Curated articles written by supply chain experts to help suppliers win at retail.

Don't let Walmart Post-Audits catch you off guard in 2025. Join Allie and Bekah to learn best practices for preventing and disputing Post Audits.

Prepping for Walmart Audits

Post Audits are preventable and disputable! Join Allie and Bekah to learn how to best prepare for Walmart Post Audits.

Articles

Core Return Program for Auto Parts Suppliers Who Want Their Deposits Back 

A core charge is essentially a refundable deposit. When a customer buys a remanufactured part, they pay a deposit for the used part, or “core,” they’ll return for remanufacturing. Once the core is returned and accepted, the customer receives a credit. 

For auto parts suppliers, though, getting that credit back involves more than getting the part back to the warehouse. The return must be authorized, shipped, received, inspected, and matched to the original transaction. If those records don’t connect, a valid core can result in a delayed or disputed credit. 

That’s what makes core returns a reverse logistics challenge. The physical part has to stay connected to the records that determine whether the customer gets their credit. A core return program gives suppliers a process for managing that connection, from the initial return authorization through inspection and reconciliation. 

Core returns and warranty returns can move through the same reverse logistics network, but they serve different purposes. Treating them as one and the same is exactly how suppliers lose track of deposits they're owed and credits they should be disputing. 

 is tied to a deposit on a part. Say a customer buys a remanufactured part (a rebuilt one, like an alternator) to replace their old, worn-out unit. At checkout, they pay a core charge on top of the price. When they send back their old unit, called the core, it gets evaluated against the program's requirements, and if it's accepted, they get the deposit credited back. customer buys a remanufactured part (a rebuilt one, like an alternator) to replace their old, worn-out unit. At checkout, they pay a core charge on top of the price. When they send back their old unit, called the core, it gets evaluated against the program's requirements, and if it's accepted, they get the deposit credited back. 

 is a defect-driven claim. If a car part fails due to the manufacturer’s error, such as a brake caliper that seizes, or a leaky water pump, it can be returned through a warranty. The customer expects a replacement plus reimbursement for whatever the defective part cost. 

Keeping the two processes distinct helps suppliers reconcile the right transaction to the right return. 

A typical core return program follows a straightforward sequence: 

The physical return and the financial credit are different events, and the supplier needs enough information to connect them. For example, GM’s 

 covers parts including brake master cylinders, water pumps, alternators, and air conditioning compressors. Its requirements include a return window and condition requirements for specific types of cores. 

Heavy duty parts follow the same basic model. 

 identifies batteries, engines, transmissions, alternators, turbochargers, and brake calipers among the parts that can carry core charges. Return requirements vary by program and component. 

Core credits can get stuck for a few predictable reasons. 

The Core Arrives Outside the Return Window 

Core programs can set specific deadlines for returning a part. 

, for example, allows customers up to six months from the purchase date to return certain cores. A return outside the applicable window may not qualify for the expected credit. 

The Returned Part Doesn’t Match the Authorization 

A supplier may receive the right type of part but have difficulty determining which transaction or authorization it belongs to. If the return is associated with the wrong authorization, the physical inventory and financial records can become disconnected. 

Core credits can depend on the condition and completeness of the returned part. GM’s program, for example, specifies required components for certain engine cores. Missing components can affect whether the core qualifies for a full credit. 

The Credit Isn’t Connected to the Original Transaction 

A supplier may receive the core, complete the inspection, and issue a credit. There can still be a reconciliation problem if the credit can’t be matched to the transaction that generated the original core charge. 

That’s where connected return data becomes important. The supplier needs a consistent identifier and transaction history that follow the return from authorization through credit. 

Connecting Return Data From Authorization to Credit 

The return process works better when each step produces data that can be connected to the next. 

, or return merchandise authorization and notification, can communicate information about a return authorization. An 

 (aka functional acknowledgment) double-checks that the transaction was received. A reverse advance ship notice can then provide information about what is being returned before the shipment arrives. 

