SztylerSolution · Process Lenses™
COMPARE · VALIDATE · ACT · DEMONSTRATION CASE STUDY

Supplier Despatch vs Receipt Lens™

Turn two daily operational exports into one exception-first control workflow.

Open live demoWatch walkthroughSee the workflow
Download supplier despatch exportworkflow input
Download receipt-history exportworkflow input
Match lines and search for differencesworkflow input
PROCESS
LENS™rules · checks · exceptions
Matched records separated from action itemscontrolled outcome
Missing, short, over and timing-related exceptionscontrolled outcome
Traceable reason and supporting source valuescontrolled outcome
Local workflowDesigned to run with controlled files in the browser.
Exception firstReview what needs judgement instead of every line.
Representative exampleIllustrative data and narrative, not a client claim.
ANONYMISED WORKFLOW CASE STUDY

The team needed the few receipt exceptions — but had to compare everything to find them.

Situation: A recurring supply-chain check compared supplier despatch information with internal receipt data to identify missing receipts, short quantities, duplicates and timing differences.

Before: The comparison relied on aligning references, materials, quantities and dates across separate files. Most lines were fine, yet every line consumed attention before the real operational exceptions became visible.

What changed: The sources were mapped into one controlled matching workflow. Agreed rules classify routine matches and surface missing, short, duplicate or review-required records with the original source values preserved.

Result: The daily task changes from manual comparison to exception review. The workflow is easier to repeat, easier to cover during absence and easier to rerun against historic files when required.

Anonymised operational working pattern. Organisation names, people, locations, internal system names and identifying details are intentionally excluded. Any value figures elsewhere on this page are illustrative unless explicitly stated as validated.
BeforeTwo sources repeatedly aligned and checked line by line.
Rules capturedReference, quantity, date and duplicate checks made explicit.
Review focusRoutine matches separated from actionable differences.
TraceabilityOriginal values retained beside each exception.
THE OPERATIONAL CHALLENGE

How the work happens before the Lens

A supplier despatch file and receipt history are repeatedly compared line by line. PO numbers, materials, quantities and dates may be checked manually before the team can identify what actually needs action.

Download supplier despatch exportCurrent manual step
Download receipt-history exportCurrent manual step
Match lines and search for differencesCurrent manual step
Build and format an exception listCurrent manual step
THE HIDDEN BUSINESS LOGIC

The real value sits in the rules

The Lens is built around agreed conditions, tolerances and actions — not around a prettier spreadsheet.

If PO, material and quantity agree → Matched
If no receipt is found → Missing receipt
If received quantity differs → Quantity variance
If dates fall outside the agreed tolerance → Timing exception
If mandatory identifiers are absent → Review required
THE CONTROLLED WORKFLOW

From raw input to action-ready output

1Load two files
2Map agreed columns
3Validate required fields
4Compare and classify
5Review exceptions
6Export action pack
WHAT THE USER SEES

Clear outcomes with the source detail preserved

Matched records separated from action items
Missing, short, over and timing-related exceptions
Traceable reason and supporting source values
Manager summary and clean output pack
REPRESENTATIVE DEMONSTRATION RESULT

A result that can be explained, reviewed and exported

Figures and labels below describe the demonstration workflow and must be replaced or validated before being presented as a client result.

150representative lines
112matched
38requiring action
WHAT THE CONTROLLED WORKFLOW CHANGES

Better control, earlier visibility and less dependence on memory

The value is not only that the task becomes faster. The workflow becomes easier to cover, explain, review and improve.

01Same-day controlMissing and short receipts are visible before they disappear into the next report.
02Cover during absenceThe agreed rules remain available when the usual controller is on leave.
03Fewer escaped errorsDuplicates and quantity differences are classified consistently.
04History can be reviewedOlder periods can be rechecked for unresolved supplier or receipt variances.
ILLUSTRATIVE VALUE MODEL

From morning administration to a controlled exception review.

Using the stated assumptions, the repeatable checking capacity released is visible before any commercial recovery is counted.

260 hoursillustrative annual capacity released
£4,680illustrative annual labour value

Assumptions used

  • 1 person
  • 5 runs per week
  • 75 minutes before
  • 15 minutes after
  • £18/hour
  • 52 weeks

Illustrative only. The final baseline is confirmed during a Process Scan using the client’s actual frequency, time, people and cost.

Historic value: A historic rerun may also identify missed claims, chargebacks or other commercial recovery opportunities where the source evidence and contract terms support them. Those amounts are deliberately excluded from the labour-saving figure.
BOUNDARIES AND TRUST

What this demonstration does — and does not assume

Representative sample data — not a client performance claim
Local browser processing; no routine server upload
No write-back to supplier, ERP or WMS systems
Final matching keys and tolerances are agreed during discovery

Have a similar manual workflow?

Describe it in plain English and see the first-pass opportunity.

Check your process