What’s inside: output checking · company memory
The question this file answersHow many of our misdeliveries started with a clerk guessing which customer record an order meant?
Fits: logistics operators handling 100–500+ orders a day, where orders still arrive by email into the TMS.
From the logistics playbook — consignee checking is one step inside order intake (100–500+ orders a day for a mid-size operator) and has no separate count. Orders arrive with a name that is almost the customer — a trading name, a nickname, an old address. The clerk picks whichever record looks right.
Typical, from the industry playbook — not a client's day.
By the time the clerk sits down, the orders for known sites carry the right master record, and the queue holds only the near-matches — a new depot, a trading name, a residential address — with the possible records shown for a choice. Misdeliveries that began with a guess have nowhere to begin.
Typical, not a measured client result. Every figure here comes from the playbook source named below.
consignee matched to the master before the order is booked — one step of our email-order intake file; no separate figure for the check
Before: a clerk guesses which master record the almost-right name means. After: known consignees are matched to the master before booking; near-matches and new sites reach the clerk with the candidate records shown. No figure of its own; the intake range sits on the parent file.
No published benchmark isolates consignee matching. The McKinsey (2023) / Deloitte (2022) 40–60% range covers order intake as a whole and lives on the parent file; this step is inside it, not measured on its own. Not a delivery-accuracy claim.
Your TMS and its customer master stay — SAP TM, CargoWise, Transporeon or the one you run. This is a single step of our email-order intake build, run on its own where the rest of intake is already in place:
New sites. Groupage consignees. The address that turns out to be a person, not a warehouse.
Not a delivery-accuracy claim.
A dirty master — duplicates, dead sites, two records for one dock — produces near-matches on every order until it is cleaned, and the first weeks will show you exactly how dirty it is. Groupage consignees and one-off residential deliveries never have a master record; they go to a person by design.
The path: free 60-second estimate → free 20-minute review → paid audit of this one process (€1.5–3K, typically two weeks) → pilot with your people in the loop (€10–20K, weeks, not quarters). No transformation programme. Prices are public, on the services page →
Scoped in the audit — the playbook has no estimate for this exact desk.
That depends on your volumes and wage costs — this page will not invent the number. The free 60-second estimate runs that calculation from your answers, with every multiplier sourced.
Not a named Aperanda client. Process file · Logistics.
Short process file. Same build as its parent file; the playbook has no separate volume or benchmark for this desk.