The system shows availability. The picker sees a different problem.
Imagine a warehouse storing the same product in several batches. One is close to dispatch, another expires sooner, and a third awaits a quality decision. The product name and quantity match the order, but choosing the first pallet found could breach the customer’s requirements.
An experienced employee knows these relationships. A new colleague asks the supervisor, and during busy picking periods some decisions are made from memory. The team needs a system that shows not only how much stock is in the warehouse, but which batch may be picked for a particular order.
What holds up the work?
Starting point
Stock on hand does not mean stock available
Goods may be reserved, on quality hold or allocated to another customer. The total quantity is not enough to decide what can be picked.
A product code does not identify everything
The same product can have different batches and packaging units. Scanning an EAN alone does not always confirm the correct expiry date, batch or number of items.
A discrepancy discovered at the location
The employee reaches the location, but the goods do not match the records. Without a way to report the problem, a change of location remains a verbal arrangement.
A recommendation must account for the conditions of that particular issue
We connect product, batch, location, quality status and reservation. If the process uses FEFO, selection starts with the earliest expiry date, but only after accounting for holds and the remaining shelf life required by the customer.
The handheld interface shows one action at a time: location, product, batch and quantity. Scanning verifies the pick, while a deviation follows an agreed decision path. The system should not force an employee to confirm a movement that did not actually happen.
What the new workflow could look like
Receive the batch with complete identification
Goods receipt links the product identifier, batch, quantity, unit, expiry date and location. A missing label or unreadable code must be resolved before stock is made available for picking.
Select goods that meet the order requirements
The rules account for availability, holds and customer requirements. A picking recommendation should explain unusual choices, particularly when it skips a batch closer to the employee.
Confirm the movement that actually happened
The employee scans the required identifiers and enters the quantity picked. Partial picks, different units or alternative locations have their own handling rather than pretending the plan was followed exactly.
Keep the history and reconcile the stock
Each movement records its source, destination, batch, quantity and author. For ERP integration, we agree the posting point, rejection handling and how discrepancies between systems will be detected.
Exceptions reveal whether an application is ready for real work
A damaged pallet, an expiry date that differs from the label or a loss of signal are not rare user errors. They are situations the design needs to address. We establish which actions can be saved as pending and which require a live availability check. Retrying a transmission must not issue the same stock twice.
- Warehouse employees report discrepancies without independently changing quality rules.
- An authorised person releases a hold or approves a deviation with a reason.
- A correction keeps its link to the earlier movement and the batch history.
We test at the workstation, not just on a laptop
Button size, scanning behaviour and error feedback are checked on the device used in the warehouse. We account for gloves, lighting, labels and network coverage. If a WMS is already in place, we first look at extension or integration options. A bespoke module should address a justified need rather than unnecessarily replace the entire warehouse management system.
Let us start with one part that works.
A sensible pilot covers one zone, a selected product group and one type of movement, such as picking with batch confirmation. First we agree label and data quality requirements and responsibility for discrepancies. Only after testing work on the actual devices do we add further zones, put-away strategies or more advanced route planning.
How will we know it is better?
This is a measurement plan, not a promised result. We agree the baseline before implementation.
Compliance with picking rules
We examine incorrect batch selections and the reasons for deviations. We compare orders of similar complexity rather than judging solely by the total number of scans.
Time to resolve discrepancies
We measure the time from reporting a problem at a location to the decision that allows work to continue. We look for missing information or unclear responsibility.
Consistent stock records and history
We compare application movements with the master system and physical checks. We also verify whether the locations and issues of a selected batch can be reconstructed.
Questions worth asking
Will we need new scanners?
We do not assume so. We check the available devices, code types and how scans are passed to the application. A phone may be enough for some tasks, but intensive warehouse work requires an assessment of the ergonomics, speed and reliability of the actual equipment.
Will the application automatically choose the oldest batch?
The rule depends on the process. FIFO considers receipt order, while FEFO considers expiry date. Both also need to account for holds, reservations and customer requirements. Before implementation, we establish which criteria are mandatory and who approves exceptions.
