Inventory & Working Capital Review · ¥38,000 · 4 Weeks
Understand where your cash is sitting — and what it would take to release it.
An examination of stock levels, holding periods, obsolescence and the cash tied up across the supply chain — together with the ordering practices that produced the current position.
What This Review Delivers
A working model and a clear view of where the cash has gone.
Companies with reasonable profit margins sometimes find their cash position does not reflect what the numbers suggest. Stock has accumulated in categories that move slowly. Orders placed to hit volume discounts have created holding costs that quietly offset the saving. Obsolete items sit on the books at values that do not correspond to what they would actually fetch.
This review examines stock levels, holding periods and the ordering practices behind them — working with purchasing, warehouse and finance functions over four weeks. The output is a working model handed to your finance team, an ageing view by product category, and a ranked list of adjustments showing cash released against operational risk introduced.
What you receive at the end
- —A working model handed directly to your finance team — not a static report
- —Ageing view by product category showing how long stock has been held and at what cost
- —Obsolescence identified with current book value against realistic realisable value
- —Ordering practice analysis showing how the current stock position was reached
- —Adjustments ranked by cash released against operational risk introduced — so you can decide what to act on
The Situation
When the P&L and the bank account tell different stories.
PATTERN 01
Profit is there; cash is not
The business is trading profitably by any conventional measure. But cash remains tight, overdraft use is higher than it should be, and the finance team cannot point to a single clear explanation for why.
PATTERN 02
Stock has grown without a deliberate decision
Inventory levels have increased over time through ordering practices that made sense individually — volume discounts, safety stock, minimum order quantities — but have compounded into a position that now holds more cash than necessary.
PATTERN 03
Obsolete stock is not being recognised
Items that will not sell at book value remain on the balance sheet because writing them down requires a decision nobody has been asked to make. The cash they represent has already been spent; the position simply has not been acknowledged.
This review is intended for companies whose cash position has become a concern without an obvious cause — where the operational team believes stock levels are necessary and the finance team cannot demonstrate that they are not. An independent examination of both perspectives, with figures, tends to resolve the question more quickly than internal discussion does.
The Approach
Three functions, four weeks, one working model.
AREA 01
Stock position analysis
Current inventory examined by category, age and movement rate. Slow-moving and non-moving items identified. Holding costs calculated using the company's own cost-of-capital figure, not a benchmark rate. The ageing view distinguishes between stock that is slow by design and stock that is slow because demand has changed.
AREA 02
Ordering practice review
How purchasing decisions are currently made — who decides, on what basis, using what information. Where volume discounts or minimum order quantities drive the decision, the net effect on working capital is calculated. The review covers at least twelve months of purchasing history to identify patterns, not individual decisions.
AREA 03
Obsolescence and write-down view
Items identified as obsolete or significantly impaired are listed with current book value, estimated realisable value, and the accounting treatment required. This is not a recommendation to write anything down — it is the information needed for the company and its auditors to make that decision with the full picture.
AREA 04
Adjustment ranking
Possible adjustments — to reorder points, safety stock levels, supplier terms or product range — ranked by cash released against operational risk introduced. Each adjustment is presented with a plain statement of what it would require to implement and what it would mean for service levels or supply security.
What Working Together Looks Like
Four weeks across three functions.
WEEK 1
Data and access
Inventory records, purchasing history and financial data transferred. Access to warehouse and purchasing contacts confirmed. Scope note reviewed. Stock count data requested if a recent one exists.
WEEK 2
Stock analysis
Inventory examined by category and movement rate. Ageing view constructed. Holding cost calculated. Obsolescence candidates identified for further confirmation with the warehouse function.
WEEK 3
Ordering and write-down
Purchasing practice review completed. Obsolescence view confirmed with purchasing and warehouse contacts. Progress note shared with the named contact covering early findings.
WEEK 4
Working model and output
Working model finalised and handed to the finance team. Full written output delivered. Review session held with purchasing, warehouse and finance to go through findings and answer questions.
What the working model contains
The model handed to your finance team is a structured document — not a static spreadsheet export — that can be updated as stock positions change. It contains the ageing view, the holding cost calculations, the obsolescence list and the adjustment ranking.
It is designed to be used directly by the finance team, not translated from a consulting format into something the team can work with.
