BEYOND VENN Sample report · illustrative data
System Health Check

Operational scale-readiness assessment

Fenwick Foods Ltd · multi-site food manufacturer & distributor · £24m turnover · 3 sites · 140 staff · NetSuite ERP · Assessed September 2026

2.7/5
Scale-readiness
score
Were order volume to double, in line with the company's stated growth ambition, dispatch would be the first department to fail, at approximately 20% above current throughput.

The operation currently depends on the skill of a small number of individuals compensating for processes the system does not capture. Each department below is assessed on the factors that determine whether that compensation holds under growth: data visibility, documented process, key-person dependency, capacity headroom, and error and rework rates.

6
departments assessed
14
blind spots found
5
fixes costing nothing
£68k/yr
illustrative cost of top 3 gaps

Department scores

Each department is scored from 1 to 5 on its readiness to absorb additional volume. The score is the mean of the five assessment dimensions set out in the following section.

Order intake

3.2 /5
Major accounts order through a portal; independents order by email and phone, with prices adjusted manually at entry and no audit trail of overrides. Accuracy is currently maintained by the entry team's knowledge of each customer.
Assessed to fail at approximately +40% volume, at which point entry errors and unaudited overrides are expected to exceed the team's capacity to correct them.

Planning & approvals

2.4 /5
Orders can be held for credit or margin approval without downstream visibility; no view exists of what is held or for how long. The production plan is issued weekly but amended daily by phone, faster than dependent departments can plan against.
Assessed to fail at approximately +30% volume, when unobserved holds begin to compromise delivery commitments.

Production

2.9 /5
Output is measured against targets set before changeover time was fully understood; the resulting efficiency figures are not a reliable basis for decisions. Batch sizes are determined by tank capacity rather than demand.
Assessed to fail at approximately +35% volume: overstock on some lines is expected to fund stock-outs on others.

Warehouse & picking

2.6 /5
Picking runs to a daily run-sheet frozen each morning; orders amended or added after the freeze are handled off-list on paper, so by afternoon an informal second pick stream operates alongside the system's. Stock is booked in by the case but picked in singles, so recorded stock drifts weekly.
Assessed to fail at approximately +25% volume: the off-list stream grows with every amendment, and the system's picture of the warehouse degrades with it.

Dispatch & carriers Breaks first

1.9 /5
Vehicle loading is planned at the door, on the day, from a whiteboard. Routes follow historical patterns rather than current drop density, and carrier bookings are made by phone and email with no consolidated view of the day's departures.
Assessed to fail at approximately +20% volume. Vehicle fill on departure is not currently measured.

Data & systems

2.4 /5
The ERP holds the data the business requires; working knowledge of the ERP rests with one individual. Recorded stock and physical stock diverge weekly, and are reconciled by manual correction counts rather than at source.
Fails on the first occasion the key individual is absent during an incident.

What's behind the scores

Five dimensions, scored from 1 (critical) to 5 (strong). Rows identify a department's weakest factor; columns identify company-wide patterns.

DepartmentData visibilityProcess documented Key-person riskCapacity headroomError & rework
Order intake 3 3 2 4 4
Planning & approvals 1 2 3 3 3
Production 2 3 3 4 2
Warehouse & picking 2 2 3 3 3
Dispatch & carriers 1 2 2 1 3
Data & systems 3 2 1 4 2
1 · Critical 2 · Fragile 3 · Coping 4 · Solid 5 · Scales

The bottleneck cascade

Resolving a single constraint transfers pressure to the next weakest point. The sequence below sets out where pressure lands as each constraint is resolved, and is the basis on which investment should be ordered.

1
Dispatch runs out of day · at ~+20% volume. Load planning done the afternoon before, and fill measured at departure, buy the headroom back without new vehicles.
2
The off-list pick stream overtakes the system · every amendment after the morning freeze widens the gap between the warehouse and the record of it.
3
Invisible approval holds start missing promises · an unobserved queue today; at higher volume, unobserved failures.
4
Order intake outruns the team's memory · manual entry and unaudited overrides hold at today's volume and not much beyond it.
5
The key-person dependency gets tested · one holiday, one resignation, and the ERP knowledge leaves the building.

Recommendations

Recommendations are ordered by impact against cost. Five of the eight require a decision only, at no financial cost. Savings shown are illustrative, derived from observed time and error rates.

#Fix DepartmentCostWorth (illustrative)
1 Plan the next day's loads the afternoon before, and record fill at departure DispatchNil · process ~45 min/day loading
2 Move the run-sheet freeze to midday, with a single afternoon release WarehouseNil · policy Ends the off-list stream
3 Capture amendments in the system at the point of change, not on paper WarehouseConfig ~£9k/yr rework
4 Reconcile case-level receipts against unit-level picks automatically Data & systemsConfig Ends the weekly correction counts
5 "Stuck in approval" queue visible to the warehouse PlanningConfig ~£12k/yr missed promises
6 One consolidated daily departures view for carrier bookings DispatchSmall build ~1 hr/day + error risk
7 Surface date codes at pick so short-dated stock ships first WarehouseConfig ~£14k/yr expiry waste
8 Encode the ERP knowledge: decision matrix + documented data map Data & systemsIncluded Removes the single point of failure

Assessment method

The assessment is completed in two to six weeks, depending on the size and complexity of the operation, for a fixed fee agreed in advance. Access to data is read-only; no new system is introduced.

Stage 1 · Site observation

The operation as it runs

Time on site with the people who carry out the work. Each stage is mapped as it operates in practice, not as documented. Blind spots are recorded as such, never estimated.

Stage 2 · Data analysis

The account tested against the record

A read-only extract is taken from existing systems. Current performance, capacity and error rates are measured at each stage, and the operational account is verified against the data.

Stage 3 · Findings

Scored, ranked and presented

This report, scored and ranked, is presented in person, where each finding can be examined against its supporting evidence.

Know what breaks first, before it does.

The System Health Check is a fixed-fee assessment, completed in two to six weeks depending on the size of the operation. The report is generated from site observation and data analysis, and is delivered in person, finding by finding. All figures in this sample are illustrative. Subscribers receive a report of this form each week: the Health Check is the Beyond Venn method carried out once; the subscription is the same method running continuously.

Book the check