How to Tell Whether an ERP or eCommerce Development Partner Really Understands Your Australian Business

For Australian retail and eCommerce teams, a platform portfolio does not establish whether a partner understands how the business prices, stocks and reports. Test that understanding with a business rule before implementation.

• Choose one awkward product or transaction with freight, rebates, tax or allocation rules.
• Ask the proposed team to reconstruct the result using agreed inputs and policies, and to identify missing decisions.
• In the illustrative example below, a AU$10 purchase price becomes AU$11.70 per unit. At AU$15 selling price, gross margin changes from 33.3% to 22%.
• Use the exercise to assess reasoning and traceability—not as proof of the partner’s entire delivery capability.

For an importer or multi-channel retailer, costing crosses purchasing, inventory, pricing and finance. Give every candidate the same sample and agreed business context.

A strong answer shows how the team reasons. It does not, alone, establish prior experience: validate relevant references and delivery evidence separately.

Business rules are not always complete in a requirements document. A rebate may sit in a supplier agreement; a freight allocation may be handled in a spreadsheet; warehouse exceptions may be known mainly to operations.

A partner should discover and document those rules with their owners before implementing them. The problem is not that a spreadsheet exists. It is that its assumptions, approvals or downstream effects are absent from the proposed system design.

The same test works beyond costing: who can approve a discount, which warehouse serves an order, how backorders are handled and when a customer pricing tier changes.

Costing makes the evaluation concrete because the result can be reconciled to source records and agreed tax, accounting and commercial rules. There is not one universal cost formula: the purpose, allocation method and policies must be explicit.

The following simulated scenario illustrates how a purchase price can differ from the cost used for margin decisions. Amounts are AUD per unit; assumptions are not a reported client result.

This example assumes the listed allocations are approved, do not overlap, and import GST is fully creditable and therefore excluded. Confirm those assumptions for your business; the ATO sets conditions for import GST credits.

Across 1,000 units with the same AU$1.70 cost difference, the aggregate gap is AU$1,700. At a GST-exclusive selling price of AU$15, purchase-price-only gross margin is (15 − 10) ÷ 15 = 33.3%; using AU$11.70 gives 22%. These are gross-margin calculations, not net-profit estimates.

For direct importers, ABF’s importing-cost guidance is a useful starting point. Classification, origin, concessions and qualifying trade arrangements can affect duty. Where those differ across goods, the model must support the relevant item-level treatment rather than apply one unexplained shipment percentage.

GST-credit entitlement depends on the importation and the claimant meeting the ATO’s requirements; payment or a name on a declaration is not a sufficient system rule on its own. Non-recoverable duty may form part of cost, but duty is not universally unrecoverable: ABF’s duty drawback scheme provides refunds in qualifying export circumstances.

What to ask: Which finance-approved rules apply to this transaction? What evidence establishes eligibility? How are later credits, rebates or corrections reflected without losing the original calculation?

This is a software-evaluation example, not tax or accounting advice. Confirm treatment with your adviser. If you do not import, choose a domestic pricing, rebate or stock-allocation rule instead.

Start with representative records and the people who understand them. Document each rule’s source, owner, effective date and exceptions. Reconcile sample results before the rule is used across ERP, storefront, inventory and finance workflows.

Use our partnering approach and relevant client references to test how the proposed team would work with your business. The same questions apply to us; a company portfolio does not replace that evaluation.

Rate each factor from 1 (unsupported) to 5 (demonstrated and documented), using the same sample and criteria for each partner. This is a discussion aid, not a validated delivery-risk score.

A high total does not resolve an unproven critical rule. Close material gaps before committing to implementation; assess technical capacity, security and commercial fit separately.

Pause when a partner cannot explain how the stored cost is derived, or cannot describe how an existing manual rule will be governed and reconciled. Neither a single field nor a spreadsheet is automatically wrong; an unexplained result or missing owner is the concern.

This exercise can reveal business reasoning and missing requirements. It cannot prove delivery speed, integration resilience or long-term continuity. Use the wider partner evaluation guide and critical-workflow reliability checks for those complementary questions.

What should I ask an ERP or eCommerce development partner about product costing?
Give the proposed team a representative product or transaction, its source records and the relevant business policies. Ask how the cost is calculated, which decisions need confirmation and how the result can be reproduced. Validate the reasoning, not just the final number.

Is purchase price enough for an eCommerce margin calculation?
Only if it represents the appropriate cost under the agreed rules. Freight, non-recoverable charges, rebates and allocations can change unit cost. State the purpose and assumptions, and reconcile the calculation with your finance team.

Should GST be included in landed cost for an Australian importer?
GST that is fully creditable is normally excluded from the cost used in this example. Credit entitlement must be confirmed for the importation; non-creditable amounts and other charges may need different treatment. Confirm the policy with your adviser rather than applying a blanket rule.

Our ERP has a cost field—is that enough?
The field is useful if its calculation, inputs and update rules are controlled and traceable. In the illustrative example, AU$10 versus AU$11.70 produces a AU$1,700 difference across 1,000 units with identical assumptions—not across an unspecified number of SKUs.

How does Shinetech approach ERP and eCommerce business rules?
Its approach starts from business workflows and representative records, makes rule owners and assumptions explicit, and validates sample results before implementation. Ask the proposed team to demonstrate this against your scenario and provide relevant delivery references.

What business rules besides costing can we test?
Use a pricing tier, discount approval, warehouse allocation, backorder rule or rebate agreement. Agree the authoritative inputs and expected behaviour with the business owner so you can evaluate the partner’s reasoning.

The takeaway is practical: before selecting a partner, see whether it can turn one difficult operating rule into an explainable system result.

• Choose a representative rule and the person authorised to confirm it.
• Use sanitised sample records and agreed assumptions.
• Ask the proposed engineers to show inputs, calculation, exceptions, downstream effects and tests.

If you are planning an ERP, eCommerce or integration project, discuss the workflow with Shinetech. We can first agree the scope and evidence for a useful working session. Do not send confidential product or customer data through the initial enquiry.

Read what our clients say about working with Shinetech on Clutch.

• ATO — Claiming GST credits for goods you import
• Australian Border Force — Cost of importing goods
• Australian Border Force — Duty drawbacks
• Shinetech — How We Partner

The cost example is simulated and its assumptions are explicit. It is not a client result or tax advice. Use your own records and adviser-approved rules.