Before a furniture purchase order, reconcile every quote version, item specification and total formula; then check what event starts the schedule. A filled price and a lead-time label do not establish an approved order.
Original document audit · Two 20-item working copies + one blank schedule · No signed transaction outcome
1. What the planning worksheet actually contained
We reviewed two near-identical copies of an internal furniture planning worksheet, each with 20 item rows. One labels its unit prices as estimated ex-factory prices; the other uses a less clear currency heading. All 20 unit-price cells differ between copies, while their item labels, quantities, product-dimension entries and line-total formulas match. Neither copy identifies itself as the signed final offer. We cannot infer which price set was approved, whether either was sent to a supplier, or whether a later document corrected the gaps.
In the copy used for the chart below, quantity, unit price, a line-total formula and a “60” lead-time entry appeared on all 20 rows. Yet the material/specification and packed-weight columns were empty throughout. Only 11 rows contained anything in the product-dimension field, generally a single measurement rather than the stated length × width × height. The entries mixed inch marks and metres under a millimetre header. The other copy shared those counts except that its two carton-dimension conversion formulas were also absent.
This is a worksheet-completion audit, not a supplier-performance sample. A blank field may have been resolved in a drawing or correspondence elsewhere. Until those records are linked by model and revision, the worksheet alone cannot support approval.
2. Recalculate the total; do not trust the “Total” label
Both worksheet variants use the same final total formula, which sums line totals from rows 3 through 18. The item list continues through row 22. That leaves four line items outside the total formula. We do not publish the private prices, but the structural error matters even if every unit price were agreed: the displayed total would not represent all 20 items.
For an order review, compare the number of item rows with the formula range, recalculate quantity × approved unit price by line, and reconcile the total against the supplier’s final quotation. If the quantity changes later, recheck formulas that contain hard-coded multipliers.
3. Make dimensions computable before discussing freight
The product-dimension header specified “L × W × H mm,” but populated cells commonly held a single inch measurement. Two entries in the packaging-dimension column were inch-to-centimetre conversion formulas, even though that column also stated millimetres and asked for three dimensions. No package weight was entered. This is a unit and completeness problem, not evidence that a carton was incorrectly manufactured.
One measurement in a field labelled L × W × H, with a millimetre header.
Each measurement stated in one unit, tied to the exact model/revision; packed size and weight stated separately.
Why it matters: the same unit ambiguity can flow into carton cube, loading, storage, door clearance and claims handling. The buyer should request a supplier-confirmed measurement sheet, then measure the approved sample and first packed unit against that version.
4. Audit the clock before repeating a delivery promise
A separate blank furniture schedule states 10 days for order confirmation, 60 for production and 30 for sea transit, then labels the total as 90 days. Those three sequential durations add to 100 days; the table itself ends at day 100. Every stage is marked “Not Commenced,” so this is a planning inconsistency, not evidence of a missed shipment.
Before an order is placed, ask the supplier to define what “day 1” means: deposit receipt, signed drawings, material approval, or something else. Separate factory-ready date from vessel departure and arrival; define who owns delays caused by drawing changes, failed samples or customs. Treat the schedule as an agreed control record once both sides accept dates and owners.
5. A three-part release gate for the purchase order
These files would be useful working drafts. They are not yet a decision packet. The release gate below focuses on the three things the buyer could not verify from the files alone.
Every item has a controlled drawing or spec, material/finish, complete units, sample sign-off and pack data.
All item rows appear in the total; quantities and formulas match the final supplier quote and agreed currency/terms.
Milestones add up, start events are defined, approvals have owners, and transit assumptions are identified.
| Ask for | Minimum usable answer | What to do if missing |
|---|---|---|
| Revision-controlled product sheet | Model, material, finish, L × W × H and units, drawing/sample reference | Hold that line from final price approval |
| Packing sheet | Carton count, outer L × W × H, gross weight, hardware and protection | Do not finalize freight/cube assumptions |
| Reconciled quote | Every item × quantity × approved unit price, complete total and terms | Recalculate and request a corrected version |
| Dated milestone schedule | Start trigger, sample/drawing approval, production finish, dispatch and transit basis | Label timing as provisional until agreed |
Method and limits
This review used two private variants of the same 20-item planning worksheet and one blank furniture-schedule PDF. We compared cell contents across variants, counted non-empty cells, checked formula references and compared the schedule header with its component durations and day range. A separate file named as a purchase order exists in the source folder, but its structure and item list do not establish a traceable revision chain to these two worksheets. We did not verify associated supplier correspondence, approved drawings, completed orders or final shipping records. Therefore this page reports document-readiness findings, not a defect rate, supplier failure, typical market lead time or actual delivery outcome.
That limit is also the point: a company can publish a useful original finding without dressing a planning file up as a completed case study. Once a finished order can be traced from quote to approved sample, packed item and receipt, the analysis can be updated with outcomes.
