Demand Plan Reconciler
Says which forecast has been right before
The three plans differ by 20.7% in total, and 9 product-months disagree by 20% or more.
15 product-months. Sales plans 37,500 units, operations 30,670 and finance 30,960; the average is 33,043.
7,480 units separate the highest from the lowest forecast across all rows, 5,680 of them in the flagged rows.
Sales is the highest forecast in 9 of 9 flagged rows: its plan runs above the others in this data.
Which forecast is right is not in the data; no actuals are used, only how far the three disagree.
Units forecast by function
Disagreement by product (units)
- New mini range (3)2,350
- New eco line (3)1,880
- Core subscription box (0)1,500
- Premium bundle (3)1,450
- Gift card pack (0)300
Biggest disagreements
| Product | Month | Sales | Operations | Finance | Gap | Spread |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| New mini range | Mar | 2,000 | 800 | 1,000 | 1,200 | 94.7% |
| New eco line | Mar | 1,500 | 520 | 640 | 980 | 110.5% |
| New mini range | Feb | 1,400 | 650 | 800 | 750 | 78.9% |
| Premium bundle | Mar | 2,100 | 1,600 | 1,500 | 600 | 34.6% |
| New eco line | Feb | 1,000 | 400 | 520 | 600 | 93.8% |
| Premium bundle | Feb | 1,900 | 1,550 | 1,450 | 450 | 27.6% |
| Premium bundle | Jan | 1,800 | 1,500 | 1,400 | 400 | 25.5% |
| New mini range | Jan | 900 | 500 | 600 | 400 | 60% |
| New eco line | Jan | 600 | 300 | 450 | 300 | 66.7% |
What to do this week
- Agree one number for New mini range: its forecasts differ by 2,350 units across the quarter.
- Ask Sales to show the assumptions behind its high forecasts, starting with New mini range.
- Hold the supply decision for New mini range, New eco line, Premium bundle until the three plans are within 20%.
Do
- Meet on the flagged rows only and leave the agreed ones alone.
Don't
- Don't average the three to settle it: the average hides which assumption is wrong.
How to improve
- Add last quarter's actuals so the next report can say which function forecasts best.
- Add each plan's key assumption (price, promotion, launch date) so gaps can be traced to a cause.
Demo
Overview
Sales forecasts to a target. Operations plans to what it can build. Finance budgets to what it promised the board. Three numbers for the same quarter, and the organisation resolves it by having each department act on its own.
The consequences land elsewhere. Operations builds to the conservative number and cannot supply when sales delivers, or builds to the optimistic one and the difference sits in a warehouse for a year. Either way the cost appears in a different department from the forecast that caused it, which is exactly why nobody fixes it.
The consensus meeting meant to resolve this resolves it by authority — the most senior or most confident person wins — rather than by evidence about who has been right before.
That evidence exists. Every forecast has a history against actuals, and it is usually biased in a consistent direction by a consistent amount, per product, per team. A forecast that has been 18% optimistic for eight quarters is not a forecast, it is a target with a known correction factor. Nobody applies the correction because nobody has measured it.
This agent measures it, shows where the plans diverge, and prices the consequence of each divergence in stockouts or excess. It sets no plan and commits no production — that is a decision with commercial context it cannot see.
Benefits
Consensus by evidence, not seniority
Which is the only way the meeting improves anything.
Bias corrected once it is measured
Usually the single biggest accuracy gain available.
The cost made visible
In the department that will actually pay it.
What it does
Measures each forecast's own bias
18% optimistic for eight quarters is not a forecast, it is a target with a known correction factor nobody applies.
Shows where the plans diverge
By product and period, rather than as one company-level gap that hides everything.
Prices the disagreement
What each divergence costs in stockouts or excess stock. The number that ends the meeting.
Names which forecast to trust where
Track record differs by product. One team is reliable on one line and not on another.
Finds forecasts that never move
A number repeated unchanged each cycle is a placeholder, not a plan, and it is treated as one.
Sets no plan
It has no route to a planning system and commits no production, purchase or capacity.
What this changes
What this changes about your week
- It takes over
- Reconciling sales, operations and finance forecasts against their own track records.
- Done today by
- A consensus meeting, resolved by whoever is most senior or most confident.
- How often
- Every planning cycle.
- Typical manual effort
- Bias has to be measured per source per product across many periods.
Why Operations in particular. A forecast that has been 18% optimistic for eight quarters is a target with a known correction factor, and nobody applies it because nobody has measured it. The cost lands in a different department from the forecast that caused it.
Runs unattended
Started by you or by an event, and it finishes on its own. Nothing waits for someone to be at a desk.
The same standard every time
The two-hundredth item is held to the bar the first one was. Consistency is the part people cannot sustain.
It cannot act on its own
Demand Plan Reconciler has no path to sending, spending or committing. That limit is why its output is safe to act on.
How it runs
This agent runs server-side through the PROMIVO runtime. Each run is logged step by step and every tool call is permission-checked before it executes.
- 1InputValidated against the agent input schema
- 2Modelclaude-opus-5 with automatic fallback
- 3Toolsextract_structured_data
- 4PermissionsRuns READ actions automatically; anything higher waits for approval
- 5OutputStructured result matching the output schema
- 6LoggingTokens, duration and every step recorded
Requirements
Integrations
No integrations required.
Before you start
- Forecasts by source, product and period
- Actuals for prior periods against each forecast
- Cost of a stockout and of holding excess, where you have them
- Requires the All-Access plan or higher
Use cases
Before the consensus meeting
Divergences, track records and the cost of each.
After a stockout or a write-off
Which forecast caused it, and whether the bias was known.
New product planning
Which forecasts have been reliable on comparable launches.
Annual planning
Bias-corrected baselines rather than last year plus a percentage.
Pricing
All-Access
Billed monthly through your PROMIVO subscription. Cancel at any time.
Runs consume your plan allowance for agent executions and tokens. See plan limits
FAQ
Does it produce its own forecast?
It produces a bias-corrected version of each existing forecast — the same forecast with its measured historical error applied — and labels it as exactly that. It does not invent a fourth number to argue with the other three.
Does it commit production or purchasing?
No. It has no route to a planning system. Committing capacity or stock is a decision with commercial context it cannot see.
Does it judge which team forecasts badly?
It reports measured bias per forecast and per product, as a property of the process rather than the people. A sales forecast is a target, and reporting it as biased is a description of what it is for.
Reviews
Reviews open once customers have run this agent.
Need this agent to work differently?
Tell us what to change and our team will scope a customised version for your business.
Customize this agent