1 weekStart with a one-week proof on one processStart with a one-week proofWatch the latest Stanford AI & Investment session

Book a call (opens in a new tab)

CustomersLubricants and greases manufacturer · UAE, German roots · ~300 people

Export orders shipped in 8 days, not 14. Document errors from 11% to 2%.

Measured by Mirr Oils’ finance lead and quality manager: Feb–Jul 2026 vs the 12 months to Sep 2025.

Placeholder until OQ-42 is answered

The clientWho they are, where they stood, what we did

The engagement at a glance

Who the client is

Mirr Oils is the premium brand of German Mirror Lubricants & Greases, a manufacturer of engine, industrial and marine oils and greases. It was incorporated in Nuremberg in 1995, has run from the Hamriyah Free Zone in Sharjah, UAE, since 2000, has about 300 people, and sells through distributors in many countries.

Where they stood

The range, the pack sizes and the destinations had grown faster than the processes behind them. Distributor orders, packaging, lab release and export documents lived in an ERP, shared sheets and e-mail. Only 6 of 16 processes had an owner, and 11% of export shipments had a document error.

What we did
  1. Started with a one-week proof of concept on one process; the full engagement followed once it proved useful
  2. Agreed access with the group CEO before kick-off, and named an owner for each process by week 4
  3. Connected read-only to seven sources, each with a data contract and a named owner
  4. Mapped the order-to-dispatch path as it really ran: 16 processes and four data flows
  5. Checked every order against Mirr Oils’ own procedures, ISO 9001 and ISO/IEC 17025 requirements and each destination’s document rules: 24 findings, 5 critical
  6. Designed target processes and a control for each critical finding, approved by the group CEO
  7. Ran live checks on every new order and batch, so a mismatched document or an outdated formulation surfaces the same day
How long it took

A 12-week due diligence; results measured over the 6 months after the 90-day plan

  1. Week 0One-week proof of concept on one process
  2. Weeks 0–2Connect; access signed off
  3. Weeks 2–6Map the order-to-dispatch path
  4. Weeks 6–10Find the gap
  5. Weeks 10–12Design and plan
  6. Months 4–10Live checks; results measured by the finance lead and the quality manager
Who we worked with
  • Group CEO (executive sponsor)
  • Chief operating officer
  • Finance lead
  • Quality manager and laboratory head
  • Head of supply chain
  • Head of export sales
In scope
  • ERP and accounting
  • Batch and blend records
  • Laboratory system
  • Warehouse
  • Packaging-materials plan
  • Export-document files
  • Distributor order mailbox

SummaryThe problem, what we did, what changed

Client issue · Solution · Impact

Client issue

A manufacturer of engine, industrial and marine lubricants and greases, with its own blending, grease and filling plants and distributors in many countries, had added products, pack sizes and destinations faster than its processes. Export orders waited a median of 14 days, 11% of shipments had a document error, and only 6 of 16 processes had an owner.

Solution

AIx2 ran a 12-week due diligence of the path from distributor order to dispatch across seven sources, with the group CEO’s access sign-off before kick-off. It found 24 findings, five of them critical, and designed a control for each critical one. The company’s teams built the controls, and live checks ran on every new order and batch.

Impact

Within six months: export orders shipped in 8 days instead of 14, document errors fell from 11% to 2%, batches needing a re-test or re-blend from 6.5% to 2%, and complete on-time delivery rose from 72% to 91%. All 16 processes have an owner.

From → ToEach result, before and after

From → To

Before · as-is
After · as built now
  • Export order, request to dispatch: 14 days (median) to 8 days (median)
  • Export shipments with a document error: 11% to 2%
  • Batches needing a re-test or re-blend: 6.5% to 2%
  • Filling-line stoppages for missing packaging: 9 a month to 2 a month
  • Distributor orders complete and on time: 72% to 91%
  • Days of finished stock: 74 days to 52 days
  • Processes with a named owner: 6 of 16 to 16 of 16
Drag the divider to compare before and after.

Measured by Mirr Oils’ finance lead and quality manager: Feb–Jul 2026 vs the 12 months to Sep 2025.

