# Inventory discrepancy referral brief template | SourceX

Canonical: https://refer.sourcex.si/resources/inventory-discrepancy-investigations-referral-brief-template
Last updated: 2026-10-27

A company introduction about stock count variances is a one-screen note the warehouse director can check and forward unchanged. It states headcount and locations, the business task, record classes, systems, years of history per location, rough volumes, the open question about how write-ups link to approved corrections, any access deadline, a note on client-owned goods, and who can authorize. It never contains count sheets, tickets, photos, staff names or exports.

This template belongs to the [inventory discrepancy guide](/guides/workflow-inventory-discrepancy-investigations). Complete it after a single conversation, and label anything unconfirmed as an estimate or "unknown".

## The nine fields to fill

Paste the fields into an email or the [client opportunity brief generator](/tools/client-opportunity-brief-generator). Keep each entry to one line.

| Field | What to write | Who usually knows |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Company | Distributor, manufacturer or logistics provider; full-time headcount at peak; country; number of buildings | Director of operations |
| 2. Business task | The variance work and who approves corrections, in one sentence | Director of operations |
| 3. Record classes | Counts and recounts, stock movement history, correction reason codes and approvers, written investigations | Inventory control lead |
| 4. Systems | Warehouse management system by type, where write-ups live, any spreadsheets, the ERP | System administrator |
| 5. History per location | The first year each record class can be followed, building by building | Director of operations |
| 6. Volumes | Corrections a year by reason code, number of write-ups, as ranges | Correction report; project summary |
| 7. Open question | The link you do not yet know holds | Your notes |
| 8. Ownership and deadline | Any client-owned goods; any documented upgrade, shutdown or read-only date | Contracts summary; project plan |
| 9. Sponsor and signer | Who convenes, who can authorize | The [who-can-say-yes tree](/questions/who-can-license-inventory-discrepancy-investigations-records) |

End every brief with the same line: what is deliberately left out.

## Completed example: a three-building food distributor (Illustrative)

Every value below describes a fictional company. It is **Illustrative**, not a real business, case or deal.

| Field | Example entry |
|---|---|
| 1. Company | Food-service distributor, about 480 full-time staff at peak, United States, three distribution centers |
| 2. Business task | Investigating count variances above a value threshold; corrections approved by the inventory manager |
| 3. Record classes | Count and recount results, stock movement history, correction reason codes with approver, written investigations with comments |
| 4. Systems | One warehouse management system; Jira for write-ups since 2021; a shared spreadsheet before that |
| 5. History per location | About nine years of counts at all three buildings; write-ups since 2019 |
| 6. Volumes | Corrections in the thousands a year; write-ups in the low thousands, per the director's estimate |
| 7. Open question | Do corrections made before 2021 point to the spreadsheet row that explains them? |
| 8. Ownership and deadline | All goods company-owned; system upgrade planned next year, read-only date for the old version not yet set |
| 9. Sponsor and signer | Director of distribution sponsors; the CEO authorizes, advised by the COO, the controller and counsel |
| Left out | No count sheets, write-ups, photos, staff names, exports or logins |

The volumes are ranges, and the open question names one specific link and one specific year. Field 8 says the goods are company-owned, which removes one rights question; SourceX's rights review covers the rest, including whether any records were licensed for AI training before.

## How to fill the harder fields

**History per location (field 5).** Ask in which year each building started writing up its variance work rather than only approving corrections. A building that changed tools may hold two separate runs of history, and the earlier one is easy to forget.

**Volumes (field 6).** A correction report grouped by reason code, or a project summary screen, yields a range without anyone reading an entry. Ranges also help planning later: Atlassian notes that Jira Cloud's CSV export handles up to 10,000 work items per run, splitting larger sets into batches.

**Open question (field 7).** Choose the link that decides whether a correction can be traced back to the reasoning behind it. When buildings merge, that is usually the location code: whether the old code survives beside the new one is a genuine unknown worth naming. The [system map](/guides/inventory-discrepancy-investigations-records-across-systems) lists each link.

**Ownership (field 8).** A logistics provider storing goods for clients generally does not own client item and balance data, while its own process notes may be licensable where contracts allow. The [3PL data ownership answer](/questions/3pl-data-ownership) explains the usual split.