Here are the typical steps on a core return for a remanufactured alternator: 

Return authorization → Shipment → Receipt → Inspection → Credit → Reconciliation 

Each step answers a different question: 

A consistent return or returned merchandise authorization (RMA) number can provide the thread connecting those records. It ties the authorization, the inbound notice, and the credit together so they don’t have to be matched by hand. Without that connection, each document can be valid on its own while the overall transaction remains difficult to reconcile. 

When a Warranty Return Becomes a Supplier Recovery Claim 

Warranty returns create a different type of financial exposure. Understanding the warranty parts return process starts with knowing when a warranty return becomes a supplier recovery claim. 

When an OEM or other customer determines that a component failed under warranty, it may seek to recover the cost from the supplier that produced the component. This is a supplier recovery warranty claim. The supplier may need to review the original warranty claim, the returned part, inspection results, and identifying information such as the part or serial number. 

One common source of disagreement is a No Trouble Found (NTF) claim. The part comes back for inspection, but the supplier can’t reproduce the reported failure. 

In that situation, the physical part alone doesn’t resolve the dispute. The supplier needs the surrounding records to understand what was reported, what was inspected, and what costs are being charged back. 

The same principle applies to core returns. Reverse logistics data is most useful when it stays connected to the transaction that created it. 

Is a core charge the same as a warranty? 

No. A core charge is a refundable deposit associated with returning a used part that can be remanufactured. A warranty covers repair or replacement when a part is defective within a defined coverage period. 

It depends on the program. GM’s Core Return Program allows up to six months from the purchase date for applicable returns, while other programs can have different requirements. The specific program documentation or authorization determines the applicable window. 

What happens if a returned core fails inspection? 

The return may be rejected or the credit may be reduced based on the condition or completeness of the returned core. Program-specific requirements determine how the inspection affects the credit. 

Core returns are physical transactions with financial consequences. A part has to move back through the supply chain. The supplier also needs to know why it is coming back, what transaction it belongs to, what happened during inspection, and whether the resulting credit was applied correctly. 

When those records remain connected across trading partners, suppliers have a clearer record of the return and less manual reconciliation work. 

 helps auto parts manufacturers and distributors connect trading partner data across supply chain processes. For more on EDI and return documentation, visit 

Deduction Recovery and Prevention: The Get Paid, Get Better Framework

“Get paid, get better” should be the default strategy for any supplier navigating deduction management. 

 involves recovering the money from an invalid deduction. 

 means figuring out why a valid deduction occurred, so that the same mistake doesn't generate future deductions.  

Where this works as a strategic framework is by viewing deductions as a signal to improve processes, while simultaneously streamlining the dispute process, so that suppliers truly can get paid and get better.  

Get paid deals with invalid deductions, and disputing them to get revenue back. Get better involves valid deductions, and learning from the mistakes that caused them.  

occur when the retailer makes an error and deducts money by mistake. These deductions should always be disputed.  

 fall into two main buckets: planned and unplanned.  

Get paid is recovery; get better is prevention.  

Disputing deductions and investigating their root causes are both established practices for most suppliers. But suppliers often struggle to manage both functions because they are time consuming and lack the necessary visibility to successfully manage manually.  A supplier that disputes every single deduction may be disputing the same deduction every month. A supplier that only investigates the root cause of the deduction without taking action may be forfeiting recoverable revenue. 

This is why the “get paid, get better” framework is so important, because manually managing deductions is nearly impossible. From the sheer scale of deduction management to the lack of visibility into root causes, even suppliers who are trying to handle deductions are likely still leaving money on the table. 

Getting paid starts with checking the validity of a deduction. Not every deduction is disputable, and disputing a valid one can strain a retailer relationship. However, invalid deductions should be disputed. Most dispute processes require the following steps:  

Only about 20 to 30% of deductions get disputed on average, and roughly 40% of disputed deductions are won back, based on industry-wide deduction dispute data.  

How Does Deduction Root Cause Analysis Drive Getting Better? 

Getting better starts by asking why a deduction happened at all, rather than just disputing as the default. Every deduction should be treated as an alarm for an operational failure. Most deductions fall under one of five categories: 

Shortage claims clustering around one distribution center (DC) might mean that there is a receiving problem there. A wave of ASN chargebacks usually means that there is a timing problem within the EDI process. But these findings only matter once they reach the team that can fix them, whether that's warehouse, EDI, logistics, finances, operations, or account management. 

