[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":72},["ShallowReactive",2],{"legacy:insights\u002Fsrm-delivery-receipt-inbound:en":3},{"id":4,"title":5,"description":6,"keywords":7,"author":8,"robots":9,"bodyClass":10,"image":11,"jsonld":12,"html":71},"insights\u002Fsrm-delivery-receipt-inbound","Purchasing as a relay: supplier says shipped, warehouse says no lines—why in-transit never ties - JEDP Digital Platform","The in-transit and actual received amounts do not match. It is common that different segments are managed separately by the shipping plan, shipping details, dock occupancy, and posting feedback. Suppliers and the warehouse need to share the same set of statuses, and purchasing will no longer rely on screenshots to communicate.","Delivery scheduling, ASN delivery, appointment receipt, integrated warehousing, SRM WMS collaboration, supplier portal","Shenzhen Langbowan Information Technology Co., Ltd.","index, follow","page-insights","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.jedp.cn\u002Fres\u002Fimages\u002Fproduct\u002Fsrm-slide6.webp",[13,31,45],{"@context":14,"@type":15,"@id":16,"headline":17,"description":6,"inLanguage":18,"datePublished":19,"dateModified":20,"articleSection":21,"keywords":22,"image":11,"author":23,"publisher":25,"isPartOf":26,"mainEntityOfPage":28},"https:\u002F\u002Fschema.org","Article","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.jedp.cn\u002Finsights\u002Fsrm-delivery-receipt-inbound#article","Purchasing as a relay: supplier says shipped, warehouse says no lines—why in-transit never ties","zh-CN","2026-09-30","2026-10-17","SRM · Supplier","delivery scheduling, ASN shipment, inbound appointment, integrated receiving, SRM and WMS collaboration, supplier portal",{"@id":24},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.jedp.cn\u002F#organization",{"@id":24},{"@id":27},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.jedp.cn\u002Finsights#collection",{"@type":29,"@id":30},"WebPage","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.jedp.cn\u002Finsights\u002Fsrm-delivery-receipt-inbound",{"@context":14,"@type":32,"itemListElement":33},"BreadcrumbList",[34,39,43],{"@type":35,"position":36,"name":37,"item":38},"ListItem",1,"Home","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.jedp.cn\u002F",{"@type":35,"position":40,"name":41,"item":42},2,"Insights","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.jedp.cn\u002Finsights",{"@type":35,"position":44,"name":17,"item":30},3,{"@context":14,"@type":46,"@id":47,"mainEntity":48},"FAQPage","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.jedp.cn\u002Finsights\u002Fsrm-delivery-receipt-inbound#faq",[49,55,59,63,67],{"@type":50,"name":51,"acceptedAnswer":52},"Question","Can delivery and warehousing be integrated without a WMS?",{"@type":53,"text":54},"Answer","Can make a simplified version: Coordinate side shipping plan and shipping details, supplier confirmation, and use the receipt confirmation form to write back actual receipt and undelivered items. Platform and storage location shelving are still weak, but orders in transit and actual receipts can be aligned first.",{"@type":50,"name":56,"acceptedAnswer":57},"What is the relationship between shipping details and delivery schedules?",{"@type":53,"text":58},"A schedule is a plan line of 'how much to deliver when'; shipment details are a notice of 'which lines\u002Fcontainers\u002Fbatches this trip carries.' One trip can cover multiple plan lines; an appointment without details only occupies time and not preparation information.",{"@type":50,"name":60,"acceptedAnswer":61},"What should we do if the supplier doesn't fill in the system?",{"@type":53,"text":62},"Light portal or confirmation link: only fill in the current shipment and the expected arrival. The main factory can enter non-critical fields on behalf, but shipment confirmation and arrival timestamps must be generated through collaborative actions.",{"@type":50,"name":64,"acceptedAnswer":65},"Do direct deliveries to the workshop still need to be posted?",{"@type":53,"text":66},"Physical goods can be directly delivered, but the account still needs to go through the receipt or direct storage node; otherwise, transit, quality inspection, and undelivered quantities will inevitably drift.",{"@type":50,"name":68,"acceptedAnswer":69},"How does it connect with OTIF and reconciliation?",{"@type":53,"text":70},"The receipt timestamp and the actual received quantity are inputs for OTIF; the actual receipts are