## What the director should remove before forwarding

| If the draft contains | Replace it with |
|---|---|
| A counter's or analyst's name | The role, such as "inventory control analyst" |
| A client's name | "Some goods held for clients" |
| An item number, location code or quantity from a real case | The record class and a yearly count |
| A screenshot of any system | The system type |
| A guess at value | Nothing |

Names and user IDs matter: under the EU General Data Protection Regulation, personal data is any information relating to an identified or identifiable person, including by name or identification number. For the covering note, the [warm introduction brief](/resources/a-warm-introduction-brief-for-a-business-owner) helps with tone and disclosure of your referral relationship, and the [cycle count variance page](/data-types/cycle-count-variance-investigation) gives background the CEO may want.

## Check eligibility before you send

For SourceX, an introduced company needs 50+ full-time employees at peak (contractors excluded), a documented operating history, rights to license and an authorized contact. Companies in the U.S., Canada and the EU qualify, as do companies in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, India, Singapore, South Africa, Latin America, the UAE and Saudi Arabia when at least 90% of the data is in English. Partners sign the Channel Partner Agreement first, and the first valid introduction within the 90-day window is credited when the company submits a verified application. Rights, buyer interest and any offer stay unknown until SourceX reviews the opportunity.

## Next step

> **Refer a company. Earn up to $100,000.** Default reward: 25% of Actual Supplier Payout, capped at $100,000 cumulatively per referred company. Eligibility and payment conditions apply, and a signed Schedule A or addendum can differ. A lead, meeting or signature alone does not trigger payment.

Once all nine fields are filled or marked unknown and the director has approved the wording, [register as a partner](/register), confirm the company on [who qualifies](/who-qualifies) and read the [program terms](/terms) before you send the brief.

## What makes an inventory discrepancy introduction useful?

A useful introduction answers what a variance log cannot say about itself: whose people counted the stock and wrote each explanation, whether the history survives system changes, which entries describe other parties' goods or paper, and whether the CEO wants the conversation. Holding years of counts and adjustments is a reason to talk, not evidence of rights, fit or demand. The eleven questions below come from one call with the company's own staff, fill the nine fields of the brief above and need no file.

## Why a warehouse keeps a discrepancy log at all

A warehouse system holds a book quantity for every item in every location. People then count the shelf. When the two disagree, someone recounts, looks for the cause, posts an adjustment so the books match the shelf and, in a well-run building, writes down why. The log is the trail those corrections leave.

Counting and correcting is routine, not a habit of tidy companies. For a US business that keeps book inventories, the federal tax regulations on inventory valuation say "the balances shown by such book inventories should be verified by physical inventories at reasonable intervals and adjusted to conform therewith." Audits of public companies add an observer: the PCAOB's inventory standard treats observing the count as a generally accepted procedure and says the auditor must always make or watch some counts, because testing the records alone is not enough.

Software turns the explanation into a field. In Microsoft's Dynamics 365 Supply Chain Management, for example, counting reason codes exist to analyze counting results and discrepancies, and a warehouse can make them mandatory so that a counting journal cannot be closed without one. SourceX's own notes on this workflow name three outputs (discrepancy reports, investigation notes and adjustments) and list supplier pricing, personal contact details and account or payment numbers as removed before anything is shared. The [supplier-side workflow page](https://sourcex.si/workflows/inventory-discrepancy-resolution) covers the technical side; this page stays on what a partner asks.

What no screen shows is whose count it was. A results file can come from the company's employees, an agency's temps, an outside inventory firm or a supplier's rep refilling bins the supplier manages, and the entries look identical.

## Eleven questions that test an inventory history on the first call

Each question fills a numbered field of the brief above. Questions 1 to 4 test whether the history holds together over time, 5 to 9 find out who produced each layer, and 10 and 11 settle permission. Write down each answer as given, and write "unknown" where nobody knows. The sample answers in quotation marks are Illustrative.

