Payback estimate
What would this actually save your plant?
Put your own numbers in. The estimate below is arithmetic on ranges we see in manufacturing deployments — it is an illustration to argue with, not a promise, and every assumption is printed underneath.
Estimated first-year effect
£ 0
—
| Admin hours recovered | — |
| Material wastage cut | — |
| Working capital released from stock | — |
| Fewer write-offs and rework | — |
What this maths assumes
- Re-keying and reconciliation time falls by 55% once documents are entered once and post themselves.
- Material wastage falls by a fifth of its current level when issues are recorded per batch against a recipe.
- Material cost is taken as 45% of sales, which is typical for textile and similar discrete manufacturing.
- Stock carried falls by 12% once the store balance is trustworthy enough to plan against; the saving shown is the financing cost of that capital at 10% a year.
- Write-offs and rework fall by 1% of sales when quality is recorded where it happens.
- Nothing here counts revenue growth, price improvement or headcount reduction — only cost that stops leaking.
Where the numbers come from
Each saving traces to a specific mechanism
Entered once
A GRN posts stock and the payable together, so nobody re-keys it into a second register.
The module
Issued against a recipe
Chemicals and yarn are issued per batch, so consumption is measured instead of estimated at month end.
The module
Costed from actuals
Cost per piece is built from real issues, wages and utilities, so pricing stops being guesswork.
The module
Caught at the machine
Defects are recorded at the loom and the batch, so the pattern is visible before the carton ships.
The module