Process automation
Removing the approvals, handoffs, follow-ups, and reconciliation that quietly consume your team's week.
How it worksAll industries
Precision and assembly
The schedule changes. The system should absorb it.
Customer schedules, control plans, rejection and warranty analysis, tool life, and traceability built for tier supply.
Where the standard system leaves the cost in place.
Component supply is a business of imposed rhythm. The customer releases a schedule, revises it, and expects delivery performance measured against the revision, not the original. Underneath that sits a quality system with control plans, capability requirements, and part traceability that has to hold up when a field failure is investigated years later. Most suppliers run the schedule in a spreadsheet, the quality system in a folder, and the connection between them in someone's head. Every one of these is paid for in either premium freight, rejection cost, or a customer scorecard.
- Customer schedules arrive by portal, email, and EDI, and are transcribed into a planning sheet that is out of date within a day.
- Rejection and rework are recorded as quantity, not as cause, so the same defect recurs without anyone able to prove the pattern.
- Control plans, inspection frequencies, and capability studies live outside the system that actually schedules the work.
- Tool and die life is tracked by a maintenance diary, so a tool fails in the middle of a run rather than being changed between them.
- Job work sent out for plating or heat treatment is followed by phone, and the reconciliation of what went and what came back happens monthly.
Built for automotive components.
Built on the same core our products run on, extended with the records and rules this sector is actually judged against. These are scopes we build and integrate, not shelf modules with a licence key.
Customer schedule management
Releases and revisions received, versioned, and exploded into production and purchase requirements, with delivery performance measured against the schedule that actually applied.
Control plans and in-process quality
Inspection frequency and method held against the operation, results captured at the frequency the plan requires, and capability tracked from real measurements rather than a periodic study.
Rejection, rework and warranty analysis
Defects recorded by cause, station, shift, and batch, with internal rejection, customer complaint, and field return analysed against the same structure so parts per million figures mean something.
Tool, die and fixture life
Tooling with stroke or cycle counts, maintenance and regrind history, and life-based alerts so a change happens between runs rather than during one.
Job work and outside processing
Material issued to processors under challan with quantity, weight, and expected return reconciled by the system, including the statutory returns that job work movement requires.
Part traceability to despatch
Batch or serial traceability from raw material through operations to the customer despatch, so a field investigation identifies the affected population rather than the whole year's production.
What it has to be able to prove.
Compliance fails when it is a parallel activity. These obligations are carried by the system that runs the operation, so the evidence exists because of how work was recorded rather than because someone assembled it afterwards.
Documented information for the quality standard
Procedures, records, competence, and calibration evidence maintained in the system, structured the way the standard's audit trail expects to find it.
Customer-specific requirements
Each customer's labelling, packing, documentation, and reporting requirements held against that customer, so compliance is applied by the system rather than remembered per order.
Job work and tax movement records
Challan-based movement of material to and from processors, with reconciliation and the periodic returns that depend on it produced from the same records.
What it runs on.
The sector layer is built. The operational core underneath it is not a proposal: it is running in production with clients today.
ERPMachERPLivePlanning, procurement, production, costing, and dispatch against customer schedules, with the quality and traceability layer built into the same flow.See what it does
SIMSMach SIMSLive with clientsLine-side and store stock, job work material at processor locations, batch traceability, and movement discipline.See what it does
What it returns.
Schedule changes stop causing firefighting
A revision re-plans requirements automatically instead of triggering a manual rebuild of the week.
Defect causes become provable
Rejection data carries station, shift, tool, and batch, so improvement is directed at the actual source.
Material at processors is accounted for
What went out, what came back, and what was lost in process is reconciled continuously rather than at month-end.
Where this normally starts.
Which of these applies depends on how well the constraint is already understood. A review that finds the real one usually turns into a build.
Data and reporting
Turning scattered records into dependable, current reporting that leaders can act on rather than argue about.
How it worksQuestions we actually get asked.
Can you take schedules directly from customer portals or EDI?
Where an interface exists, yes, and it is usually one of the highest-return integrations in the sector because it removes daily transcription. Where a customer only offers a portal download, we automate the ingestion of that file instead. Either way the schedule enters the system once.
We do a lot of job work, in both directions. Is that handled?
Yes, and it is treated as a first-class part of the operation rather than an adjustment. Material sent for processing stays visible as your stock at their location, with expected returns, process loss norms, and the statutory movement records generated from the same transaction.
How much of this can we implement without stopping production?
All of it, if it is sequenced properly. We normally start with the schedule and dispatch layer because it removes the most manual work with the least disruption, then extend into quality and traceability once the operational spine is running.