| # | Ask | Fills field | Answer worth writing down | Answer that changes the brief |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Which system recorded counts and adjustments in each year, and when did that change? | 4, 5 | "ERP counting journals from 2012, the current WMS since 2018" | The old system was switched off without migration: the history starts at the cutover unless an archive survives |
| 2 | Has the list of adjustment reason codes changed, and is the old list still on file? | 3, 7 | "Codes rewritten in 2020; the earlier list is in the inventory manual" | Nobody can say what the old codes meant: that becomes the open question in field 7 |
| 3 | Has the variance size that triggers a recount or an investigation moved over the years? | 2, 6 | "Raised from 2% to 5% of line value in 2022" | Volumes before and after the change are not comparable: give both ranges and the date |
| 4 | Were explanations typed into the system, kept in a tracker, written on paper or not written at all? | 3, 4 | "Free-text notes in the WMS since 2016, binders before that" | Only a code and a number survive: say so plainly, since an accurate thin record beats an inflated one |
| 5 | Who did the counting: employees, agency temps or an outside inventory firm? | 1, 8 | "Our own counters for cycle counts; an outside firm for the year-end count" | Mark the outside firm's files as another party's layer; agency temps never add to full-time headcount |
| 6 | When auditors observed a count, did their test counts go on the company's tags or into their own papers? | 3, 8 | "The auditors keep their own sheets; our tags carry our counters' figures" | Auditor notes sit inside investigation files: name them as the audit firm's material |
| 7 | Who writes the reason for a variance, and who approves the adjustment at each size? | 2, 3 | "Analysts write it; the inventory manager approves above a value limit, the controller above a higher one" | A supplier's rep or a client's staff writes some explanations: those entries move to field 8 |
| 8 | Does any stock in the buildings belong to someone else, such as client goods, consignment racks or vendor-managed bins? | 8 | "Two manufacturers' consignment racks in one building" | Counts of goods the company does not own go to rights review as their own layer |
| 9 | Do investigation files carry other parties' paper, such as carrier delivery receipts, claim forms or supplier credit notes? | 3, 8 | "Shortage files attach carrier receipts and supplier credits" | Describe them as attachments from others, not as the company's writing |
| 10 | Has any of this been licensed for AI training, and has the company ever applied to, written to or held an account with SourceX? | 8, covering note | "No to both, according to the CEO" | An earlier AI-training license takes those records out; earlier SourceX contact makes the company a duplicate |
| 11 | Does the CEO know about this conversation, and want it? | 9 | "Yes; the operations director will set up the call" | Not yet: stop, and let the director raise it with the CEO |

**How to read the answers.** Questions 1 to 4 decide how many years the brief can honestly claim. Questions 5 to 9 decide which layers it calls the company's own work and which it names as someone else's. Questions 10 and 11 decide whether a brief goes out at all. A brief that flags three outside layers and admits one gap gives SourceX's review more to work with than a confident one that never mentions the outside counters.

Question 5 matters more than it looks. Outside counting is a recognized arrangement: the PCAOB's auditing interpretations address it directly, saying that a count by an outside inventory firm of nonaccountants is not, by itself, a substitute for the auditor's own observation. Ask about it every time, because the results file will not say who produced it.

## Who answers which question, and who decides

The inventory control lead can usually answer questions 1 to 4 from memory or a settings screen. The operations or distribution director answers 5 to 9, because agreements with counting firms, suppliers and storage clients pass through that office. Questions 10 and 11 belong to the CEO, who under the program authorizes a licensing discussion and signs for the company. The controller, counsel and the director can prepare those answers; none of them is the yes.

Write down the legal entity that employs the counters and holds the records, not only the brand on the building. Where counters work for one company in a group and the warehouses sit in another, note both; for the reward cap, a parent and its subsidiaries are treated as a single company.

## Three stockrooms put through the questions (Illustrative)

Illustrative: generic companies and invented facts. Nothing here implies acceptance, an offer or a payout.

**Own staff, own stock, own words.** A 260-person maker of hydraulic fittings counts bar stock and finished parts with its own employees. Two inventory analysts have typed variance notes into the ERP since 2015, and the controller approves adjustments above a value limit. The external auditors observe the year-end count and keep their test counts in their own working papers. The brief is short: one system, one gap (paper notes before 2015, still in binders), all goods company-owned, and a CEO who wants the call. Left to SourceX: its rights check and whether a current program wants this kind of record.

**Outside counters and other people's paper.** A 340-person building-supply distributor runs cycle counts with its own staff, but an outside inventory firm takes the annual wall-to-wall count on its own handhelds and sends back a results file. A fastener supplier's rep counts and refills vendor-managed bins at all five branches. Shortage investigations attach carrier delivery receipts and supplier credit notes. The brief describes the staff-written investigations since 2017 as the company's work and names three other layers: the outside firm's count files, the rep's bin counts and the attached carrier and supplier paper. Nobody contacts the counting firm or the supplier before the call. Field 1 counts only the distributor's own full-time employees; the seasonal temps it hires each spring are left out.

