Trace a suspect batch to customers and remaining stock

Decide whether the customer list is complete

A Hong Kong consumer-goods wholesaler already has an inventory system. A supplier flags a potentially defective lot of reusable bottles. The immediate system decision is whether the wholesaler can identify every direct customer shipment and account for the stock still under its control. A report showing a lot number is not enough: the operations manager needs document-level evidence, unresolved exceptions and a named person responsible for each follow-up.

Define the investigation key as supplier, product and supplier lot, retaining any mapping to internal lot codes. Do not search the lot string alone if suppliers reuse identifiers. Set a snapshot time in Hong Kong time and reconcile physical movements as well as posting dates. Late posting, mixed units and missing return references can each create a plausible but incomplete answer. This is a batch-lineage exercise, not a legal recall procedure or evidence of downstream consumer ownership.

Reconcile two receipts of the same lot

Use the following invented exercise in a test environment. Product BTL-01, supplier S1 and lot L2410 have zero opening stock. Receipt R1 brings 120 units into Kwai Chung; R2 later brings another 80 units of the same lot. Every quantity below is an individual bottle, not a carton. At the agreed snapshot, all listed movements are posted and physically complete. There are no losses, repacking, supplier returns or other adjustments.

All figures are illustrative. The open allocation is not another movement and must not reduce physical stock twice.

The expected direct-customer list is A, B and C. Gross shipments total 150 units; the received return is 10, leaving net shipments of 140. Stock on hand is 60: 20 in the Kwai Chung storage bin, 10 in its quarantine area and 30 in Tuen Mun. Thus 200 received equals 140 net shipped plus 60 on hand. D belongs on a separate pending-dispatch list; its allocated 20 units are already included in the Kwai Chung balance.

Keep A on the investigation list after the return. Its row should show 70 shipped, 10 physically received back and 60 net shipped, with the original delivery address retained. Net shipments do not establish what A still holds: A may have resold or used goods. Likewise, a credit note without a physical return is not stock received. Ask the warehouse to verify the three remaining locations, including quarantine, against this snapshot.

Check what the trace screen leaves out

Microsoft documents Business Central as one example: Item Tracing follows posted transactions forwards or backwards, while Find Entries also locates open records. Its documentation warns that Item Tracing shows only applied transactions and may omit movements when the same lot is received multiple times. Combine the two checks when testing this example. These documented behaviours are not a promise about another product or your own configuration.

Ask your partner to start from each receipt independently, then compare the combined result with a full product-and-lot movement extract. Deduplicate by transaction and line identifier, not by customer name or quantity. Require each result to retain the receipt, shipment, transfer or return reference that explains it. A total can balance while a customer is assigned the wrong lot, so inspect the underlying lot allocation on every shipment in this small exercise.

Record open purchase receipts, picks, sales orders and return requests separately from completed movements. If a record has no lot assigned yet, label it unresolved rather than declaring it unaffected. Reconcile any goods in transit between warehouses as their own location or status. For a live investigation, include movements after the snapshot in a controlled update so a late shipment cannot disappear between successive exports.

Choose the repair from the evidence

A complete result may need only a saved query, clear working instructions and a scheduled rehearsal. If staff omit lot identifiers on receipts or returns, improve capture and exception handling first; a new report cannot reconstruct facts never recorded. If the data exists but the standard screen misses repeated receipts, commission a focused reconciliation export. Consider a wider system change only if the current data model cannot preserve the required links and the partner demonstrates that limit.

For the next working session, give the warehouse lead and system partner this fixture and ask for three deliverables: a shipment-level customer file, a location-and-status stock file, and an exception register. Include customer IDs, delivery sites, document lines, units, lot mappings, snapshot time and the evidence behind each balance. Accept the exercise only when every known movement is accounted for and unresolved records remain visible with an owner. Then repeat it on a real historical lot under your normal access controls.

If the exercise exposes historical code or opening-balance problems, use the existing ERP implementation guide to frame that separate data repair. A system integration and ERP review can scope missing transaction links where the evidence shows that technical work is needed. Keep the acceptance request centred on batch lineage and a usable follow-up list.