- Who is this for?
- Operations, sales administration, invoicing and transport IT teams
- Question addressed
- Understand how to link a multichannel event to the correct transport record.
Key takeaways
- A channel shows where information appeared, not which record it belongs to.
- An exact reference is strong evidence, but it must remain consistent with the surrounding context.
- Two plausible records must never be resolved silently.
- Every match retains its source, rule and version so that it can be explained or corrected.
The record is built across several systems
An order may be created in a portal, amended by email, discussed over the phone and then confirmed in the TMS. Messages do not always carry the same reference, and some documents arrive after the operational action. Matching means recognizing that these events describe one operation without merging similar shipments.
This step is decisive: accurately extracted data linked to the wrong record still produces a false decision. Vigilo therefore treats matching as a controlled decision rather than an approximate background search.
Evidence used to propose a match
| Evidence | What it contributes | Required control |
|---|---|---|
| Explicit reference | Order, shipment, tour or document number. | Check its format, sender and uniqueness within scope. |
| Party identity | Customer, site, carrier, contact or sender domain. | Distinguish the legal entity, site and individual contact. |
| Operational data | Origin, destination, goods, quantity or time slot. | Compare values using the tolerances defined for the flow. |
| Chronology | Proximity to an expected creation, follow-up or amendment. | Exclude closed records or records incompatible with the event date. |
| Document continuity | File name, version, conversation thread or EDI identifier. | Retain the source document and identify superseded versions. |
Decision levels, not a magic score
- 01Determinative match
A unique reference consistent with the other data allows matching within the authorized scope.
- 02Agreement across several signals
Independent signals point to the same record and the workflow controls confirm the proposal.
- 03Competing candidates
Two records remain plausible, so Vigilo presents their useful differences instead of choosing arbitrarily.
- 04No reliable candidate
The event remains in a triage queue with its source and already extracted data.
Example: an amendment with no shipment number
An email asks to move a delivery to 10 a.m. and only names the destination site. Two shipments are planned for that site. The conversation thread matches the first record, but the pallet count matches the second. These contradictory signals prevent an automatic match.
Vigilo can present both records, the divergent value and the source document to the operator. Once the choice is made, the decision remains linked to its context. If the same ambiguity recurs, it may support a proposed rule; it does not silently alter the matching logic.
Retain evidence and versions
This audit trail explains why a document enriched a record and lets teams correct the history without losing the previous state. It also provides real cases for testing a new rule before activation.
- the raw event, its channel and timestamp;
- the candidate records examined;
- the evidence accepted, ignored or found contradictory;
- the matching rule and its version;
- the person or mechanism that confirmed the decision;
- subsequent corrections and their reasons.
Adapt matching to the company’s operating model
Reliable identifiers differ from one organization to another. One team works by trip number, another by customer reference, and another by a site-and-time-slot pair. Adaptability comes from common building blocks — events, entities, rules, controls and escalations — configured for the actual operating model.
This approach supports different TMS platforms, channels and conventions without imposing a single operating template. Compatibility and action permissions are still validated system by system and workflow by workflow.
Frequently asked questions
Direct answers
Is an identical reference always sufficient?
No. It may be reused, mistyped or carried by an older version. The workflow checks the constraints defined around that reference.
What happens when two records match?
Processing stops at the defined level and presents the candidates, differences and sources to the person responsible for the decision.
Does a human correction automatically become a rule?
No. It first remains a contextual decision. A recurring pattern may produce a candidate rule, which is reviewed before activation.
Does matching require a new TMS?
No. It is adapted to the identifiers and tools selected by the company after the relevant workflow has been validated.
Sources and methodology
This resource describes Axonovia's product approach based on transport workflows. The examples are illustrative and do not constitute a performance commitment or a universally applicable contractual rule.
Product review: Axonovia team · next review recommended before 31 August 2027 or following a material change in scope.