Order with its lines
Items, quantities and prices, with net, tax and total calculated automatically. The document sent to the supplier comes straight from here.
Feature
Maintenance purchasing isn't driven by the purchasing department: it's triggered by a breakdown, low stock, or a technician calling from a site. And it almost always gets handled outside the system.
That demand is irregular and almost never planned ahead. In a production purchase, you know what you'll need because you know what you're going to manufacture; in maintenance, half of what gets bought is a response to something that just broke. That has two practical consequences: the urgent order is the norm, not the exception, and a good part of the spend happens without comparing prices because it's urgent. Having purchasing inside the system doesn't remove the urgency, but it does let you know afterwards where the money went and how much of that spend was avoidable.
Rarely in the big order. Almost always in the drip.
An order is a document with a status, lines and a destination. Nothing more, and nothing less.
Items, quantities and prices, with net, tax and total calculated automatically. The document sent to the supplier comes straight from here.
Who it's bought from and where it goes: the warehouse that receives it, or directly the address where the work is being done.
Your workflow: requested, approved, sent, partially received, closed. You define them, like the rest of the product.
What's received feeds the destination warehouse's stock, so the inventory doesn't get kept separately.
The user and the technician who originated the request stay on the order. It's what lets you reconstruct why it was bought.
The delivery note image lives on the order itself, not in a folder or someone's email.
Flagging whether the material is picked up from the supplier changes the day's logistics, and it's better as a data field than a message.
Internal and external reference on the same order, which is what makes it possible to cross-check against the invoice without guessing.
Leave your details and we will get in touch to see whether we fit. No commitment, no lock-in period.
The value of having purchasing inside the system isn't in the order itself, it's in the chain being complete: the breakdown creates the work order, the work order needs a part that isn't in stock, low stock creates the purchase order, the order arrives at the warehouse, and the material leaves the warehouse for that same order. When that whole path lives in one system, you can answer questions nobody can normally answer: how much material was bought urgently versus through planned restocking, which supplier really delivers late, and how much of the year's maintenance spend went into parts for equipment that should have been replaced already.
This isn't a procurement module for an industrial company and it doesn't replace the purchasing department: it doesn't handle volume rate negotiation, supplier approval, or multi-level amount-based approval according to your org chart. If your purchasing has that kind of complexity, it lives in the ERP, and only what gets consumed reaches this. What it does cover, and cover well, is the purchase that originates from maintenance: the one that today gets handled by email and WhatsApp and ends up in the accounts with nobody able to say which breakdown it was for.
Yes, and it's one of the fastest data points to pay off. The real lead time — not the promised one — is what determines what needs to be kept in stock and what can be ordered when needed. With a few months of history, it quickly becomes clear which references really take longer, and that list is usually half as long and quite different from the one people had in mind.
By making the need visible right where it's detected, for whoever does the buying. Most duplicate purchases in maintenance don't come from poor warehouse control but from the lack of a shared place: two technicians order the same part for the same breakdown two days apart because neither knew about the other. When the request is tied to the work order, the duplication shows up before ordering.
In urgent corrective maintenance, almost never: the cost of downtime outweighs the difference. Where it does pay off is on recurring material, the kind bought every month, always from the same place, out of habit. Knowing how much gets spent per year on each reference is what turns that conversation into something concrete.
No, and it shouldn't. This manages the purchase that originates from maintenance: the part needed for a work order, or restocking low inventory. Rate negotiation, supplier approval and multi-level authorization stay in the ERP, with which integrations exist.
Yes. What's received feeds the destination warehouse's stock, so there's no need to keep the inventory separately or reconcile it by hand afterwards.
The order records who originated it and which warehouse or address it was going to, and the material consumed gets charged to the specific work order. That chain is what lets you reconstruct spend by breakdown and by asset.
Yes, right to the order itself. It's the difference between finding the document in two seconds and hunting for it in the email of whoever made the purchase.
Yes. You define the order statuses, just like work order statuses, so the workflow reflects how your company actually approves purchases.
In the demo we walk through a real purchase, from the technician who requests it to the delivery note, and see what would be getting missed.
Accessibility
Saved in this browser. Light or dark theme is set from the footer.