ERP stands for enterprise resource planning. It brings functions such as purchasing, inventory, sales and finance into connected applications that share business information. In manufacturing, an ERP can also plan production and support work on the factory floor, depending on its modules and implementation.

MES stands for manufacturing execution system. MES software helps direct, monitor and record the work of making products, including the instructions people follow and the evidence collected during production. It often connects that activity with the ERP’s business records. SAP’s explanation of MES describes this manufacturing role.

If you are responsible for manufacturing systems, you may already have an ERP that records production orders while the floor still works from separate job sheets. Adding an MES is one possible response. First, establish which job your current setup cannot perform adequately. The ERP and MES labels overlap: some suites already include production execution and quality assessment, and a separate MES still needs an agreed connection to the rest of the business.

Where the other manufacturing labels fit

Material requirements planning, or MRP, addresses which materials are needed for planned production, in what quantities and when. Warehouse management systems, or WMS, support warehouse work such as receiving, storing and picking goods. A quality management system, or QMS, organises quality processes and their records. These responsibilities can sit within a suite or in separate applications.

One production order can involve all of them. The plan establishes the quantity to make and the materials required. The floor needs instructions to perform the work and a way to record what it consumed and produced. Quality assessment establishes whether that output meets the agreed requirements. The warehouse needs to know what it may use or dispatch. Our guide to what ERP software covers explains the broader business-system scope.

A plan for 200 units gives the floor a target. Establishing how many of the resulting units passed inspection requires evidence from the work that followed.

How 200 units produced becomes 180 available

Consider an illustrative work order for 200 units. Assume that quality acceptance releases output for dispatch and that there are no other availability restrictions or shipments during the example.

The floor reports 200 units produced. A specified quality check accepts 180 and places 20 on hold for investigation. Production has reached the planned quantity, but dispatch can use only the 180 accepted units.

Suppose the system sends dispatch an order-level “complete” flag when the floor reports its work. Dispatch now expects all 200 units. The problem is the meaning of that flag: it carries production progress into a decision about availability without carrying the quality result. Changing the produced quantity to 180 would make availability look right at the expense of the production record. The other 20 units were made and still need an outcome.

The process needs to retain 200 produced, 180 accepted and 20 held. It also needs to identify which output is held, with the relevant inspection record and reason, so the quality team can investigate it and the warehouse can distinguish it from released stock. Recording totals alone does not tell someone which goods to move.

Now suppose 12 of the held units pass rework and the required inspection. The authorised release adds those 12 to accepted output and removes them from the held quantity:

The rework record refers back to the held output. It does not add another 12 units to the original production total. Dispatch can now use 192 units under this example’s release rule, while eight remain held. The original production result remains true throughout; the inspection and release history explains why availability changed.

Find the missing responsibility

The same discrepancy can come from different missing capabilities. If the job sheet never prompts the quality check, examine how the operator receives instructions and records the result. If the check happens but its findings remain on paper, the missing job is capturing that evidence against the output it describes.

If the software already records 20 units as held but still permits all 200 to be dispatched, the release rule needs attention. The next step must use the quality decision when establishing what is available. A dashboard showing the hold can help someone notice the problem, but it leaves a person to compensate for a dispatch process that still accepts the wrong quantity.

There may also be a connection problem. The quality application can correctly show 180 accepted while the warehouse application receives only “200 produced”. Both records can accurately describe their own part of the process, yet the warehouse has been given the wrong fact for its decision. The connection needs to carry the released quantity and the identity of the affected output, then handle later releases such as the 12 reworked units. Its design must account for a failed or repeated update.

Capturing the inspection result and applying it to dispatch may require changes in different parts of the system. Identify the missing responsibility precisely enough to test whether your existing software can fulfil it.

Configure the suite or add an execution system?

Start with the suite you have. ERP products can cover this sequence: Microsoft’s Dynamics 365 Supply Chain Management, for example, documents production progress reporting, quality assessment that can update inventory status, and subsequent warehouse movement. The question is whether your selected modules and configuration support the process you need.

An existing execution feature may replace the separate job sheet. A configured quality process may supply the missing release decision. Where a standard process meets the requirement, adopting it can avoid the work of implementing another application and maintaining its connections.

A specialist MES warrants investigation when the missing responsibilities extend into detailed production execution or machine integration. Establish what the particular product supplies and what its implementation must add. If your operation has regulated or validated shop-floor requirements, ask for evidence against those specific requirements; the MES category alone does not establish compliance or validation.

Cloud describes how software is hosted and accessed. It does not establish whether the system distinguishes produced and released quantities. Likewise, “for small manufacturers” does not tell you whether its quality and warehouse processes fit yours. These labels can help narrow deployment or supplier requirements once the functional gap is understood.

Running the production handoff in Keel

Keel is an operations platform shaped around how your team works. For this handoff, a Keel implementation could guide people through recording completed production and give the quality team a working view of held output, with the inspection findings needed to resolve it. Your business defines the steps people follow and the checks required before the next team may use the result.

In our example, recording the successful rework would let an authorised person release 12 units while keeping the other eight held. The agreed release rule would govern which output becomes available to the warehouse. The person overseeing production could see the full quantity made and the work still awaiting a quality decision. Each team’s view would draw on that production and inspection history.

If your team changes who resolves a hold or which inspection evidence release requires, the working screens and rules can be revised together. The person handling the hold can be shown the findings they need, and the release step can require the evidence your business has agreed. This lets you improve how the team handles held output while keeping release dependent on the appropriate checks.

Keel leads the implementation and testing of the agreed process and connections to retained systems, then agrees handover with your team. That scope might leave production planning and inventory in your existing ERP while Keel runs the work between production completion and release. Our guide to what Keel supplies and what the implementation builds explains these responsibilities.

Use the held output to define the requirement

Take a production order with a quality hold through your current system. Can you retain the full produced quantity while showing the smaller released quantity? Who may release part of the hold, and what inspection evidence supports that action? Which record does the warehouse actually use when deciding what it can dispatch?

The answers should identify a particular missing instruction, evidence record, release rule or system connection. That gives you a requirement against which to assess configuration, an MES or a tailored implementation. To explore the latter, discuss your production handoff with Keel, including the evidence that makes output usable by the next team.