consolidated after reconciliation. The chain breaks at posting, and both on-time rate and reconciliation will be falsified together.","\u003Carticle class=\"insight-article\">\n    \u003Cdiv class=\"insight-container\">\n      \u003Cnav class=\"breadcrumb\" aria-label=\"Breadcrumb\">\n        \u003Ca href=\"\u002F\">Home\u003C\u002Fa>\n        \u003Cspan class=\"breadcrumb-sep\">\u002F\u003C\u002Fspan>\n        \u003Ca href=\"\u002Finsights\">Insights\u003C\u002Fa>\n        \u003Cspan class=\"breadcrumb-sep\">\u002F\u003C\u002Fspan>\n        \u003Cspan>SRM · Supplier\u003C\u002Fspan>\n      \u003C\u002Fnav>\n\n      \u003Cheader class=\"insight-hero\">\n        \u003Cdiv class=\"insight-tags\">\u003Cspan class=\"r-tag\">Delivery Scheduling\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003Cspan class=\"r-tag\">ASN\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003Cspan class=\"r-tag\">Receiving and warehousing\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003Cspan class=\"r-tag\">Supplier Portal\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fdiv>\n        \u003Ch1>Purchasing as a relay: supplier says shipped, warehouse says no lines—why in-transit never ties\u003C\u002Fh1>\n        \u003Cp class=\"insight-lede\">When materials are lacking, the purchaser will have three chat windows open at the same time: on the left, the supplier sends the waybill number; on the right, the warehouse manager replies, 'Without an appointment, we don't know where to unload'; in the middle, the planner asks, 'Is it still on the way or not?' The problem is rarely about who is not responsible, but that the actual shipping information cannot get into the shared status between the two sides—the purchaser is forced to act as a messenger, and the in-transit numbers are always a step behind the actual situation on site.\u003C\u002Fp>\n        \u003Cdiv class=\"insight-meta\">\n          \u003Cspan>Updated 2026-09-30\u003C\u002Fspan>\n          \u003Cspan class=\"dot\" aria-hidden=\"true\">\u003C\u002Fspan>\n          \u003Cspan>~8 min read\u003C\u002Fspan>\n          \u003Cspan class=\"dot\" aria-hidden=\"true\">\u003C\u002Fspan>\n          \u003Cspan>Manufacturing digitalization · SRM · Supplier\u003C\u002Fspan>\n        \u003C\u002Fdiv>\n      \u003C\u002Fheader>\n      \u003Csection class=\"insight-takeaways\">\n        \u003Ch2>What you'll take away\u003C\u002Fh2>\n        \u003Cul>\u003Cli>Order confirmation only responds with 'whether to accept the order,' not 'how many deliveries will be made this week'; the effective line must have an executable delivery plan.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>Shipping details answer 'what to bring,' platform reservations answer 'when to occupy resources'; with only the waybill number, on-site you can only unpack and guess.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>After posting generates actual receipts, in-transit and undelivered items must be written back to the order line, and they must also be visible synchronously on the strategic supplier side.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>The supplier portal or lightweight link should be able to maintain this shipment and view the receipt results, using the same set of facts as the internal warehouse.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>First, establish the minimal chain for strategic suppliers: 'plan → details → positioning → actual receipt,' then expand to long-tail and complex direct delivery.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003C\u002Ful>\n      \u003C\u002Fsection>\n\n      \u003Cdiv class=\"insight-layout\">\n        \u003Cdiv class=\"insight-body\">\n\u003Ch2 id=\"三个聊天窗口-拼不出一趟车\">Three chat windows, can't piece together a single ride\u003C\u002Fh2>\n\u003Cp>At 8 a.m., the planner reported a shortage of critical parts. The purchasing team asked questions in the group chat, and the supplier sent a screenshot of the courier slip; the warehouse replied, 'No such truck at the gate.' Ten minutes later, the truck arrived, and the team leader opened two pallets only to find missing boxes and batches that didn't match the order. In the afternoon, the reconciliation team came to ask, 'Does this shipment count as received?' The same shipment is considered a material shortage incident in the morning and a discrepancy dispute in the afternoon — the purchasing team spent all day relaying messages, but no one looked at the same line status to say: shipped, allocated, actually received, differences closed.