted customer service 

• Expediting and urgent purchasing that increased cost and stress 

• Low confidence in lead times and availability, which made planning unreliable 

What we did 

We rebuilt replenishment so the ERP functioned as a true inventory control system, not just a record-keeping database. 

Depending on the environment, the work typically included: 

• Correcting and standardising lead times so planning reflected reality 

• Implementing reorder logic and replenishment rules that matched actual consumption 

• Establishing clearer stocking targets so ordering decisions were consistent and repeatable 

How we approached it 

We focused on operational behaviours as much as system configuration. The goal was to change ordering habits so decisions were driven by data and agreed rules, rather than intuition. 

That meant: 

• Making replenishment signals visible and trustworthy 

• Ensuring the rules were practical enough that teams would actually follow them 

• Reducing reliance on a single person “keeping an eye on things” 

Results 

Across these engagements, the most meaningful outcome was improved serviceability. 

• Fill rates improved because stock was available and ready to ship when customer orders were placed 

• Teams spent less time reacting to shortages and more time executing planned work 

• Replenishment became more consistent, which reduced avoidable urgency in purchasing and production 

Why it matters 

Many small and mid-sized manufacturers and distributors already have an ERP. The difference between constant stockouts and stable fulfilment is usually not the software. It is whether replenishment rules, lead times, and day-to-day behaviours are aligned