Cited by 11Advanced Manufacturing and Logistics OptimizationSupply Chain and Inventory ManagementBusiness Logistics and Inventory Control

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 33 of the 33 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The impacts of inventory record inaccuracy and cycle counting on distribution center performance

Open access

Abstract

Paper aims The objectives of this paper are: (i) to analyze the impacts of Inventory Record Inaccuracy (IRI) on picking productivity (PP), lost sales (LS), and warehouse capacity utilization (WCU) for different warehouses; (ii) verify if the Cycle Counting (CC) implementation is sufficient to reduce IRI and (iii) the number of CC operators to maintain warehouse performance. Originality A causal loop diagram in detail of the IRI and CC variable's effects in receiving and picking processes is developed. IRI is separated into ghost and hidden inventory to represent the actual effects in WCU, LS, and PP. Research method A dynamic system model is built. Simulations are performed for the five categories of warehouse performance with different numbers of CC operators. Main findings IRI impacts in all warehouses simulated, so managers should monitor IRI besides employee productivity. CC can reduce IRI in all types of warehouses. The number of CC operators to be implemented is different for each warehouse. Implications for theory and practice Several implications for theory and practice are discussed. For example, IRI impacts more ADV and BIC warehouses without CC implementation. In TYP, ADV, and BIC warehouses CC is sufficient to reduce IRI. In MO and DIS warehouses, other improvements are needed.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1590/0103-6513.20220077

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Rajasekar D., 2020, Annual physical inventory stock taking lead time reduction a case study, International Journal of Management IT & Engineering, 10, 70

Metadata

Authors
Destro, I. R., Staudt, F. H., Somensi, K., & Taboada, C.
Affiliations
  • Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (BR)
  • Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Brasil
Venue
Production
Published
2023
Volume
33
ISSN
  • 0103-6513 (ISSN-L)
  • 1980-5411
OpenAlex
W4365804136
Cited by
11
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 1
FWCI
1.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Production (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering › Advanced Manufacturing and Logistics Optimization
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Supply Chain and Inventory Management
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Business Logistics and Inventory Control
Keywords
cycle counting, lost sales, warehouse performance, dynamic system model, causal loop diagrams

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review