What merchandising said afterwards

Aina — fashion app, Klang Valley

The brief arrived two days after 12 November. Add-to-bag had been presented as a success; paid orders had not. During the audit week we found the thank-you screen firing a purchase event even when FPX came back declined. Aina’s finance partner had already used the inflated line in a board appendix. The reservation she still mentions: we insisted on restating the weekend before the readout, which made Friday tense. The restated pack, however, is the one merchandising still uses for voucher planning.

Daniel — grocery chain app, Johor

Daniel booked the naming workshop because substitutions at wet-market SKUs were landing as ordinary product views. The first hour was argument; he said so in the room. By the afternoon, gift-with-purchase and substitution had separate rows. The Merdeka window that followed could be read without pretending a free bundle was a paid grocery order.

Siti — electronics specialty app, Penang (readout only)

Siti did not want a full audit. She wanted the mid-year sale window reconstructed: which categories moved on voucher, which did not, and whether pickup appointments were being counted as deliveries. The pack was short on purpose. She later wrote that the buying meeting used the pickup line and ignored our comment on search impressions — which was fair; search was out of scope.

A longer visit: bundle SKUs on a festive fashion grid

For a Johor-based apparel desk we walked a Raya lookbook where bundles (baju plus shawl) shared the same product identifier as the baju alone. Bag counts looked heroic; paid order value did not. The audit pack split the identifier and listed the screens that still wrote the old name. Implementation sat with their engineers. Our part ended at the readout, which is how we prefer it when the catalog team is already tired.