Fuel Automation System

Cooperatives in the Tarım Kredi group sell fuel to their farmer members; the CV describes this network as 1,100 cooperatives. Each sale involves station equipment such as pumps and tanks, tankers deliver fuel, and every day the sales have to be reconciled and reported. The group's technology company, where I worked, delivered the software that manages this process.

Fuel sales, reporting and reconciliation across cooperative operations needed more standardisation, automation and visibility. Reports were not produced in one consistent way across locations, which made the data harder to compare and to rely on at group level. Much of the reporting was fragmented and manual, and data inconsistencies were a known issue.

The group needed one system that records fuel sales in a standard way, supports the daily work at stations and produces reconciled reports that mean the same thing in every cooperative. It had to align three things that rarely fit neatly together: physical equipment at stations, business rules for member sales and daily reconciliation.

The team delivered a system that standardises fuel station workflows, tanker and pump processes, daily reconciliation and reporting, with control mechanisms for operations teams. This page describes the scope at a high level. Which integrations reached production at each location, and how devices are connected, are not published here.

The in-house teams designed, built and tested the system, with requirements from fuel operations and cooperative stakeholders. I led product and delivery: setting priorities across many stakeholders, defining the first scope, planning how the system moved through testing and pilots to live use, and keeping equipment, business rules and reporting needs in one plan.

Fuel systems touch physical equipment, money and regulation at once, and each depends on the others. Planning therefore had to treat station equipment, business rules and reconciliation as one chain of dependencies. A phased path through user acceptance testing and pilots, rather than a single switch-over, was the way to manage that risk across many sites.

Reconciliation is where operational truth shows up. If the numbers do not match at the end of the day, the cause is usually upstream: in how sales were recorded, how equipment reported or how a rule was interpreted. I learned to work backwards from the reconciled report and to agree data definitions before building screens.