Why Do Recovery and Prevention Have to Run Together? 

Disputing and preventing deductions should be treated as a connected system, not separate workstreams. 

Recovery without prevention means a finance team spends hours every cycle fighting a deduction that another team could have prevented. Prevention without active disputing means that while the upstream problems get fixed, revenue is still lost to invalid deductions.  

"The expensive deductions are the ones that repeat, because the same root cause keeps generating new ones every cycle," says Eric Shelton, Senior Customer Strategist at SPS Commerce. "Fixing the cause is what actually changes the number next quarter." 

, one of North America's largest bedding manufacturers, was dealing with three Walmart deduction problems at once: EDI errors generating deductions every cycle, a complicated settlement offer, and a $200,000 

On the “get better” side, the SPS Revenue Recovery team traced the recurring deductions to specific mismatches in Serta Simmons' raw EDI data and corrected them at the source, which stopped the deductions from recurring. On the “get paid” side, SPS Commerce reviewed the settlement line by line to recover more than the retailer's initial terms and used historical documentation to dispute and win the full $200,000 claim. 

That's what “get paid, get better” looks like in practice.

Another example comes from EOS, which saw a 17-time return on investment with 

. Suppliers lose an estimated 5 to 7% of annual revenue to deductions, chargebacks, and compliance fines. This is why it is important to invest in deduction management. Across brands, SPS Commerce has recovered more than $2 billion revenue lost to deductions.  

Where Should Suppliers Start Applying This Framework? 

Most supplier teams are reactive when it comes to deduction management, because the sheer volume, manual processes, and lack of visibility make it feel impossible at scale. If this is how you are currently operating, disputing what you catch and writing off the rest, your next investment is 

. Tag root cause on every dispute, even the ones you don't pursue. That habit alone turns a dispute log into an early-warning system. 

If your team already tracks root cause by category, retailer, or DC, then you're further along than most. The next step is tightening the loop between what the analysis finds and who's accountable for fixing it. 

That upstream fix often runs through the same 

 and item data that generates the deductions in the first place. Clean ASNs and accurate item setup prevent a meaningful share of the five root-cause deduction categories before a shipment reaches the retailer's dock. 

Ready to See What Get Paid, Get Better Looks Like for Your Deductions? 

This dual approach is what SPS Commerce calls 

, with an automated dispute workflow for the Get Paid side and root-cause reporting for the Get Better side. Our complimentary audit shows you the real dollar amount and trends in your supply chain at no cost and no commitment. Our free audit includes:  

Das europäische goldene Quartal: Acht Wochen, die die Sortimentsüberprüfung des nächsten Jahres prägen

, wobei die gesamten europäischen Einzelhandelsausgaben im Jahresvergleich voraussichtlich um 3,1 % steigen werden. Acht aufeinanderfolgende Wochen mit erhöhtem Bestellvolumen, Aktionsverpflichtungen und verstärkter Prüfung durch die Einzelhändler. Das Vorbereitungsfenster, in dem noch echte Korrekturen möglich sind, liegt vor diesem Zeitraum – nicht innerhalb davon.

. Der letzte Zeitpunkt, an dem EDI-Fehler, Lücken bei der Lieferquote (Fill Rate) und Aktionsvolumen-Zusagen erkannt und korrigiert werden können, bevor Bestellungen in großem Umfang eintreffen. Danach werden die Handlungsspielräume enger.

 Anlieferungsfrist der Distributionszentren für den Black-Friday-Bestand bei den meisten großen europäischen Einzelhändlern. Bei Importprodukten müssen

 – das verschiebt die Bestätigungsfrist in den September.

 Das Aktionsfenster öffnet sich. Die Genauigkeit des Lieferavis (DESADV), die Lieferquote und die Leistung bei Bestellbestätigungen fließen ab diesem Tag in die Lieferanten-Scorecards für das kommende Jahr ein.

