Team high-five in a meeting room

Case studies

When fragmented commerce workflows become one operating system

The outcomes below are composites and illustrative scenarios based on patterns from real evaluations, pilots, and production rollouts—names, labels, and percentages are anonymized or rounded. They are meant for planning conversations, not as guarantees for your business.

For board or diligence use, we provide deeper packs under NDA where customers permit attribution.

At a glance

Themes we see across winning deployments

Fewer exception loops

One queue, clear owners, SLA by channel.

Faster trust between teams

Ops, finance, and growth align on one numbers spine.

Risk before shipment

Explainable signals instead of post-mortem blame.

Cleaner close

Reconciliation becomes exception-based, not total reconstruction.

Fashion & lifestyle · D2C + marketplaces

Northline Atelier

A premium D2C brand drowning in marketplace exceptions and payment-on-delivery leakage unified OMS, risk scoring, and growth guardrails—cutting RTO and shortening the weekly margin review.

India · National fulfillment ~₹180 Cr annual digital GMV · 120-person ops & CX org

Situation & challenges

Orders lived in five consoles (two marketplaces, D2C stack, WMS export, finance spreadsheet). Ops “swivel-chaired” to decide cancellations and address fixes. RTO hovered near 18% on high-ticket categories; finance could not reconcile contribution until mid-week.

Growth ran promos without inventory buffers tied to marketplace SLAs—twice in six months, hero SKUs oversold during a livestream, damaging seller health and CX.

OmniBrain pilot was politically sensitive: leadership needed explainability, not a “black box” block list.

What we implemented

  1. Phase 1 (8 weeks): Central OMS with two marketplaces + D2C; exception queue with reason codes and SLA view by channel. Finance received daily settlement summary tied to order state.
  2. Phase 2: OmniBrain RTO risk in shadow mode for 4 weeks, then gated auto-flag for outbound review on top-decile risk only. All scores carried top driver fields for Ops and Compliance sign-off.
  3. Phase 3: Ads & growth module linked spend to ATP and margin floors—promo calendar required buffer confirmation before go-live.

Adjacent systems

Custom storefront, Delhivery + marketplace logistics, Tally + FP&A models, Meta / Google ads.

Illustrative outcomes

Directional indicators only; your results depend on data quality, change management, and scope.

Metric Before After Notes
RTO rate (weighted) 18% 11% Measured on same category mix; excludes one discontinued high-return line.
Manual exception touches / 1k orders 214 126 After queue standardization and risk pre-sort.
Weekly margin review prep ~11 hrs finance + ops ~4 hrs Single workspace; fewer reconciling spreadsheets.
Oversell incidents (promo windows) 2 severe in 6 mo 0 in following 2 quarters With ATP-linked guardrails.

“OmniBrain flags risky cohorts before dispatch and we stopped arguing about which spreadsheet had the “real” margin. The ops and finance meeting became a decision meeting.”

— VP Operations, Northline Atelier (composite)

Cloud kitchen · Multi-brand · Aggregators

Kitchen Collective

Aggregator reconciliation and outlet variance consumed finance every week; Food OS and payout lineage moved the org to exception-based close.

Metro clusters · 14 outlets ~45k platform orders / week at peak

Situation & challenges

Each outlet manager maintained partial shadow sheets for Swiggy/Zomato adjustments; chargebacks surfaced two weeks late in lump CSVs.

Kitchen display and modifier errors spiked cancellation rates during dinner rush; HQ lacked a single ticket timeline across brands.

Expansion to two new cities duplicated onboarding pain—no standard playbook for menu syndication and tax mapping.

What we implemented

  1. Food OS rollout: unified KDS routing by station, centralized menu versions with platform-specific visibility rules.
  2. Settlement ingestion: nightly match of platform statements to order IDs; variance queue owned by finance with line-level drill-down.
  3. HRMS-lite for outlet staffing and overtime visibility tied to peak SLAs (optional module path in same contract).

Adjacent systems

Aggregator APIs + manual backup files, local payroll partner, QuickBooks regional entity.

Illustrative outcomes

Directional indicators only; your results depend on data quality, change management, and scope.

Metric Before After Notes
Reconciliation cycle time 4–6 days post statement < 36 hrs exception-only Team sizes unchanged first 90 days.
Unexplained payout variance (monthly) ~2.1% of GMV flagged late 0.4% caught in-window Residual tied to known platform delays.
Order cancellation (kitchen error) 8.2% 5.1% Attributed to KDS clarity + modifier defaults.

“We went from spreadsheet-heavy close cycles to exception-based review. Finance finally explains variances with ticket IDs, not theories.”

— Head of Finance, Kitchen Collective (composite)

Specialty retail · 35 stores + regional DC

Urban Cart Co.

Store inventory blind spots and transfer chaos resolved with Retail OS on Support Master’s OMS spine—fewer stockouts on hero SKUs and calmer planning cycles.