Results, measuredHow each number was defined and counted

Results, measured

ResultDefinitionBeforeAfterSampleSource
Export order, request to dispatchMedian days from the distributor’s order request to the shipment leaving the plant14 days8 days1,840 export orders in the baseline window; 1,020 in the measured windowERP and dispatch log, measured by Mirr Oils’ finance lead
Export shipments with a document errorShare of export shipments with a certificate or packing-list mismatch found before or at the port11%2%All export shipments in each windowAIx2 live check on export documents, confirmed by the quality manager
Batches needing a re-test or re-blendShare of batches that failed first release and went to a re-test or a re-blend6.5%2%All batches in each windowLaboratory system and batch records, measured by the quality manager
Filling-line stoppages for missing packagingStoppages of more than 30 minutes caused by missing caps, labels or cartons, per month9 a month2 a monthFilling-line log, every month in each windowFilling-line log, reviewed by the head of supply chain
Distributor orders complete and on timeShare of distributor orders shipped complete and on or before the confirmed date72%91%All distributor orders in each windowERP and dispatch log, measured by the finance lead
Days of finished stockAverage days of finished-goods stock on hand74 days52 daysMonth-end stock, every month in each windowERP, measured by the finance lead

VerificationWho checked the numbers, and how

How the results were verified

  • Mirr Oils’ finance lead and quality manager measured dispatch time, on-time delivery, re-blends, stoppages and stock from the ERP, the batch records and the filling-line log
  • AIx2 measured document errors from its live checks, confirmed by the quality manager
  • Window: Feb–Jul 2026 against the 12 months to Sep 2025
  • The group CEO signed off every finding and every control before it went live

Financial caseThe money, modelled from measured results

Financial case

Placeholder until OQ-42 is answered

Modelled from the measured results, with an explicit attribution rule: only the share of each change that the finance lead agreed came from the new controls.

About USD 0.9 million a year from fewer re-blends, fewer filling-line stoppages and fewer port-side claims, plus a one-off release of about USD 2.4 million of working capital. Payback on the engagement: under one year.

The full storyThe engagement, chapter by chapter, from the client story

The full story

The engagement in brief

German Mirror Lubricants & Greases (brand: Mirr Oils) · engine, industrial and marine oils and greases · Hamriyah Free Zone, Sharjah

A manufacturer selling in many countries, and the 12 weeks that put every batch and every export order on one map

The company was incorporated in Nuremberg in 1995 and has run from the UAE since 2000. Its own blending plant, grease plant, filling lines and can-making serve distributors in many countries under the Mirr Oils name and under private labels.

Client issue: growth had added products, pack sizes and destinations faster than the processes around them. Nobody could say, with evidence, where an export order lost its days between the distributor’s request and the truck at the port.

Solution: AIx2 ran a 12-week due diligence of the path from distributor order to dispatch, across seven sources, with the group CEO’s sign-off on access before kick-off. It found 24 findings, five of them critical, and designed a control for each critical one.

Impact: within six months of the 90-day plan, export orders shipped in a median of 8 days instead of 14, batches needing a re-test or re-blend fell from 6.5% to 2%, and export-document errors from 11% to 2%.

Where the company stood

Mirr Oils blends and fills engine oils, hydraulic and gear oils, marine lubricants and greases, and packs them from small bottles to drums, totes and bulk. Its quality system is certified to ISO 9001, and its laboratory to ISO/IEC 17025.

The product range kept widening: private labels, toll blending, new pack sizes, new destinations. Each addition touched the same chain: a distributor order, a formulation, a blend, a lab release, packaging, a filling slot, export documents and shipping.

The group CEO asked one question: where does an order lose time between the distributor’s request and the port, and who owns each step?

What AIx2 did

Weeks 0–2 · Connect: read-only connections to seven sources: the ERP, the batch and blend records, the laboratory system, the warehouse, the packaging-materials plan, the export-document files and the distributor order mailbox.

Weeks 2–6 · Map: the order-to-dispatch path as it really ran, order by order. 16 processes, four data flows, and the routes around the ERP: orders agreed by e-mail, packaging booked on a shared sheet, certificates typed by hand.

Weeks 6–10 · Find the gap: every order checked against Mirr Oils’ own procedures, its ISO 9001 and ISO/IEC 17025 requirements and each destination’s document rules. 24 findings, each with a count, the evidence and a named owner.

Weeks 10–12 · Design: target processes, a control for each critical finding and a 90-day plan, approved by the group CEO. The company’s own teams built the controls; AIx2 ran live checks on every new order.

What we found

Export orders waited a median of 14 days from distributor request to dispatch, and the longest waits were not in the plant. They sat in document preparation and in the wait for packaging.

11% of export shipments had a document error: a certificate of analysis that did not match the batch, or a packing list that did not match the pallets. Each one cost days at the port.

6.5% of batches needed a re-test or a re-blend, mostly because the formulation sheet in use was not the latest approved one.

The filling line stopped nine times a month for missing packaging: caps, labels or cartons booked on a sheet that was not tied to the order book.

Of 16 processes, six had a named owner. Several people did the same work in different ways.

What changed

Distributor orders move into the ERP with one approval step, and the packaging plan reads from the order book. Filling-line stoppages fell from nine a month to two.

