Explain what you solved and finish the Workshop
Return to the opening inventory question and summarize the first action and its evidence.
Question for this chapter
Why did the evidence put price review ahead of replenishment?
Return to the opening problem
At 9:00 a.m., inventory and competitor prices lived in separate tables, and it was unclear where to start among 13 widgets. Choosing only the largest number would mix replenishment and price signals.
This Workshop separated the signals, enriched the same product key with current price observations, and narrowed the relationship and dashboard evidence to one branch-product action.
Complete the solution path
| Opening problem | Applied solution | Visible evidence | What changed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Inventory and price lived in different tables. | Connected the same product with item_code. | 46,700 rows and 56 price observations | The tables have a comparable key. |
| Inventory rows could contain stale competitor prices. | Enriched competitor price with the update pipeline. | Competitor price changed in 46,444 rows. | The comparison uses the current source. |
| Ownership context for a product was scattered. | Expanded product into branch, region, and supplier relations. | 4 entity and 3 relation types | Follow-up context is available together. |
| Thirteen widgets made the first action unclear. | Read replenishment → price review → verification. | 0 stockout-risk rows, 36,805 price candidates | Price review comes before replenishment. |
| A price gap could be mistaken for an immediate price cut. | Preserved time, specification, promotion, and cost as conditions. | KRW 6,890 gap for the Suwon candidate | Decision and further verification remain separate. |
Complete the operations report
Restate this report in your own words:
The synthetic seed has zero stockout-risk flags, so it does not support immediate replenishment. Put Abib_Heartleaf_Spot_Pad_Calming_Touch at Suwon AK Town Central first on the price-review list. Its selling price of KRW 20,210 is KRW 6,890 above the competitor price of KRW 13,320, but verify observation time, product specification, promotion, and cost before changing the price.
The report separates observed fact, first action, and the condition that delays an irreversible action. If future data contains any stockout-risk row, the ordering may change.
What you accomplished
- Distinguished shared product keys from different observation units.
- Explained changed and preserved fields in one before-and-after row.
- Expanded a product candidate into branch, region, and supplier context.
- Read dashboard widgets as three groups of operational evidence.
- Reported the first candidate and conditions for further verification.
Completion check
- I can explain why
item_codeconnects the two tables. - I verified that 46,700 output rows represent price enrichment, not appended facts.
- I expanded product-to-branch, region, and supplier relationships.
- I treated zero stockout-risk rows and price candidates as different action signals.
- I can state the first candidate and the checks required before a price change.
Apply the pattern elsewhere
- Decide how replenishment and price review should be ordered when stockout risk is no longer zero.
- Define how old a competitor-price observation may be before it leaves the candidate set.
- Trace how one price change could affect several branches and suppliers.
Next learning
- Use the Analyst Path to present the same candidate table with other charts.
- Compare this flow with Choose a CNC inspection order from three HIGH alerts, where several signals become a maintenance priority.