See one closed, end to end.
Not a feature tour. Each of these pins a single decision and shows the whole anatomy of it — the signal that opened it, the systems the agent consulted, the recommendation it made, and what each alternative would have cost. Open one and you will know what a closed decision looks like, whether or not the scenario is yours.
Every one has the same five parts.
This is the structure that transfers. The scenario changes; the shape of a closed decision does not.
The event that made this a decision — a slip, a shortfall, a drift past a control band.
Which of your systems held each piece of the answer, and what the agent read from each.
One reconciled action, with the constraint that applied and the rule that governed it.
The options not taken, priced. This is the part that makes a recommendation defensible.
The approved, edited or rejected outcome returning to the system of record with its audit trail.
Two decisions, closed in full.
ATP short-ship
A priority customer is about to be short-shipped. Here is who ships, who waits, and what it costs.
A port strike halts inbound flow and committed orders exceed available-to-promise by 3,800 units. Four allocation strategies ship the same 8,600 units — with very different penalty exposure.
Open the worked decision →
SCOR Source / Transform · Material Availability agentClear to Build
The work order releases Friday. One BOM line out of 214 says no. What unlocks it, and at what cost?
A supplier slip leaves one capacitor line short while 212 lines keep arriving to plan. Equivalent stock exists under another customer’s part number — if the ontology can prove it. Transfer, expedite, or wait, priced as one decision.
Open the worked decision →
That example turns on whether equivalent stock under a different part number can be proven equivalent. That is an ontology question, not a data question. How the ontology settles it.
Five more being worked now.
Each one pins a different decision family. If the one you need is not here, that is the useful thing to tell us.
Supplier OTIF drift
A key supplier’s on-time-in-full is drifting. When does a trend become a decision?
In preparation
Forecast deviation
Four weeks of MAPE creep on one family. Re-plan now, or ride the noise?
In preparation
Capacity spillover
Line 2 is over commitment for the week. What spills, where, and at what cost?
In preparation
Inbound reroute
A port closes overnight. Which inbound lanes move, and what does each day of dwell cost?
In preparation
Safety-stock rebalance
Service targets moved. Where does the buffer belong now — and what frees up?
In preparation
The survey takes about ten minutes and asks how your forecast, schedule, inventory and promise decisions actually get made today. Send it back and we will work your decision as an example, and walk it with you in the session. Take the survey.
Your scenario is different. The shape is not.
The families are shared
Every example is pinned to a SCOR process, so a Source decision reads as a Source decision whether the shortage is a capacitor or a cut of beef. The framework is ASCM’s, not ours.
The hard part is always the tradeoff
Short-shipping a priority customer and spilling capacity off line 2 are the same problem underneath: two commitments, one constraint, and a number attached to whichever one you break.
What reaches the planner is identical
One reconciled recommendation with the trigger, the alternatives, the constraint and the expected impact attached — ready to approve, edit or reject. That does not change by industry.
Bring the decision you wish were on this page.
Tell us where your decisions stall and we will work yours the same way — the signal, the systems, the recommendation and what the alternatives cost — against your own operation.