ERPNext Agriculture Case Study: From Field Procurement to Finished Stock

Once it went into processing, the link to the source batch was lost, and nobody could say how much finished stock a given intake actually produced.

• Gate procurement was on paper, so rates and quantities were hard to reconcile.
• No batch trail from a farmer intake to finished stock.
• Processing yield was unknown, so losses hid in the gap.
• Quality issues could not be traced back to a source batch.

Quality checks sit at the points that matter.

• Farmer procurement captured against supplier and batch at the gate.
• Processing runs as manufacturing, so yield is measured, not guessed.
• Every finished lot traces back to its source intake.
• Quality checks flag issues before stock moves on.

We set up the processing steps with the plant team so yield reflects how they actually run, then went live before the peak season.

Go-live took ten weeks, timed ahead of the main intake.

Every finished lot traces back to a farmer intake, processing yield is finally a number, and quality issues can be tracked to their source.