National · Tier 1–2 cities Omni revenue mix · ~220 FTE in stores

Situation & challenges

BOPIS and ship-from-store ran on store managers’ initiative; ATP in ecommerce never matched backroom counts until end-of-day batch.

Transfers between stores were often “known informally”; HQ planning used DC snapshots that lagged floor reality by 2–3 days.

Peak seasons produced angry regional chats when same SKU showed “available” online but not on shelf.

What we implemented

  1. Retail OS + OMS: node-level on-hand, reservations, and channel eligibility per store profile.
  2. Standard transfer workflow with expected availability dates; receiving closed loop updated ATP for web same-hour where network allowed.
  3. Associate training on exception codes; regional dashboards for fill rate and BOPIS SLA.

Adjacent systems

POS bridge, SAP retail posting extracts, Shiprocket for SFS.

Illustrative outcomes

Directional indicators only; your results depend on data quality, change management, and scope.

Metric Before After Notes
Fill rate (A-list SKUs, omnichannel) 91% 96% Rolling 90-day post cutover.
Customer complaints: “site said in stock” Top 3 driver Dropped out of top 10 Per VOC categorization.
Planning cycle prep 3 days 1 day Shared ledger reduced reconciliation.

“Store teams and central ops finally see the same stock truth. Planning stopped being a negotiation about whose export was right.”

— Director of Retail Operations, Urban Cart Co. (composite)

Marketplace-first · High SKU count · 3P logistics

Atlas Home Goods

A lean team scaled SKU breadth without proportional headcount by automating exception triage and surfacing settlement-aware margin daily.

Multi-warehouse · PAN India ~8 Lakh annual marketplace units

Situation & challenges

SKU count crossed 4k; listing errors and fee changes created silent margin erosion on long-tail items.

Return reasons were inconsistently coded—demand planning and AI experiments lacked trustworthy labels.

Working capital swung wildly with payout timing; leadership had no forward view tied to actual remittance calendars.

What we implemented

  1. OMS: normalized catalog keys across two marketplaces; fee schedule versioning with effective dates.
  2. Structured return reason enforcement at QC; weekly data-quality report to category owners.
  3. OmniCapital lite: obligation calendar vs expected settlement inflows for treasury (no lending product—visibility only).

Adjacent systems

Marketplace seller APIs, 3PL webhooks, Zoho Books.

Illustrative outcomes

Directional indicators only; your results depend on data quality, change management, and scope.

Metric Before After Notes
Ops FTE per 100k units 12.4 8.9 After 9 months; hiring freeze period.
Margin surprise incidents (fee/promo) ~6 / quarter 1–2 / quarter Caught in alerting vs month-end.
Label quality (returns) 61% coded 89% Required for planning models.

“We stopped discovering margin leaks in the third week of the month. The calendar view alone changed how we talk to our lenders.”

— Co-founder, Atlas Home Goods (composite)

Growth agency · 12 retained commerce brands

Agency One Performance

An agency standardized client reporting and experiment readouts on Support Master read-only overlays—reducing bespoke sheets and client churn on “trust” issues.

Remote-first · client HQs in India/UAE ~₹450 Cr combined managed ad spend / year

Situation & challenges

Each account team built custom Looker + sheet stacks; client finance questioned ROAS that ignored returns and fees.

Experiment holdouts were documented inconsistently—hard to prove incrementality in QBRs.

When a client hit inventory walls mid-campaign, blame bounced between media and ops.

What we implemented

  1. Workspace templates per client: OMS read connectors or weekly file drops where API not allowed.
  2. Growth module: shared guardrail language (margin floor, stock-linked pacing) in client kickoff checklist.
  3. Quarterly “trust review” pack exported from same numbers ops used—single narrative for CMO and CFO.

Adjacent systems

Per-client ad accounts, mixed OMS maturity; some clients on Support Master core, others file-based.

Illustrative outcomes

Directional indicators only; your results depend on data quality, change management, and scope.

Metric Before After Notes
Client QBR prep hours / account ~14 ~6 Median across 8 flagship accounts.
Renewal disputes tied to metrics 3 active 0 Following two renewal cycles.
Campaigns paused for stock (proactive) Rare Standard playbook Fewer emergency calls.

“We sell performance, but we were drowning in reconciliation theater. Now the story matches the ops data—or we know exactly where it diverges.”

— Managing Partner, Agency One Performance (composite)

Methodology

How we talk about outcomes internally

Why composites instead of only named logos?

Many enterprises restrict public attribution. Composites let us teach patterns without exposing confidential operating data. Named references are available under NDA when customers allow.

How should we treat the percentages?

They illustrate directional change after structured adoption—not statistically audited guarantees. We encourage pairing any business case with your own baseline and pilot design.

What if our stack differs from the “Adjacent systems” line?

Integration patterns are adaptable; the case narrative highlights problems solved, not a requirement to use the same vendors.

Map these patterns to your P&L and operating plan

Share your channels, exception volume, and close process—we will recommend which narrative is closest and what a pilot should measure.