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>\"'Integration' is not achieved by simply buying an extra scanner, but by making\u003Cstrong>Shipping plan, details of this trip, resource occupation, and posting back\u003C\u002Fstrong>Falling on the same traceable state. Any segment only exists in WeChat or the registration book, and if materials are missing, it will continue with the screenshots.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Ch2 id=\"确认了交期-仍可能不知道这周交哪几行\">The delivery date has been confirmed, but it is still possible not to know which lines will be delivered this week.\u003C\u002Fh2>\n\u003Cp>Order confirmation only answers 'Do you acknowledge this order?' and does not answer 'Which lines are delivered this week, and in how many shipments.' When the purchaser asks in the meeting 'Exactly which day will it arrive,' the supplier replies 'According to the delivery schedule.' Both are correct, yet the site remains empty.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>Minimum rule:\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cul>\u003Cli>Only effective PO lines are allowed to create a delivery plan; the total quantity of plan lines must not exceed the undelivered quantity;\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>\"Shipped\" can only be generated from submitted plans or shipment statuses; verbal reporting is prohibited.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>Plan changes (quantity, expected arrival) must retain a version or reason code to prevent being silently overwritten.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003C\u002Ful>\n\u003Cp>Without a planned order, the in-transit kanban can only guess; with a plan but allowing procurement to fill in fake plans to boost coverage rate, it’s even worse than having no plan—numbers look good, but the platform is still chaotic. When the total planned orders exceed the undelivered quantity, the system should intercept it instead of relying on warehouse management to find out afterwards.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Ch2 id=\"有运单号不等于能卸货\">Having a tracking number does not mean you can unload the goods\u003C\u002Fh2>\n\u003Cp>The waybill number proves that the goods 'have left a certain place,' but it does not prove that the warehouse knows what is being unloaded or which time slot it occupies. Without detailed information for the trip, the team leader still has to unpack to know the workload; without track numbers and without row and pallet information, it is impossible to reserve storage space and plan sampling strategies. Appointments with pallet numbers exceeding the threshold but without details should be downgraded to standby slots or completed on-site, rather than competing for the platform with trips that have complete details.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cdiv class=\"table-scroll\">\u003Ctable>\u003Cthead>\u003Ctr>\u003Cth>On-site phenomenon\u003C\u002Fth>\u003Cth>Supplier \u002F Procurement Terms\u003C\u002Fth>\u003Cth>Warehouse experience\u003C\u002Fth>\u003Cth>Missing fact\u003C\u002Fth>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003C\u002Fthead>\u003Ctbody>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd>\"Already sent\" but missing materials\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd>The tracking number has been sent to you.\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd>No placeholder, no details\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd>Shipment Not Entered into Plan\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd>The truck has arrived but can't be unloaded.\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd>Arrive according to the delivery schedule\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd>At the same time three vehicles, not sure which one to unload\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd>Unallocated Capacity \u002F No Details\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd>The actual receipts do not match the orders\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd>\"Sent according to the order\"\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd>Supplement for missing boxes later\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd>Posted but not written back, not submitted\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd>Did the supplier ask if it was received?