What’s inside: routing · step-by-step flow
The question this file answersHow long does a breakdown request sit in the maintenance inbox behind routine 'do we have this in stock?' questions?
Fits: manufacturers chasing 50–500+ active suppliers.
Typical pattern, not a measured desk; the manufacturing playbook gives no volume for spare-part requests. Stores, buyers and the night shift email about one part; a stock question, a reorder and a machine down look identical. It hurts at night, when whoever knows the stock is at home.
At the start of the day shift the buyer opens the breakdown requests first, each with stock position and history attached, and the stock questions from the night have already been answered from the ERP. The person did not disappear; the lookups did.
Typical, not a measured client result. Every figure here comes from the playbook source named below.
the same sorting build as supplier follow-up — no published figure for spare-part requests
Before: stores, buyers and the night shift write about the same part into one inbox. After: stock questions are answered from the ERP, reorders drafted, breakdowns routed to a person with context. No percentage — the follow-up figure is about suppliers, on the parent file.
McKinsey Procurement 2025 (2022) and the Jaggaer/Coupa case studies measure buyer follow-up with suppliers, not internal part requests; that range stays on the supplier follow-up file and this one carries no percentage. Not an uptime claim.
Your ERP and stores system stay — SAP, Dynamics, Infor or the one you run. This is the same sorting-and-chasing build as our supplier follow-up file, pointed inward at part requests:
Nothing is ordered without the buyer.
The genuine breakdown. Obsolete parts. The vendor who only answers a human.
Not an uptime claim.
If stock records in the ERP are wrong — parts booked out but still on the shelf, or the reverse — the automatic stock answer is wrong too, and confidently so; a stock-accuracy check is audit work first. Obsolete parts and vendors who only answer a human are outside the build; those requests are routed, not resolved.
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 · Manufacturing.
Short process file. Same build as its parent file; the playbook has no separate volume or benchmark for this desk.