Your availabile-to-promise isn't ATP. Here's what that's actually costing you.
Most order management systems (OMS) calculate available-to-sell (ATS) and call it available-to-promise (ATP). The difference shows up the moment a promise breaks.
The gap hiding in your availability number
Ask a supply chain executive whether their organization has available-to-promise (ATP), and most will say yes without hesitation. Ask whether their last major fulfillment failure traced back to a bad availability number, and the room tends to go quiet.
That's because most companies aren't running ATP. They're running available-to-sell (ATS): on-hand inventory minus committed orders. Simple math. ATP asks a harder question: can we deliver this, from this location, by this date, given labor, carrier capacity, allocation rules and everything else that has to go right?
Get that distinction wrong, and it doesn't show up as a data problem. It shows up as a cancellation, a delay or a customer who doesn't come back. And your organization can't afford any of these.
What you'll learn
Why ATS and ATP look identical on a dashboard and behave completely differently in practice
Where the invisible inventory in your supply chain actually lives, and why most systems can't see it
What real availability requires: quantity, location, date and constraints working together instead of in isolation
How to close the gap in a practical, phased sequence without a rip-and-replace overhaul
Who it's for
Built for you if you're a supply chain execution, fulfillment or operations leader who's tired of finding out your availability number was wrong after the promise already broke.