\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd>Ask the warehouse\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd>\"Ask Procurement\"\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd>The receipt status is only visible to the supplier\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003C\u002Ftbody>\u003C\u002Ftable>\u003C\u002Fdiv>\n\u003Ch2 id=\"隔日过账-是在途造假的最常见手法\">Next-day posting is the most common method of falsification in transit.\u003C\u002Fh2>\n\u003Cp>Actual receipts are only recorded in the warehouse ledger and are not written back to the order line. The procurement dashboard will always show 'in transit,' and suppliers are always asked 'have you received it or not.' Differences (short delivery, over delivery, damage) must be closed with a reason code on the same day, and it must be decided whether to generate a make-up delivery plan line. Posting in batches the next day will make the 'in transit' status look good for a long time, while the site remains in a long-term panic.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>When there is no independent warehousing system, the goods receipt confirmation can be used instead of detailed docking and storage locations, but\u003Cstrong>Actual Write-back Order\u003C\u002Fstrong>Cannot skip it—otherwise, scheduling and reconciliation will still be disconnected. Direct delivery to the workshop can bypass the platform physically, but on the accounts it still needs to go through the receipt or direct warehouse entry node, otherwise quality inspection and undelivered items will inevitably drift.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Ch2 id=\"供方看不见实收-就会继续用截图当证明\">If the supplier cannot see the actual receipt, they will continue to use screenshots as proof.\u003C\u002Fh2>\n\u003Cp>No matter how complete the internal system is, if the strategic supplier can only be called to ask 'Has it arrived?', the portal's value is reduced to just data entry. The receipt results, discrepancies, and shortfall closures should be visible to the strategic supplier (the level of detail can be adjusted, but the state machine must be consistent). If the actual receipt cannot be seen, WeChat screenshots will continue to serve as proof of delivery, and the procurement intermediary cannot remove that.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>It is recommended that both parties share these status labels: Planned \u002F Shipped \u002F Scheduled \u002F Receiving \u002F Received \u002F Short Delivery Closed. During spot checks, ask the supplier: 'Is the status you see in the system the same as what the warehouse said?' If it is not consistent, it is not yet connected.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Ch2 id=\"战略供方先跑最小四步\">Strategic suppliers should first take at least four steps\u003C\u002Fh2>\n\u003Cp>Select three to five strategic suppliers and high-frequency materials, only requiring:\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Col>\u003Cli>Before shipment: Submit the details of this trip (line, quantity, expected arrival) through the portal or link;\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>Before arrival: Reservation successful (or recorded by warehouse staff to hold a spot);\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>Upon arrival: Post according to the details, and close any discrepancies on the same day;\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>The supplier can see the 'Received \u002F Discrepancy' status.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003C\u002Fol>\n\u003Cp>Stabilize for two weeks in four steps, then discuss direct delivery, VMI, and automatic appointment algorithms. Write batch and short-term deliveries into a policy in one sentence:\u003Cstrong>Planned items are assessed and closed separately; short shipments must have a reason code, and it must be clear whether a supplementary shipment item is generated.\u003C\u002Fstrong> Otherwise, \"sending part of it\" would simultaneously contaminate the three metrics: delivered, undelivered, and reconciled.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cdiv class=\"table-scroll\">\u003Ctable>\u003Cthead>\u003Ctr>\u003Cth>Ability\u003C\u002Fth>\u003Cth>Key points for implementation\u003C\u002Fth>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003C\u002Fthead>\u003Ctbody>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd>Delivery Scheduling\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd>Confirmed PO lines can maintain a staggered delivery plan; the remaining undelivered items are negotiable\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd>Supplier Contact\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd>Maintain this shipment; check the booking window and delivery receipt results\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd>Detailed rules\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd>The number of bets exceeding the threshold must include details; without details, the reservation will enter the standby pop-up window.