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 

Manufacturing businesses that needed realistic capacity planning and better labour utilisation. 

The challenge 

When run times, setup times, and work centre capacity are not defined properly, schedules become optimistic and delivery promises become unreliable. Teams compensate with overtime and constant rescheduling. 

What we did 

We implemented routing and work centre data that reflected real work. 

This included: 

• Defining run times and setup times 

• Using motion studies to validate time assumptions What became visible Once routing data was realistic, it became clear that some tasks could be split into two linked activities: 

• A higher-skilled portion of the work 

• A lower-skilled portion of the work This maintained one-piece flow while allowing higher-skilled workers to focus their energy where it created the most value. 

Results 

• Higher output with less overtime

 • Reduced bottlenecks because labour allocation matched the true constraint 

Why it matters 

Capacity planning is only as good as the data behind it. When routing and work centre assumptions match reality, scheduling becomes a practical tool instead of a constant negotiation. 

Client 

Manufacturing businesses using ERP systems to manage product data and production execution. 

The challenge 

Bills of Materials (BoMs) and work instructions often drift apart. For example, the BoM might specify one quantity or component, while the instruction on the floor specifies something different. When instructions are unclear or incomplete, teams compensate with workarounds. 

That creates: 

• Production errors and rework 

• Inventory discrepancies that are difficult to explain 

• Unreliable product costing What we did We cleaned up BoMs and aligned them with clear, complete production instructions. 

How we controlled changes 

We implemented a product lifecycle management approach: 

• BoMs and instructions were maintained through product management, not informally on the floor 

• Sign-offs and approvals were required from relevant parties before changes went live 

Results 

• Increased inventory accuracy 

• Fewer questions and less time spent investigating discrepancies 

• More accurate costing because consumption and structure were consistent 

Why it matters 

BoM accuracy is foundational. When BoMs and instructions match the real process, everything downstream improves, including purchasing, planning, inventory, and margin visibility. 

Client 

Manufacturing businesses using Odoo, Zoho, and Pronto. 

The challenge 

Spreadsheet-based production scheduling often fails in the same ways: 

• Information becomes outdated quickly 

• Version control breaks down 

• The schedule depends on a subject matter expert to keep it alive 

• When that person is absent, the shopfloor loses direction In some cases, maintaining the spreadsheet required up to 6 hours per day of admin effort. 

What we did 

We replaced spreadsheet scheduling with system-based workflows that created live visibility and clear priorities. 

Examples across systems: 

• Odoo: Used standard manufacturing functionality and introduced priority rules for manufacturing orders based on whether they were required for delivery orders or stock orders. Stock orders were prioritised based on inventory levels. 

• Zoho: Built a custom planning tool in Zoho Creator, including a planning algorithm to handle complex manufacturing flows and constraints such as tool and space limitations. 

• Pronto: Implemented a custom prioritization algorithm for delivery orders based on destination state. 

Results 

• Shopfloor staff could work more autonomously because priorities were visible and current 

• Live tracking of orders through manufacturing improved day-to-day coordination 

• Admin time dropped significantly because planning focused on exceptions rather than manually maintaining every detail 

Why it matters 

The biggest gain from “moving off spreadsheets” is not technology. It is operational resilience. When priorities are visible and current, production can keep moving without bottlenecks around a single planner. 

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