. Der Wiederauffüllungszyklus für Weihnachten beginnt unmittelbar nachdem sich der Black-Friday-Bestand bewegt hat. Einzelhändler, die gleichzeitig Regale auffüllen und Weihnachts-Vorausbestellungen bearbeiten, erzeugen das höchste anhaltende Bestellvolumen des Jahres. Lebensmittel- und Food-Lieferanten erleben beim Weihnachtsgeschäft oft ein noch stärkeres Volumen als am Black Friday; das Nachfrageprofil unterscheidet sich, die EDI- und operativen Anforderungen bleiben jedoch identisch.

 Weihnachtsspitze. Verfügbarkeitslücken in diesem Zeitraum lassen sich nicht mehr aufholen. Bestand, der in den letzten Tagen vor Weihnachten nicht im Regal steht, bedeutet verlorenen Umsatz – und Einkäufer wissen genau, welche Lieferanten zu einem Engpass beigetragen haben.

Acht Wochen mit verschärften Konsequenzen

. Leistungsdaten, die über diese acht Wochen erfasst werden, verschwinden im Januar nicht in der Schublade. Sie fließen in die Systeme der Einkäufer ein, prägen die Gespräche zur Frühjahrs-Sortimentsüberprüfung und beeinflussen die Listungsentscheidungen für das Folgejahr.

Fehler, die in einem ruhigen Monat nur moderate Folgen haben, wiegen in der Spitzensaison deutlich schwerer. 

 Ein Lieferant mit wiederkehrenden DESADV-Fehlern im November erzeugt acht Wochen lang bei jeder einzelnen betroffenen Sendung und über alle Handelskonten hinweg eine eigene Vertragsstrafe.

Die Spitzensaison bestraft dieselben Lücken – nur deutlich härter


Für Lieferanten, die mit mehr als einem europäischen Handelskonto arbeiten, gilt jede Zeile dieser Tabelle acht Wochen lang gleichzeitig für alle Konten.

Vor Eintreffen der ersten Spitzenbestellung

Jede Verbindung vor Oktober testen – nicht erst im November

Jede in den letzten sechs Monaten begonnene Handelsbeziehung benötigt eine aktive, getestete EDI-Verbindung, bevor die Spitzenbestellungen eintreffen. Ein defekter DESADV-Prozess, der erst in der zweiten Novemberwoche entdeckt wird, lässt keine Zeit mehr für eine Reparatur vor dem Black Friday. Lieferanten, die über ein verwaltetes Netzwerk arbeiten, verfügen bereits über zentral spezifizierte und validierte DESADV-Formate und Anforderungen an Bestellbestätigungen. Die Aufgabe besteht darin zu bestätigen, dass die Verbindung aktiv ist und korrekt verarbeitet – nicht darin, die Spezifikation unter Zeitdruck neu aufzubauen.

Lieferanten, die ihr EU-Handels-EDI über 

 abwickeln, erhalten DESADV-Ausnahmen automatisch und in Echtzeit über alle Konten hinweg gemeldet – sodass Probleme im Oktober sichtbar werden, wenn noch Kapazität zur Behebung besteht, statt erst Mitte November, wenn diese fehlt.

Zusagen zur Lieferquote frühzeitig festlegen – bevor der Einkäufer es für Sie tut

Veränderungen bei Lagerkapazität oder Produktionsvorlaufzeiten seit dem letzten Gespräch mit dem Einkäufer sollten jetzt angesprochen werden. Ein Einzelhändler, der Ende November von einem Kapazitätsengpass erfährt, hat keine tragfähigen Optionen mehr. Dasselbe Gespräch Anfang Oktober gibt beiden Seiten Zeit, eine angepasste Position auszuhandeln, bevor Bestellungen aufgegeben und Zusagen fixiert werden.