\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd>Linked with the platform\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd>Plan\u002Fdetail-driven or linked appointments; performance feedback for no-shows\u002Flate arrivals\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd>Write-back of actual receipt\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd>Post and update in-transit, undelivered, and reconcilable quantities; discrepancy reason codes\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003C\u002Ftbody>\u003C\u002Ftable>\u003C\u002Fdiv>\n\u003Cp>In the supply plan, the coordination of orders and deliveries usually places confirmed schedules, portal shipments, and delivery confirmations on the same state machine, and can be linked with warehouse reservations and postings. When JEDP-SRM and WMS are jointly debugged, priority is given to verifying 'whether the supplier can enter data before shipment, whether the warehouse can post according to details, and whether undelivered posts are written back the same day and visible to the supplier,' rather than first doing a large coverage dashboard.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Ch2 id=\"编制-主数据与不适用边界\">Compilation, Master Data, and Inapplicable Boundaries\u003C\u002Fh2>\n\u003Cp>When the warehouse staffing is severely insufficient, scheduling can only smooth the peaks, not create manpower — first supplement staffing or outsource unloading, then discuss mandatory line items. If multiple codes for one item are not addressed, the line items may be wrong. For consignment\u002FVMI, consumption triggers replenishment, while traditional PO line shipping chains require separate indicator design. Spot stores pick up goods and there is no in-transit management, so forcibly implementing a full chain brings limited benefit. When suppliers have zero willingness to cooperate and there are no contractual constraints, forcing a portal will turn into a pretend exercise — first handle business and stratification.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>Useful metrics: the proportion of confirmed orders with a shipping plan, detailed coverage rate, proportion of arrivals without details, appointment on-time check-in rate and no-show rate, timeliness of actual receipt backwriting, and random checks of supplier-visible receipt status. Filling in fake plans on behalf of procurement, supplementing details after arrival to boost coverage, canceling appointments without recording no-shows, and batch posting on the next day — all are anti-patterns.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>Promotion can be layered by supplier: first, enforce planning for strategic suppliers; then, add details for peak categories with placeholders; next, expand actual receipts and make them visible to suppliers. If the 'planned proportion' and 'proportion of arrivals without details' remain unchanged for two consecutive weeks, first stop the expansion, fix the main factory substitution entries, and delay postings.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>Coordination with delivery and reconciliation must be clarified in advance: receipt timestamps enter OTIF, actual quantity goes into the reconciliation pool; If unqualified or unreleased for inspection, whether reconciliation quantities are frozen must follow rules to avoid \"goods arrived, payable on account, quality still being returned.\" Integration failures (plans not being pushed out, posting writes interrupted) must be shown to procurement and warehouse management on the same pending list, and silent retries are prohibited only in the technical group.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>During peak season when platform pressure is high, it’s better to narrow the mandatory scope to strategic suppliers than to use 'unload first and then reorder' to make the detail coverage appear green—that kind of green will explode simultaneously with material shortages and reconciliation week next week. The sign that the procurement relay can be withdrawn is simple: during material shortages, you no longer need to open three chat windows at the same time to comment on the same line status.