Split scarce stock deliberately, not evenly
When the hub holds eighteen packs and the network asks for twenty-six, an even split creates a shortage in two places at once. The system ships to whoever runs out first.
What is wrong today
- Goods go to whoever called first, not to whoever runs out tomorrow.
- One location holds a surplus while its neighbour is out of the same item — and nobody sees it.
How it works
A location with three days of cover is served before one with twenty-six. The priority is shown on screen together with the numbers behind it.
Before proposing a purchase, the system looks for surplus inside the network. A transfer costs less and does not grow total stock.
What it looks like in use
You see the location's request, what it will actually receive, and what its cover becomes afterwards.
| Location | Daily sales | On hand | Cover | Ship | Becomes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Location B | 51 | 96 | 2 days | 300 | 8 days |
| Location A | 34 | 410 | 12 days | 60 | 14 days |
| Location D | 17 | 205 | 12 days | 40 | 14 days |
| Location C | 8 | 640 | 80 days | 0 | 80 days |
An anonymised example: locations are lettered and the dataset is shared across every screen on this site.
Who stays in control
Any line of an allocation can be rewritten by hand. The result becomes a transfer only after the responsible person confirms.
How it is measured
By the share of locations that hit zero on an allocated item, and the number of transfers that replaced a purchase.
Show us one critical process. We will show how it runs here.
We look at your cycle: how an order is assembled today, who decides, where time leaks and what the system takes over.