**Whose count is it?** A 210-person electrical wholesaler holds consignment racks for three manufacturers in its two buildings. Under its supply agreements each manufacturer keeps title until the wholesaler sells the goods, the wholesaler's staff count everything on one schedule, and the wholesaler sends each manufacturer a monthly count report. Part of its own count history is therefore also reporting it owes those manufacturers. The CEO wants the conversation, and the operations director can describe the wholesaler's own stock history plainly. For the consignment racks, the brief reads "counts of consigned stock; supply agreements not yet read" and claims nothing more. Whether those agreements limit what the wholesaler may do with its own counts is for counsel and SourceX's rights review, not the partner.

## Keeping the first call free of files

Specialist advisors often sit closest to this data: the consultant who configured the WMS, the firm that designs the count program, the interim inventory manager. That access was granted for the engagement. Do not run a variance report, open the adjustment history or repeat a figure you saw while working. Ask the client's staff for ranges instead, so every number in the brief comes from the company, offered with its consent. SourceX starts the same way: in its first step the company lists its systems and years of history, SourceX completes the inventory with it and runs its rights check, and no records change hands.

Ask the company to leave old investigation notes exactly as they are. sourcex.si has each supplier confirm that its data was not created or altered with AI for the sale, so a pre-call cleanup of old write-ups would work against the company.

## What eleven answers still leave open

- **Demand and value.** The questions describe a history and measure nothing about its worth. SourceX checks relevance to its current data needs in review and has published no acceptance figures for this record type, so this page claims none.
- **Agreements nobody has read.** Consignment, vendor-managed and storage agreements can limit what a company does with counts of other parties' goods. The questions find those layers; they do not interpret the contracts. The [3PL ownership answer](/questions/3pl-data-ownership) covers the storage-client case.
- **One person, several roles.** In a single-building company one manager may count, explain and approve. Record each role anyway.
- **Method and testing.** The eleven questions rest on the referral terms in their 2026-10-22.2 version, the who-qualifies screening profile, sourcex.si's process and workflow pages, the federal inventory valuation rule, two PCAOB inventory texts and Microsoft's counting documentation, each read again on 2026-10-27. To test the questions, keep each introduction's eleven answers beside what review later decided about the flagged layers; those figures are not yet published.

## Credit and reward before the brief goes out

Sign the SourceX Channel Partner Agreement before submitting. Credit rests on paper, and section 2 says so: "Attribution is decided from dated records, including written introduction evidence, existing applications and preexisting relationships; an earlier link click alone does not decide credit." Question 10 asks about earlier contact because, under section 3, "a company it already knew is not a new company and is not credited." If records are licensed and every payment condition is met, SourceX funds the reward itself, apart from whatever it pays the company.

> **Refer a company. Earn up to $100,000.** Default reward: 25% of Actual Supplier Payout, capped at $100,000 cumulatively per referred company. Eligibility and payment conditions apply, and a signed Schedule A or addendum can differ. A lead, meeting or signature alone does not trigger payment.

When the eleven answers sit in the nine fields and the CEO has asked for the call, [register for a partner link](/register), test the company against [who qualifies](/who-qualifies) and read the [program terms](/terms) before the brief leaves your outbox.

Related: [what to inventory before a warehouse consolidation](/guides/workflow-inventory-discrepancy-investigations), the [system map and join keys](/guides/inventory-discrepancy-investigations-records-across-systems), [the two-bin hard case](/guides/inventory-discrepancy-investigations-exception-examples), [who can say yes to stock variance records](/questions/who-can-license-inventory-discrepancy-investigations-records), [the peak headcount decision tree](/resources/peak-headcount-data-referral-eligibility), [WMS rollout records for advisors](/guides/moment-wms-rollout-warehouse-automation-advisors) and the [guides library](/guides).

## Sources

- https://support.atlassian.com/jira/kb/export-over-10-000-work-items-in-jira-cloud/
- https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj/eng
- https://refer.sourcex.si/terms
- https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dynamics365/supply-chain/warehousing/reason-codes-for-counting-journals
- https://pcaobus.org/oversight/standards/auditing-interpretations/details/AI23
- https://pcaobus.org/oversight/standards/auditing-standards/details/AS2510
- https://refer.sourcex.si/who-qualifies
- https://sourcex.si/how-it-works
- https://sourcex.si/workflows/inventory-discrepancy-resolution
- https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-26/chapter-I/subchapter-A/part-1/subject-group-ECFRb3578fa14bdb9ea/section-1.471-2