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Ch2 id=\"怎么继续\">What to do next\u003C\u002Fh2>\n\u003Cp>Before next week's material shortage meeting, randomly pick ten orders labeled 'Supplier says it has shipped': check if there is a shipping plan in the system, if there is a detailed entry for this shipment, and if there is an actual receipt timestamp. If all three are empty, it indicates the 'telephone game' mode is still in operation. Then have the supplier log in or open the link to see if they can view the actual receipt results — if not, it still means procurement is acting as the intermediary. First, stabilize the four-step process with strategic suppliers for two weeks, then expand to the next batch of the list.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cul>\u003Cli>SRM Supply Solution: Order and Delivery Collaboration\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>Order Confirmation, Modification, and Feedback\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>Arrival Appointment and Receiving Rhythm\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>OTIF Definition and Delivery Timestamp\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>How to reconcile actual received payments\u003C\u002Fli>\u003C\u002Ful>\n        \u003C\u002Fdiv>\n        \u003Caside class=\"insight-toc\" aria-label=\"On this page\">\n          \u003Ch2>Contents\u003C\u002Fh2>\n          \u003Ca class=\"h2\" href=\"#三个聊天窗口-拼不出一趟车\">Three chat windows, can't piece together a single ride\u003C\u002Fa>\n          \u003Ca class=\"h2\" href=\"#确认了交期-仍可能不知道这周交哪几行\">The delivery date has been confirmed, but it is still possible not to know which lines will be delivered this week.\u003C\u002Fa>\n          \u003Ca class=\"h2\" href=\"#有运单号不等于能卸货\">Having a tracking number does not mean you can unload the goods\u003C\u002Fa>\n          \u003Ca class=\"h2\" href=\"#隔日过账-是在途造假的最常见手法\">Next-day posting is the most common method of falsification in transit.\u003C\u002Fa>\n          \u003Ca class=\"h2\" href=\"#供方看不见实收-就会继续用截图当证明\">If the supplier cannot see the actual receipt, they will continue to use screenshots as proof.\u003C\u002Fa>\n          \u003Ca class=\"h2\" href=\"#战略供方先跑最小四步\">Strategic suppliers should first take at least four steps\u003C\u002Fa>\n          \u003Ca class=\"h2\" href=\"#编制-主数据与不适用边界\">Compilation, Master Data, and Inapplicable Boundaries\u003C\u002Fa>\n          \u003Ca class=\"h2\" href=\"#怎么继续\">What to do next\u003C\u002Fa>\n        \u003C\u002Faside>\n      \u003C\u002Fdiv>\n\n      \u003Cdiv class=\"insight-cta\">\n        \u003Cp>\u003Cstrong>Want to apply this in your plant?\u003C\u002Fstrong>Resources has matching self-assessments and templates—or book a live demo.\u003C\u002Fp>\n        \u003Cdiv class=\"insight-cta-actions\">\n          \u003Ca href=\"\u002Fresources?from=srm#selftest\" class=\"btn btn-outline\">Self-assessment in Resources\u003C\u002Fa>\n          \u003Ca href=\"\u002Fcases#case-srm\" class=\"btn btn-outline\">SRM acceptance case\u003C\u002Fa>\n          \u003Ca href=\"\u002Fcontact?from=srm\" class=\"btn\">Get a demo\u003C\u002Fa>\n        \u003C!-- next-step:BEGIN -->\u003Ca class=\"btn\" href=\"\u002Fproduct\u002Fsrm\">Product solution: \u003Cspan>JEDP-SRM Supplier Relationship Management\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fa>\u003Ca class=\"btn btn-outline\" href=\"\u002Fres\u002Fresources\u002Fkits\u002F01-srm-supplier-onboarding-scorecard.html\">Matching resource kit: \u003Cspan>Supplier onboarding checklist + performance scorecard\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fa>\u003C!-- next-step:END -->\n        \u003C\u002Fdiv>\n      \u003C\u002Fdiv>\n      \u003Csection class=\"insight-faq\" id=\"faq\">\n        \u003Ch2>FAQ\u003C\u002Fh2>\n        \u003Cp class=\"insight-faq-sub\">Quick answers on this topic—still stuck?\u003Ca href=\"\u002Fcontact?from=srm\">Contact\u003C\u002Fa>\u003C\u002Fp>\n        \u003Cdiv class=\"faq-list\">\n        \u003Cdetails class=\"faq-item\" open>\n          \u003Csummary>Can delivery and warehousing be integrated without a WMS?\u003C\u002Fsummary>\n          \u003Cp>Can make a simplified version: Coordinate side shipping plan and shipping details, supplier confirmation, and use the receipt confirmation form to write back actual receipt and undelivered items. Platform and storage location shelving are still weak, but orders in transit and actual receipts can be aligned first.