What is needed from your side
- —At least twelve months of purchasing and inventory records at the start of week 1
- —Access to contacts in purchasing, warehouse and finance for brief sessions in weeks 2 and 3
- —Most recent stock count data if available
- —One named contact with authority to confirm scope and data sharing
Investment
A fixed fee confirmed before work begins.
The fee covers four weeks of assessment work across purchasing, warehouse and finance functions, the working model, the full written output, and the review session. It is fixed at the time the scope note is signed.
Where the adjustment ranking identifies cash that can be released, that figure tends to be a multiple of the review fee. The review does not make that claim as a selling point — the figure depends entirely on what the stock position turns out to be — but it is a reasonable thing to have in mind.
What ¥38,000 covers
Methodology
How the review works and what it is designed to produce.
Working capital reviews of this kind are most useful when they sit outside the tension between purchasing and finance. Purchasing tends to defend stock levels on service-level grounds; finance tends to challenge them on cost grounds. Neither has the other's full picture.
The review uses both sides' data and works with both functions directly, which means the output is not a Finance-sided case against purchasing — it is an analysis of the actual position, with the implications set out neutrally.
The adjustment ranking is the practical output from that analysis. Each item on the list states clearly what changing it would release in cash, what it would require operationally, and what the risk to service levels or supply security would be. The company decides what to act on.
Why the working model matters more than a report
A static report on stock becomes outdated the moment inventory moves. The working model is structured so the finance team can update it as stock positions change — the analytical framework stays useful after the engagement ends.
How cash released against risk is calculated
Each adjustment is modelled against the company's own cost-of-capital and its actual service-level requirements. The risk figure is not a generic percentage — it is based on lead times, supplier reliability and demand variability as they actually apply to each product category.
What happens if the stock position turns out to be reasonable
The review states that clearly. Not every cash position problem originates in inventory. If the stock levels are defensible and the ordering practices are sound, the output says so — and the focus turns to where in the business the cash is actually being consumed.
Commitment
What Scope Lab Zone commits to, in plain terms.
COMMITMENT 01
The working model is yours to keep
The model handed to your finance team at the end of the engagement belongs to your company. There is no ongoing subscription, no tool licence, and no reason to come back to Scope Lab Zone to use it.
COMMITMENT 02
Findings are presented to all three functions
Purchasing, warehouse and finance all receive the same output in the review session. The findings are not filtered through one function before reaching another. Each team sees what the data shows.
COMMITMENT 03
No obligation from making contact
An initial enquiry does not begin the engagement. The scope note and fee are shared before work starts. If the situation described does not fit this review, that is confirmed before any commitment is made.
Next Steps
How to get started.
01
Send an enquiry
Describe the cash position situation — how long the gap between profit and cash has been present, and whether there is an existing view on what is driving it. Use the contact form or email info@scope-labzone.com directly.
02
Confirmation or call
Scope Lab Zone responds within two working days. If the situation is straightforward, a scope note follows directly. If clarification is needed, a short call is arranged first — no obligation at this stage.
03
Scope note shared
A one-page note confirming the data required, the functions involved, the output, and the fixed fee. Work begins on an agreed start date once you confirm.
04
Four-week engagement
Data transferred in week 1. Work across purchasing, warehouse and finance in weeks 2 and 3. Working model and full written output delivered in week 4 with a review session.
Inventory & Working Capital Review · ¥38,000 · 4 Weeks
If your cash position does not match your profit figures, this review is worth a conversation.
Describe the situation briefly. Scope Lab Zone will confirm whether this review fits and what a scope note would look like. No commitment follows from making contact.
Other Assessments
Other engagements that may be relevant.
¥43,000 · 6 WEEKS
New Venture Feasibility Study
An independent assessment of a proposed new product line, service or subsidiary before internal momentum makes the decision for you.
View Details¥36,000 · 5 WEEKS
Customer Segmentation Study
Distinguishing the customer groups a company actually serves — based on purchasing behaviour and service cost, not on demographic assumption.
View Details¥40,000 · 5 WEEKS
Operational Efficiency Assessment
A review of how work moves through a company's core operation — handover delays, rework, waiting time and duplicated checking examined and mapped.
View Details