Black-Friday- und Weihnachtsvolumen getrennt planen

Das Golden Quarter als einen einzigen Planungshorizont zu behandeln, erzeugt Lücken. Black Friday erfordert eine Aktionslieferung mit hohem Volumen in einem konzentrierten Zeitfenster von drei bis fünf Tagen. Die Weihnachtsnachfrage baut sich über vier Wochen allmählicher auf, erreicht in der Woche des 22. Dezember ihren scharfen Höhepunkt und endet dann. Lebensmittel- und Food-Lieferanten verzeichnen beim Weihnachtsvolumen typischerweise deutlich höhere Werte als am Black Friday. Jedes Zeitfenster benötigt eine eigene bestätigte Bestandsposition, eine abgestimmte Produktionsplanung und eine geprüfte Vorlaufzeit.

Die DESADV-Genauigkeit der letzten 60 Tage vor Ende Oktober prüfen

Fehlermuster in der Versanddokumentation, die bei niedrigen Volumina tolerierbar sind, werden bei hohen Volumina zu Konventionalstrafen. Verspätete Nachrichten, Formatabweichungen und Mengendiskrepanzen der letzten zwei Monate lösen sich nicht von selbst, wenn sich das Bestellvolumen verdoppelt. Das Zeitfenster zur Behebung wiederkehrender Probleme liegt im September und Anfang Oktober – bevor die Saison jeden Zeitplan zusammenstaucht.

Die Scorecard ist ab dem 1. November geöffnet

Lieferanten, die mit getesteten Verbindungen, bestätigten Zusagen und sauberer Dokumentation ins Golden Quarter starten, verbringen November und Dezember damit, Bestellungen auszuliefern. Die Leistungsdaten der Einkäufer aus diesen acht Wochen fließen so oder so ins System ein. Die einzige Variable ist, was sie zeigen.

Deduction Management: The Five Root-Cause Categories Explained 

Deduction Management: The Five Root-Cause Categories Explained 

____________________________________________________________________________________ 

Every retailer names deductions differently. 

, for instance, uses numeric deduction codes, whereas 

 splits revenue loss into shortage claims and chargebacks and 

 tags each deduction with its own invoice-field code. If you’re an analyst working across several retailers, you’ll need to learn several sets of vocabularies to figure out what happened to a single payment.  

Making matters more complicated, the differences in naming are just the surface level. Underneath, almost every deduction comes from one of five root-cause categories. Those categories are: 

Once a new code fits into the right category, tracking deductions across retailers ceases to be a new investigation, and instead turns into pattern recognition. 

What Are the Five Root-Cause Categories Behind Retailer Deductions? 

Operational errors happen at the warehouse, before a shipment leaves the dock. These errors include shipment shortages, mispacks, wrong unit counts, and carton configuration mistakes. 

 is a manual deduction for a carton shortage: the gap between what was invoiced and what was received. 

 (POD) that match the shipped quantity give a supplier the paper trail to catch and dispute an operational error before it happens again. 

Administrative errors are in the paperwork. They include invoice discrepancies, pricing mismatches between the 

covers a cost gap between the invoice and the PO. Target requires written buyer approval of the correct cost before a supplier can dispute it. 

 A PO-to-invoice match, run before the invoice goes out, catches a pricing or cost mismatch while it’s still cheap to fix. 

This category covers ASNs that are late, missing, or wrong, plus EDI documents missing a required data field. Retailers often require the ASN to transmit within a narrow window before 

. A missing or malformed Serial Shipping Container Code (SSCC) segment can trigger a chargeback even when the physical shipment is correct.  

 (OTNC) chargeback triggers when a supplier's ASN transmits after Amazon's required window, even if the shipment itself arrives on time. Amazon generally expects the ASN within 30 minutes of shipment departure, or at least six hours before the scheduled delivery appointment. 

 Checking ASN timing and data accuracy against the retailer's transmission window, before the carrier picks up the shipment, stops this before it reaches the deduction stage. 

Carrier and delivery failures cover late deliveries, missed appointment or reschedule windows, incorrect carriers, and paperwork errors that affect proof of delivery. 

 Home Depot tags several of these failures with their own invoice-field codes, including a 

. Each one routes to its own department. 

 Reviewing the retailer's routing guide and double-checking carrier compliance before shipping catches most of this before delivery even happens. 

Compliance gaps cover labeling errors, pallet configuration violations, and missed packaging specs. 