\u003C\u002Fp>\n        \u003C\u002Fdetails>\n        \u003Cdetails class=\"faq-item\">\n          \u003Csummary>What is the relationship between shipping details and delivery schedules?\u003C\u002Fsummary>\n          \u003Cp>A schedule is a plan line of 'how much to deliver when'; shipment details are a notice of 'which lines\u002Fcontainers\u002Fbatches this trip carries.' One trip can cover multiple plan lines; an appointment without details only occupies time and not preparation information.\u003C\u002Fp>\n        \u003C\u002Fdetails>\n        \u003Cdetails class=\"faq-item\">\n          \u003Csummary>What should we do if the supplier doesn't fill in the system?\u003C\u002Fsummary>\n          \u003Cp>Light portal or confirmation link: only fill in the current shipment and the expected arrival. The main factory can enter non-critical fields on behalf, but shipment confirmation and arrival timestamps must be generated through collaborative actions.\u003C\u002Fp>\n        \u003C\u002Fdetails>\n        \u003Cdetails class=\"faq-item\">\n          \u003Csummary>Do direct deliveries to the workshop still need to be posted?\u003C\u002Fsummary>\n          \u003Cp>Physical goods can be directly delivered, but the account still needs to go through the receipt or direct storage node; otherwise, transit, quality inspection, and undelivered quantities will inevitably drift.\u003C\u002Fp>\n        \u003C\u002Fdetails>\n        \u003Cdetails class=\"faq-item\">\n          \u003Csummary>How does it connect with OTIF and reconciliation?\u003C\u002Fsummary>\n          \u003Cp>The receipt timestamp and the actual received quantity are inputs for OTIF; the actual receipts are consolidated after reconciliation. The chain breaks at posting, and both on-time rate and reconciliation will be falsified together.\u003C\u002Fp>\n        \u003C\u002Fdetails>\n        \u003C\u002Fdiv>\n      \u003C\u002Fsection>\n      \u003Csection class=\"insight-related\">\n        \u003Ch2>Related reading\u003C\u002Fh2>\n        \u003Cdiv class=\"insight-related-grid\">\n          \u003Carticle class=\"r-card\">\n            \u003Cdiv class=\"r-tags\">SRM · Supplier\u003C\u002Fdiv>\n            \u003Ch3>Buyer says sent, supplier says unseen? Order collaboration starts on one effective PO\u003C\u002Fh3>\n            \u003Cp>Order collaboration chaos usually is not due to the supplier being uncooperative, but because confirmations, changes, and delivery feedback are not on the same document. Confirmation timestamps, change versions, and secondary confirmations, as well as feedback and commitments, are separated, yet the interface status on both sides is consistent. ...\u003C\u002Fp>\n            \u003Cdiv class=\"r-meta\">2026-04-09 · ~8 min\u003C\u002Fdiv>\n          \u003C\u002Farticle>\n          \u003Carticle class=\"r-card\">\n            \u003Cdiv class=\"r-tags\">SRM · Supplier\u003C\u002Fdiv>\n            \u003Ch3>Board says 96% on time but the line still shorts—write OTIF as verifiable rules first\u003C\u002Fh3>\n            \u003Cp>The on-time delivery rate being achieved is inflated, mostly because the numerator and denominator have been redefined. Line-level OTIF, the commitment date benchmark, the early window, and nonconformities not counted in full quantity, and being sourced the same as order confirmation, receipt, and incoming material judgment, only then does the ranking qualify for a share…\u003C\u002Fp>\n            \u003Cdiv class=\"r-meta\">2026-06-18 · ~8 min\u003C\u002Fdiv>\n          \u003C\u002Farticle>\n          \u003Carticle class=\"r-card\">\n            \u003Cdiv class=\"r-tags\">WMS · Warehouse\u003C\u002Fdiv>\n            \u003Ch3>Three trucks at 9am, empty dock all afternoon? Appointments must consume unload capacity, not a remarks field\u003C\u002Fh3>\n            \u003Cp>Receiving congestion often occurs because appointments are only registered but do not occupy resources. Create a closed loop of occupancy—check-in—closure by linking time windows, docks, unloading capacity, and ASN; integrate tardiness, no-shows, and urgent queue-jumping into rules and performance; prioritize strategic appointments on peak days...\u003C\u002Fp>\n            \u003Cdiv class=\"r-meta\">2026-03-26 · ~8 min\u003C\u002Fdiv>\n          \u003C\u002Farticle>\n        \u003C\u002Fdiv>\n      \u003C\u002Fsection>\n    \u003C\u002Fdiv>\n  \u003C\u002Farticle>",1793937990664]