Domain: Wholesale/Retail Trade
Question:
Over the last several weeks, two patterns have emerged:

Pattern 1 (replenishment failure): Emergency buys are increasing for supplies that are normally replenished through the routine reorder workflow. In the most recent reorder spreadsheet that was submitted, multiple high-usage items are not present at all, and several remaining lines show no order quantities.
Pattern 2 (inventory integrity failure): Cycle counts for multiple high-value items do not reconcile with the system. Interviews suggest that, when requests are urgent, staff sometimes move items directly from storage to departments without recording the issue transaction or capturing the required user receipt confirmation.

Leadership wants the root cause identified and corrective controls implemented, but they also want fulfillment to stay fast.
As the operations lead, how would you (1) determine whether the replenishment breakdown is caused by item eligibility/configuration versus spreadsheet handling during the reorder workflow, and (2) redesign day-to-day execution so that reorder signals reliably result in orders and all inventory movement is captured through the standard request-to-delivery confirmation path, preserving a single audit trail and accurate on-hand balances?

Expected points in a correct answer:
Response identifies that the discrepancies are caused by inventory being moved without being properly recorded in the system (e.g., bypassing formal requisition and delivery steps)
Response states Items must be placed In Transit.
Response states items must be delivered with a required badge scan or PIN for user receipt confirmation
Result includes description of how the steps ensure inventory accuracy.
States the steps ensure a clear audit trail
Response states that bypassing formal requisition and delivery steps creates gaps between physical inventory and system records, increasing audit and compliance risk
Response encourages the staff to use the system to maintain operational efficiencies
Response states Inventory Adjustments should be used only for true exceptions (e.g., damaged, lost, or miscounted items) and not for routine distribution
Response states that undocumented shelf-to-shelf transfers should be prohibited as a process control
Details process controls need to be reinforced with signature requirements
Response states that mandatory user confirmation should be required for high-value items
Details process controls need to be reinforced with periodic spot checks or cycle counts
Suggests to diagnose the issue by reviewing the Suggested Reorder List download and upload process to determine whether the problem is system-driven or user-driven
Suggests after diagnosing issue, determine whether the affected items are in the item master,
Response states after determining if in item master, it is suggested confirming they have the correct ABC code (A)
Suggests determining whether the affected items are Active Item status,
Outlines additional tactics to determine why the item is missing include manually searching files for deletions
Outlines additional tactics to determine why the item is missing include manually searching files for filters
Response states that high-usage items should not be removed from the Suggested Order List unless intentionally excluded, and quantities should be entered for all items needing replenishment
Response states that a pre-upload review should be implemented to verify that no critical items are missing or left blank before submission
Response states the process for corrective action includes incorporating additional training
Response states the process for corrective action includes establishing audit mechanism.
Response states that the system's design requires all item movement to be tracked through formal requisition and delivery steps, even for urgent requests.
Response mentions that copying a previous requisition and modifying quantities or line items (instead of creating from scratch) is a system efficiency that can maintain operational speed.
Response states that items should have defined ROP (Reorder Point) and ROQ (Reorder Quantity) values for proper population on the Suggested Order List.
Response states that blank quantities in the reorder spreadsheet effectively remove items from ordering.
Response recommends establishing periodic audits comparing emergency purchases to the Suggested Order List to catch issues early.
Response states that refresher training should specifically address why user signatures/confirmations are required.