Fraud Protection with the Controller
Inventory management or stock management is the ultimate controlling concept. It helps you to comply with planned recipes and shows you the differences between booked and unbooked consumption. Thus, consistently positively motivated, it helps you and your loyal employees to be successful together.
Guidelines for hazard assessment
Depending on the operating mode, it may be more or less useful to check exactly. If you rely solely on the loyalty of your employees, the structure of the point of sale and the type of items are further indicators of your risk of loss.
We are often asked how high the loss is in practice. To do this, we must first define the term: we call everything that is missing in goods a loss. Missing stock is the difference between the actual stock and the theoretical stock, which is determined on the basis of the cash postings.
If you have sold 1000 items but consumed 1150, then we speak of 15% loss. Here we cannot differentiate before using the Hypersoft Suite how the loss is made up of these possibilities:
- personal consumption
- Unauthorised or authorised invitations
- theft of goods
- Theft of money in conjunction with not booking sales
- others.
Unfortunately, 15% are "only" the average of the fact we have experienced since the development of the first controller program in 1989.
In most cases, however, tax audits have gone well so far because the recipes leave too much room for manoeuvre. Did you know, for example, that with soft drinks, not taking into account the addition of ice cubes alone can cover 10% loss of goods? Where are the goods or - even worse - the money for them?
An inaccurate check may therefore be in your favour at the first moment, but it conceals the actual problem, which is at your expense. Multiply your premium calculation (where you also have to consider that a 0.2 l soft drink with ice can only consist of 18 cl of the basic item) and your purchase of goods for one year. You receive a theoretical turnover. Compare this with your actual sales. You'll find a small fortune as difference. Just take it for granted that 50% of this loss was actually sold, but the money never reached you.
Questions about your own risk assessment
The more often you answer No, the higher the risk of loss:
| question | Yes | No |
|---|---|---|
|
Do you use a POS system for all your sales? |
|
|
|
Can the internal consumption be posted in the POS system? |
|
|
|
Can invitations be booked in the cash register system? |
|
|
|
Do you carry out regular (at least monthly) inventory checks by counting? |
|
|
|
Do you determine the surcharges and parts lists yourself to determine the control value (tolerance specifications)? |
|
|
|
Are orders and change requests communicated exclusively via a POS system? |
|
|
|
Can all sales price variants be entered and tracked using the POS system? |
|
|
|
Are the employees who deliver the goods and the employees who collect the cash separated from each other? |
|
|
|
Do employees regularly report incorrectly issued change to you? |
|
|
| Are you approached about losses due to complaints, breakage, spoilage etc. or is this regulated? | ||
|
Are internal subsequent deliveries posted or noted? |
|
|
|
Are all (also internal) delivery notes checked and countersigned? |
|
|
|
Is the goods protected from access by customers or guests? |
|
|
|
Is the goods protected against access by cleaning personnel and other service providers? |
|
|
If you had to answer "no" several times, you can assume that any now more established control measure will pay off more than you invest in the control.
Further documentation: Choosing the optimal inventory management
Best practice on recipes and their tolerances
The recipes should correspond as exactly as possible to your specifications, so that they can be controlled. Tolerances have nothing to do with it, because they are considered better in the result. A correct control of the actual stock in comparison to the theoretical actual stock is usually always somewhat negative, then it is correct.
We had to observe again and again that by (repeated) increase of the recipe components it was tried to avoid differences in controls - this is wrong. Such evaluations show then too small differences and "positive credit" with correct work. Actual errors cannot be detected in this way.
Practice Valuing stocks and differences with EK or VK
When your goods are to be valued in terms of stock and value, it is often also a question of shortages. One common method is to look at the purchase price. However, we recommend looking at several situations with the sales price. Here is an example:
An average company that is moderately or not controlled and has corresponding hazards (see above) has a mixture of employees who can be honest and dishonest. There are usually three categories of sabotage that lead to shortages: a) Unauthorised self-consumption of F&B. b) Inviting guests outside your interest (and then of course usually without our loss management). c) Unauthorised "raising of tips" (we will not describe this further here). Let us assume that the three areas are equal in terms of circumference, i.e. one-third each. Irrespective of this, the question now is why should these differences be assessed with your EC? Probably because she wants to convince herself that the goods were simply lost. But they were not. a) Unauthorised personal consumption can cause damage during audits that is at least equal to your sales value. b) If guests are not invited according to your interest, you would have paid for the goods and c) Turnovers you lose were sales values, because you have also borne all costs for these items.
Assessing differences in sales value usually gives you a better overview of what is and also captures items with low merchandise values (like coffee) better. After all, it only serves your internal control and does not have to be a fiscal reality at all. Book losses accordingly - but act to avoid them.
For the recording of control stocks, employees should also be relied upon as a matter of principle; in addition, deliberate incorrect entries by the following shifts may be noticed.
One conceivable scenario is repeated closings. Example: Control closure for 30.09. at the site with incorrect values. Wait until the stock lists have been created and stored in the head office. At some point later control closure for 30.09. with correct values to "straighten" the flow of goods again.
To counteract this, you can enter a maximum of one number of days in the Period field. This number is then taken into account by the control input so that a control cannot be recorded for periods longer in the past.
Back to the parent page: fraud protection