 At Amazon, a shipping label that does not match its ASN causes a scan failure. Amazon 

, and charges a fee to cover the manual labor of processing the shipment by hand. 

 against both the retailer's spec and the ASN itself, before the carton leaves the dock, stops one labeling mistake from repeating across an entire shipment. 

Is a deduction the same thing as a chargeback? 

Not always. The terms vary by retailer. Some retailers use "deduction" for any withheld payment. Others, including Amazon, use "chargeback" for compliance issues and "shortage claim" for quantity disputes. The five root-cause categories apply across all of these terms, because they describe the failure itself rather than the retailer's label for it. 

Which root-cause category is the most common? 

It depends on the retailer, the product category, and the supplier's own supply chain maturity. No single category is universally the largest. Suppliers who log the root cause on every dispute can see which category drives the most volume in their own history. 

Can one deduction have more than one root cause? 

Yes. A late ASN can trigger a compliance chargeback at one retailer and an operational shortage claim at another if the delayed paperwork also caused a receiving mismatch. When a deduction straddles two categories, log the more specific cause, specifically the one closest to where the process actually broke. 

Does this framework apply outside major retailers like Walmart, Amazon, and Target? 

Yes. The five categories describe the operational and paperwork failures that generate deductions industry-wide. The retailer-specific codes in this glossary are examples and are not the limit of where the framework applies. 

Placing a deduction in the right category is the first step. Fixing it is separate, and so is disputing it when the charge is wrong. Both have their own paperwork and deadlines. 

 walks through that full dispute process. 

For a category-specific next step, these retailer guides cover the codes named above in full: 

For the broader library, including Amazon and CVS, visit 

Item Data 101 for Big Box Retailers 

The supply chain runs on data, which means tiny details can (and do) have a huge impact. Case in point: item data. 

Item data is the set of facts that describes a product well enough for a retailer to buy it, stock it, price it, and sell it. Retailers pull this data into their systems during item setup and then reuse it everywhere: purchase orders, distribution center receiving, shelf planning, product pages, etc.  

Wrong or incomplete item data can result in downstream problems fast, such as receiving delays due to mismatched barcodes and poor search rankings from thin product descriptions. With so much riding on item data, it’s no wonder big box retailers publish detailed item data specifications and increasingly score suppliers against them. 

From the warehouse management system (WMS) to the checkout screen, every supply chain process relies on item data. Accurate item data is critical to: 

While the specifics vary from retailer to retailer, most item data requirements can be broken into four different broad categories: 

For many products sold through major U.S. retailers, that means using a 

, the barcode-ready identifier issued through GS1. Walmart, Target, and most other big box retailers require GS1-registered GTINs before a purchase order can even be issued.  

There are two GTINs that are the most common in big box retailers in the United States: 

This category includes data regarding a product’s dimensions, weight, and configuration (case pack, pallet, etc.). These attributes determine how a product moves through a retailer’s distribution center. Retailers double-check physical and packaging data against what ships, and mismatches between the item record and the physical case are a common cause of shipment rejections and chargebacks. 

While every retailer will have its own detailed guidelines, products sold online or on a retailer’s app generally need the following: 

Big box retailers often evaluate content completeness because digital content affects search placement and product performance, which in turn affects the retailer’s bottom line. 

Products with a chemical, battery, or hazardous component typically need documentation through third-party systems before setup can finish. Country of origin, import status, and category-specific certifications are also collected during onboarding. 

Tips for Keeping Item Data Accurate Across Retailers 

Maintaining separate item records for every retailer, in every portal, is a situation that’s ripe for error. A few practices help suppliers keep item data consistent no matter how many retailers they sell to.  

Build the complete item record that everything flows from, including every attribute the widest set of retailers could ask for, rather than filling in only what one retailer's portal requires. It's easier to trim data for a specific retailer than to chase down missing attributes item by item.  

Sync Through the Global Data Synchronization Network (GDSN) Where It's Supported  

 is a global network that facilitates the exchange of standardized product data (e.g., weight, dimensions, GTIN, description) between trading partners, including suppliers and retailers. Built and governed by GS1 (the same organization behind GTINs), you can think of GDSN as the plumbing that allows this standardized product data to move throughout the supply chain.  

