Whether this is worth a conversation.
Groflex sits above an existing ERP in a regulated, multi-site operation. That is a narrow shape, and it is deliberately narrow. Below is the honest version of who it works for.
If it is not worth solving, we will say so.
This product earns its keep in a specific shape of operation. Outside that shape it does not, and finding out in month three is worse for both of us.
- Three or more distribution centres or facilities
- $50M to $500M revenue, 500 to 50,000 employees
- An existing ERP and WMS investment we sit above
- Cold chain or regulated handling requirements
- Audit pressure from a regulator or a board
- Single-site operators
- Restaurants and food service
- Companies under $50M or without an ERP
- Operators over 50,000 employees, where the complexity exceeds current fit
- Anyone wanting the AI to decide without a human signature
Four people have to say yes. The product is built for all four.
Operations opens the conversation and compliance closes it. That is not a sales theory, it is the order these four actually decide in.
- 01 · RecommendsVP Supply Chain
“Decisions that should take 20 minutes take 48 hours, because they need three people in a room.”
Signals reach you the minute they cross a limit, already priced. You get your hours back and a latency number you can show upward.
What they ask“We already have SAP for this.”
SAP records the decision. It does not make one, route it, or price the options.
- 02 · Decides the pilotCOO
“Too much escalates to me because nothing routes it correctly below me.”
Delegation that holds, decisions that stay at the right level, and proof weeks later that they held. Your board gets AI. Your compliance team gets control.
What they ask“Will this scale past one site?”
One facility, 90 days, measured. Then the same loop on the next KPI family.
- 03 · Closes or kills itHead of Quality · QP
“An auditor arrives and we spend two days reconstructing a decision trail from email.”
Every decision logged, attributed and exportable in one click. Article 12 and FSMA 204 mapped by article. Nothing executes without a named signature.
What they ask“Is the trail tamper-proof?”
Append-only, timestamped and attributed today. Cryptographic sealing is in development, and we will say so in writing.
- 04 · Signs the contractCFO
“Technology investments I cannot measure, sold on outcomes nobody can prove.”
A priced gap, a pilot that reports against it, and value cleared per quarter. Roughly four to six million a year sits in the gap at a 150 million distributor.
What they ask“What if it does not work?”
The pilot is $10,000 and it produces a written outcome report either way.
Your buying committee is your approval chain.
The three signatures on the record you just watched are the same three people who decide whether to buy. Operations recommends. Quality can veto. Finance signs. We did not design that to match the sale. We designed it to match how a regulated decision actually works, and the sale turned out to have the same shape.
What that means for you: the pilot is not a demo for one person. It is the first time all four see the same record.
If you recognise your operation above, start with the backtest.
- Backtest01Your data · 1 to 3 days · risk-freeYour last 12 to 24 months replayed. Deleted on delivery, confirmed in writing.
- Pilot02$10,000 · 90 daysOne facility. A written outcome report against your own baseline.
20 minutes. No deck. No sales script.