Put one production process in order. Then automate.
Contents
An enterprise has ERP. Documents are recorded, stock is visible and reports are generated. Yet production still calls the warehouse, the warehouse checks with the laboratory, and a manager manually decides whether the next batch can be used. The software works. The process still needs clear operating rules.
Why automation leaves uncertainty in place
Consider an incoming delivery. The warehouse records the quantity. The laboratory takes a sample, but the result is pending. Production sees the stock and plans to use it today. Everyone has completed a task, yet one shared rule remains undefined: does physical availability mean approval for use? Without that rule, ERP records the receipt but may not prevent premature release.
Start with one production flow
Choose a bounded flow, such as receiving raw material through approval for use. Identify its start, end, participants, documents and outcome. Follow an actual batch with the people involved. Observe waiting, phone calls, repeated data entry and decisions made when work is delayed. The first step does not require documenting the entire enterprise.
Separate availability from approval
Each batch needs an unambiguous status. A possible sequence is Received → Awaiting laboratory confirmation → Approved for use. A failed batch needs a separate status, such as Blocked. Names depend on the operation. The principle is that a warehouse receipt does not itself authorize consumption. Each transition needs an identified basis, supporting record and authorized person.
Assign responsibility for transitions
Saying that the laboratory owns quality is insufficient for managing a particular batch. Specify who samples, who confirms the result, who changes the status and who receives the notification. A responsibility matrix identifies the executor, decision owner and people who need information. When a decision is delayed, someone must be explicitly responsible for responding. Rules must match actual authority.
Set deadlines and exception rules
Critical steps need expected completion times grounded in the technology and available capacity. A delayed confirmation should trigger a defined response: notify the owner, escalate to the appropriate manager and retain the block. Urgent production demand must not become undocumented approval. Any permitted exception needs a reason, an authorized decision and a record of the outcome.
Where TEAM Guard fits
TEAM defines process architecture: roles, sequence, documents and rules. TEAM Guard defines acceptable boundaries and the handling of deviations. In this flow, controls may block consumption of an unapproved batch, monitor laboratory deadlines and flag attempts to bypass a required transition. The system performs agreed checks and signals deviations. An authorized person decides outside the established procedure, with the basis and outcome recorded.
Then specify the ERP requirements
The requirements can now be precise: statuses, permission rules, supporting documents, blocks and notification recipients. The technical specialist receives a specification that can be checked. Acceptance covers the normal flow and exceptions: a delayed result, a nonconforming batch and an unauthorized release attempt. Expected system behaviour is agreed before configuration.
What the pilot delivers
The deliverables are a process map, a responsibility matrix and ERP control points, supported by status rules, deadlines and exception procedures. The enterprise reviews these before software configuration. Success is assessed through selected measures such as decision waiting time, manual clarification counts and consumption without approval. Financial impact is calculated from observed data rather than promised in advance.
A pilot covering one flow
A bounded pilot makes the approach reviewable. The pilot price is €2,400 excluding VAT, covering up to five interviews. Travel expenses and ERP configuration are excluded. Flow boundaries and deliverables are agreed before work starts.
ERP exposes the business system. Define how one process should work first, then automate the agreed logic.