Polymr
Workflow

The plan rebuilds itself the minute something changes.

Most planners we meet run MRP once a night and live with a plan that is already stale by 06:00. Demand, plan, and inventory should be one ongoing calculation, not a Monday-morning ritual. The moment a shipment slips, a sales order lands, or a BOM revision posts, Polymr re-runs the MRP explosion against the current BOM and what is actually on the floor. Shortages show up in the planner’s queue within minutes. The planner spends the morning approving fixes instead of rebuilding the spreadsheet from scratch.

One planning screen. Every signal. The whole picture.

The MRP run summary below is the planner’s main screen. Run ID and timestamp across the header, three tiles for demand, supply, and gap, then the top eight SKUs that need action. Each row shows what is on hand, what demand is projected, what PO Polymr suggests, and which supplier it would go to. The run updates continuously; the timestamps are in minutes, not days.

app.polymr.tech/plan/run/MR-2026.W22

MRP run · MR-2026.W22

Started 09:11 · finished 09:13 · 1,842 SKUs evaluated · trigger ASN-7711

Polymr ERP
Demand
4,218
units across W22 to W30
Supply
3,886
open PO + on-hand cover
Gap
- 332
8 SKUs short, 3 critical
Top 8 SKUs · action neededordered by gap severity
ItemOn handProjected demandSuggested POSupplierStatus
PMR-403114280320V-218critical
PMR-CN-440440500V-244 (alt)critical
PMR-HF-2238320400V-218critical
PMR-BR-08120440440V-201short
PMR-SR-FK40240240V-244short
PMR-440684180160V-218short
HW-B8-A3251,8001,1200-cover
HW-W8-SPL2,4001,1200-cover
Trigger: ASN-7711 slip on PO-84179 · re-ran 1,842 SKUs in 132s.next run: signal-driven

The MPS timeline shows what each shortage actually means.

Click into PMR-4031 and the MPS view opens across eight weeks. Supply against demand, week by week. The red bars are the shortages from the planning queue, drawn as coverage gaps so the planner can see exactly which week the line runs out and how big the recovery needs to be. The note at the bottom names the shipment slip that caused the gap.

PMR-4031Brake hub assembly . MPS view
8 weeks rolling
W19
W20
W21
W22
W23
W24
W25
W26
Demand Supply Short
Exception: W22 . W23 short by 320
Cause: PO-84179 ASN slip +9d
Suggested: Split . V-244 lead 7d
Audit: supply pegs from open PO ledger, demand pegs from MPS document MPS-2026.W22, refreshed per signal.

The BOM rollup behind every shortage row.

Every shortage in the queue rolls up from the BOM. The indented view shows the path from parent to component, with on-hand and net requirement attached at every level. Substitute parts sit one column over, never on a separate screen.

BOM.PMR-4031.v6Indented rollup
6 levels
ComponentQtyOn handNet req
PMR-4031 brake hub114280
Hub forging13200
Bearing race2120440
Bolt M8x2441,8000
Lock washer42,4000
Seal ring FKM140240
Audit: rev v6 from PDM event 2026-05-30, net req computed against on-hand snapshot 09:13.

MRP runs nightly. The plant changes by the hour.

Most planners we meet are running an MRP that batches once a night, against an inventory snapshot that is already eight hours old. The morning queue is wrong before they sit down. The first two hours of every shift go to reconciling on-hand against scrap reported overnight from the floor, vendor shipment notices that came in after midnight, and sales orders cut after the batch ran. Polymr re-runs the explosion every time a signal lands. The planner’s queue stays accurate as the day moves. The two hours of reconciling are gone because the reconciling is already done.

Cadence comparison
Classic MRP
Nightly batch. Morning queue stale before standup.
1 run / 24 h
Polymr incremental
Re-explodes per slip, per SO, per rev. Latency cap 60 s.
~ 1 run / signal
Planner workload
Median reconciliation time recovered across the team.
-1.8 h / shift
Coverage horizon
Recommendations beyond the immediate shortage window.
12 weeks rolling

A high-volume plant with takt-driven demand.

Anonymised engagement with an automotive supplier running takt-driven assembly. Once the live re-explosion was in place, the planner’s morning reconciliation dropped from a four- hour ritual to a fifteen-minute review of the queue.

Anonymized engagement
Operations lead, high-volume automotive supplier (two plants, takt-driven)
Situation
Two stamping-and-assembly plants ran a 38-second takt against forecasted weekly volumes. Daily planner output drove material releases, work-centre assignments, and overtime calls for both sites.
What was breaking
A single inbound resin slip on PMR-4031 cascaded into a 9-day backlog across four downstream WOs before anyone caught it. Planners burned the first two hours of every shift reconciling on-hand against MES-reported scrap before they trusted the morning queue.
  • Demand → planning → purchasing
  • Delay recovery
  • Margin and bottleneck analysis
Outcome · 8 weeks
94.6%
Fill rate
was 88.2%+6.4 pts
Illustrative, reflects this specific deployment. Outcomes vary by plant, stack, and scope.