The formulation sheet is pulled from the approved record at the moment of the blend, and a live check blocks a batch that uses an older version. Batches needing a re-test or re-blend fell from 6.5% to 2%.

The certificate of analysis and the packing list are generated from the batch and the pallets, not typed. Export-document errors fell from 11% to 2%.

Export orders now ship in a median of 8 days, and 91% of distributor orders arrive complete and on time, up from 72%.

All 16 processes have an owner, and exceptions go to that person the same day.

How the results were verified

Mirr Oils’ finance lead and quality manager measured dispatch time, on-time and complete delivery, re-blends and stoppages from the ERP, the batch records and the filling-line log. AIx2 measured document errors from its live checks.

Window: the 6 months after the 90-day plan (Feb–Jul 2026) against the 12 months to Sep 2025. Sample: 1,840 export orders in the baseline window and 1,020 in the measured window.

The group CEO signed off every finding and every control before it went live.

Commercial outcome

Modelled from the measured results, with the finance lead’s attribution rule: only the share of each change that the finance lead agreed came from the new controls.

About USD 0.9 million a year from fewer re-blends, fewer filling-line stoppages and fewer port-side claims, plus a one-off release of about USD 2.4 million of working capital as days of finished stock fell from 74 to 52. Payback on the engagement: under one year.

The fee is not shown.

What the client said it changed

For the first time the leadership team reads one set of facts every Monday: which orders are late, why, and who owns the fix.

The company can take on more private-label and toll-blending work without adding the paperwork that used to come with each new product, because the documents now come from the batch.

How the work ranThe work, and how the data was protected

How the work ran and how data was protected

The work

Weeks 0–2 · Connect: seven sources opened read-only; the group CEO signed access before kick-off.

Weeks 2–6 · Map: the order-to-dispatch path as it really ran, 16 processes and four data flows.

Weeks 6–10 · Find the gap: every order checked against Mirr Oils’ procedures, ISO 9001, ISO/IEC 17025 and destination document rules. 24 findings.

Weeks 10–12 · Design: a control for each critical finding and a 90-day plan, approved by the group CEO.

Human sign-off at every step: the group CEO approved every finding and control; the owners ran them.

How data was protected

  • Read-only connections to seven sources, each with a data contract and a named owner.
  • Everything stayed on Mirr Oils’ own servers. AIx2 held no copy after the engagement.

What it requiredWhat it took, by category

What the work required

Map work from event logs
The ERP, the batch records and the laboratory system held years of events, so the as-built map could be rebuilt from real orders and batches.
Capture work outside the systems
Orders agreed by e-mail, packaging booked on shared sheets and certificates typed by hand were read from the mailbox, the sheets and the document files.
Join process and data
Each order was followed from the distributor’s request to the dispatch note across the ERP, the batch records, the laboratory system and the export files.
Check against procedures and standards
The company’s own procedures, ISO 9001 and ISO/IEC 17025 requirements, and the document rules of each destination.

For youWhat carries over to your company

What this means for you

  • An ERP or core system in use for two years or more: event data must exist
  • A named owner for each key process: every finding needs an owner
  • Data access signed off by your sponsor before kick-off: no weeks of waiting
  • Documented procedures for the main flows: the check needs a baseline
  • An executive sponsor with time every week: decisions in days
  • The same path runs through any manufacturer that blends, fills and exports: order, formulation, release, packaging, documents and shipping.

TimelineWhen it happened, who owned it, why it worked

Timeline, owners and what made it work

  1. Weeks 0–2

    Seven sources connected; the group CEO signs access.

  2. Weeks 2–6

    The order-to-dispatch path mapped: 16 processes, four data flows.

  3. Weeks 6–10

    24 findings, five critical, each with evidence and an owner.

  4. Weeks 10–12

    Controls designed and a 90-day plan approved.

  5. Months 4–10

    Live checks on every new order and batch; results measured.

Owners

  • Group CEO: signed access before kick-off and approved every finding and control
  • Chief operating officer: owned the order-to-dispatch path
  • Quality manager: owned formulation versions, lab release and the certificate of analysis
  • Head of supply chain: owned the packaging plan and the filling schedule
  • Finance lead: measured dispatch time, on-time delivery and stock
  • AIx2: mapping, findings, control design and live checks

What made it work

  • The group CEO signed data access before kick-off, so the work started on day one.
  • Every process had a named owner by week 4, so every finding had someone to act on it.
  • The documents now come from the batch and the pallets, so there is nothing to retype.
  • Mirr Oils’ own teams built the controls; live checks kept them honest.

One year laterWhether the change held

One year later

The one-year update follows twelve months after the engagement: whether the change held, with the new numbers.

The full engagement report, with the maps, findings and owners, is available on request.