The field representative takes orders throughout the day, and upon returning to the office in the evening, enters the same orders into the system for a second time. This task consumes hours every day without generating any value.
Moreover, errors are made during this second entry. Incorrect quantities, missing lines, or confused customers turn into problems that need to be resolved later.
In this article, we explained why double data entry occurs, which approach should be taken to eliminate it, and the points that need attention.
Table of Contents
Why does double entry occur?
Double data entry usually arises not from a poor choice, but from gaps between systems. Each system works well in its own domain, but there is no bridge between them.
The most common scenario is the manual transfer of a record created in the field or store to the central system. The record is already digital, but it is rewritten because the two systems do not talk to each other.
The second common scenario is processes that proceed via paper. The order is written on paper, then entered into the system, and the paper is filed away.
The third is spreadsheet files. One team keeps its own tracking in a separate file, and the same information lives in two places at once.
In all three cases, the problem is not a lack of technology, but processes that are not connected to each other.
The real cost
The cost of double entry is usually measured by the time spent; however, the real cost lies elsewhere.
Loss of time is the most visible item and is easy to calculate. A few minutes per record adds up to a serious figure in the monthly total.
The cost of error, on the other hand, is much greater. An incorrectly entered order leads to wrong shipments and the return process.
Delay is also a silent cost; an order entered in the evening loses the chance to be shipped during the day.
The biggest loss is in motivation; meaningless repeated work erodes the team's trust in the system.
Identifying where it happens
The first step in eliminating double entry is to identify where it occurs. This usually happens at more points than is commonly thought.
Asking teams how many places they write the same information yields fast and surprising results.
An inventory of the spreadsheet files used should also be taken. Each file is a potential double-entry point.
The tracking of paper forms should be handled similarly; every filled-out form is later entered somewhere.
The list resulting from the detection is used for prioritization; starting with the most repeated task.
Determining record ownership
A single point of origin must be determined for each data type. This decision is the actual step that ends double entry.
The record must be created where the information first appears. Field orders should originate in the field, and store sales at the register.
Other systems read this record or receive it via synchronization; they do not recreate it.
There should be no exceptions to this rule; a single exception quickly turns into general practice.
We detailed the ownership setup in the data mapping article.
Establishing a one-way flow
Once ownership is established, the data flow must be set up as one-way. A single direction is both simple and reliable.
Two-way flow should not be preferred unless necessary; it brings the risk of conflicts and maintenance overhead.
It is also essential that the flow is automatic; a manually triggered transfer is skipped on busy days.
When the transfer will take place must also be clarified. Uncertainty drives the team to manual checks again.
We covered the synchronization setup in the ERP synchronization article.
Simplifying the process
Some duplicate entries are eliminated not by integration, but by process simplification. Not every problem requires a technical solution.
Intermediate approval forms are a good example of this; when the record is already in the system, filling out a separate form is unnecessary.
Tracking files kept by teams themselves also usually arise to compensate for a shortcoming in the system. When that shortcoming is addressed, the file is naturally abandoned.
Therefore, when a duplicate entry is detected, its cause must be asked first. Solutions made without understanding the cause are not permanent.
Sometimes it turns out that the record does not need to be kept at all; the best solution is to eliminate the work entirely.
Accurate recording at the source
When duplicate entries disappear, the accuracy of the initial record becomes much more critical. There is no longer a second control point.
Therefore, recording screens need to be error-preventing. Mandatory fields and validation rules serve this function.
Selection lists are always safer than free text. They eliminate the possibility of typos from the start.
Barcode scanning serves the same purpose and almost zeroes out manual entry errors.
We covered the discipline of document entry in the standard document entry article.
Transition period
The transition period is the most critical stage in the effort to end duplicate entries. During this period, the team tends to revert to old habits.
Working in parallel for a while provides reassurance; however, this period should be kept short. A prolonged parallel period makes duplicate entry permanent.
The old method must be shut down on a specific date. An option left open will certainly continue to be used.
Explaining the benefits to the team is also important; someone who knows why it is changing does not resist change.
Quickly resolving issues that arise during the transition is decisive in maintaining trust.
Measuring the gain
The elimination of duplicate entries can be measured with a few concrete indicators, and this measurement makes it easier to defend the project.
Time spent per record is the most direct indicator. Before and after can be compared.
The error rate should also be monitored; the number of correction records should decrease significantly.
The time it takes for an order to enter the system also shortens; this directly reflects on shipment speed.
Periodic reporting of these indicators also confirms that the gain is permanent.
Points to consider
Failing to shut down the old method is the most common reason for failure in such projects.
Establishing two-way synchronization is also often unnecessary and creates new problems.
Neglecting the record quality on the source screen carries errors into the system.
Not involving the team in the process also generates resistance; the people who will use the solution must participate in the design.
Assuming that every double entry requires a technical solution is also wrong; some can be resolved by process simplification.
Frequently asked questions
Do we need to change our current system?
No, it is not necessary; EQLEM works alongside your existing ERP system and builds the bridge between them.
How long should parallel operation last?
It should be kept short; an extended parallel period makes double entry permanent.
Can all double entries be finished at the same time?
Not recommended; starting from the most repeated task and proceeding gradually yields healthier results.
Do spreadsheet files disappear entirely?
They disappear for the needs met by the system; the remaining ones indicate a real gap in the system and must be addressed separately.
Double data entry is a task that produces no value yet is repeated every day. Eliminating it is one of the fastest-returning improvements in most businesses.
First, figure out where it happens; asking teams how many places they write the same information yields surprising results.
Determine a single point of origin for each data type and leave no exceptions; a single exception quickly turns into general practice.
Set a sunset date to close the old method as well; an option left open will definitely continue to be used.
Invest additionally in the quality of the source screen; when the second control point is removed, the accuracy of the initial record becomes critical.
By talking to the EQLEM team,you can simplify your processes.