Item data issues can show up as downstream problems like chargebacks, shipping errors, and returns. Take the time to trace problems back to their source to avoid repeat issues.  

Does every retailer require a GS1 GTIN?  

Nearly all big box retailers require a GS1-registered GTIN before an item can be set up or ordered. GTINs are crucial for maintaining product consistency across ordering, receiving, and point of sale.  

What's the difference between a retailer portal and GDSN?  

, is where item data is entered or reviewed for that specific retailer. GDSN is a GS1-run network that lets a supplier publish item data once and have it sync automatically with every connected retailer. 

 is an item data content management solution that works alongside GDSN-certified data to centralize, validate, and distribute product data directly to a supplier’s trading partners in a format that fits the retailers’ unique requirements. 

Not ready to talk about a solution yet? 

has more guides for suppliers getting started with big box retailers

Pallet, Packaging, and Labeling Standards for Industrial Goods 

A brake component, fastener, or hand tool can leave the same warehouse on three different shipping lanes. A pallet headed to a retail or maintenance, repair, and operations (MRO) distributor may need a barcode and tracking number that match the shipment data sent ahead of the load. A pallet going to an automotive original equipment manufacturer (OEM) or Tier 1 plant may need an 

 label format that matches the customer’s part-numbering and receiving requirements. If the shipment crosses a border on a wood pallet, the packaging must also meet applicable treatment and marking requirements. 

The product doesn’t change, but the requirements do. For industrial and automotive suppliers, packaging and labeling requirements depend on where the shipment is going, who will receive it, and, for international shipments, what materials are used to package it.  

Three requirements commonly come into play for industrial and automotive suppliers: 

The same stock-keeping unit (SKU) can therefore require different labeling or packaging treatment during the same week, depending on the customer and destination. 

The requirements vary by shipping lane, but the operational goal remains the same: 

keep the physical shipment and the data describing it aligned. 

Retail and MRO distributor warehouses commonly use GS1-128 barcode labeling to identify shipping units. Each pallet or case may carry a tracking number called an 

. The SSCC is an 18-digit identifier built from a company prefix, a serial reference, and a check digit. 

The SSCC needs to connect to the shipment information sent to the receiving customer in advance. That information is often provided through an advance ship notice (ASN). When the physical label and electronic shipment data don’t agree, the receiving process can be interrupted even when the product itself arrived in good condition. 

Labeling is one part of a distributor’s packaging requirements. Supplier guides can also specify pallet dimensions, maximum load weights, carton marking requirements, and other packaging details. 

Those requirements vary by distributor and can change over time. Suppliers building a specific shipping lane should double-check the current requirements in that customer’s supplier guide rather than relying on a general packaging summary. 

AIAG B-10 Automotive Label Requirements 

Automotive supply chains use a different labeling framework. 

 provides a standard for labels used on unit loads and transport packages moving between automotive trading partners. Individual OEMs and Tier suppliers can then add their own requirements through supplier manuals. 

An automotive supplier therefore needs to account for customer-specific labeling requirements when preparing a shipment. The underlying shipment information may be the same as information used for a retail order, while the required label format, data fields, and customer instructions can differ. 

Master, Container, and Mixed-Load Labels 

A published automotive supplier manual illustrates how these requirements can work in practice. 

, which is based on AIAG B-10, requires a Master Label on pallets containing identical parts. Two identical copies attach to adjacent sides of the pallet. The Master Label does not replace the individual container labels on the boxes underneath. 

Mixed-load pallets containing more than one part number have their own labeling requirements. 

For suppliers serving multiple customer types, the practical challenge is making sure the correct customer-specific label is generated from accurate shipment information. The same underlying data can support different physical labels across different shipping lanes. 

An export order can introduce a separate requirement that focuses on packaging material rather than barcode labeling. 

Articles

Curated articles written by supply chain experts to help suppliers win at retail.

Prepping for Walmart Audits

Overview

Articles