01
Create request
The company submits a repair request with category, symptoms, location, urgency, SLA expectations and any operational or compliance constraints.
How it works
A clear repair workflow for companies, labs and operators.
B2B.repair turns repair sourcing into a repeatable operating process. Instead of relying on emails, spreadsheets and inconsistent vendor selection, every request moves through a structured sequence: intake, matching, bidding, decision, execution and outcome tracking.
The platform is designed to help companies reduce downtime, compare repair partners more clearly, and keep a reliable audit trail across teams, sites and countries.
0
Companies
0
Labs
0
Requests / Jobs
0
Countries
What changes?
Repair stops being an ad-hoc conversation and becomes an operational workflow with clearer vendor fit, faster decisions and centralized visibility.
Workflow
From request to tracked completion
Each repair request follows the same path so teams can work with the same logic every time.
02
Match relevant labs
The request is aligned to labs that fit the needed service scope, geography and turnaround profile.
03
Receive bids
Labs respond with timing, price, availability and any assumptions so the request becomes easier to evaluate.
04
Select best-fit partner
The company compares bids and chooses the most suitable lab based on SLA, cost, capability and operational fit.
05
Track execution
Statuses, timestamps and progress remain visible so the job is easier to manage internally.
06
Keep outcome history
Final outcomes stay centralized for reporting, governance and future vendor decisions.
Two-sided model
What each side actually does
Companies and labs use the same workflow differently, but both benefit from structured data and clearer visibility.
For Companies
Standardize sourcing and decision-making
- Submit structured requestsDefine issue, category, location, SLA and constraints once, clearly.
- Compare bids consistentlyEvaluate timing, pricing and assumptions side by side.
- Improve governanceKeep vendor decisions and outcomes centralized for procurement and ops.
- Scale across sitesUse the same logic across stores, depots, offices or regions.
For Labs
Receive better-qualified repair demand
- Get clearer intakeRequests arrive with more structure and fewer missing basics.
- Bid based on real fitRespond according to service scope, location and available capacity.
- Reduce admin overheadLess time wasted clarifying missing details before quoting.
- Build long-term trustCompleted work contributes to stronger vendor credibility over time.
Decision model
How selection becomes easier
Instead of “who replied first”, the process helps teams decide on real criteria.
Capability fit
Jobs should go to labs that actually match the service scope, device category and location profile required.
SLA & turnaround
Some repairs are routine, others are operationally critical. The workflow makes that difference visible early.
Cost & traceability
Price matters, but so do assumptions, history, response quality and outcome visibility.
Use cases
Where this workflow is useful
Retail & POS
Reduce downtime for store-critical devices and operational endpoints.
Corporate IT
Keep repair intake and vendor choice consistent across offices and teams.
Fleet / logistics
Align repair needs to geography and turnaround requirements.
Insurance / warranty
Track vendor decisions, documentation and outcomes more clearly.
Outcomes
What the workflow improves
Better structure
Every request follows the same intake and decision model.
Faster vendor selection
Teams compare bids faster because the data is cleaner and more consistent.
Lower operational friction
Less back-and-forth between buyers and labs before work even starts.
Cleaner reporting
Statuses, decisions and outcomes remain centralized for review and governance.
Want to run your repair sourcing with a clearer workflow?
Start with a request or contact us for a setup tailored to your business.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
Do companies send one request to one lab or multiple labs?
The workflow supports structured matching and comparison, so requests can be routed to relevant labs instead of being handled as one blind outreach.
How do labs know whether a request fits them?
Requests are matched using criteria such as capability, category, geography and service expectations.
Why is this better than email?
Because email is fragmented, hard to compare and hard to audit. Here, the process stays in one structured flow.
Can it work across multiple sites or countries?
Yes. The workflow is especially useful for multi-site operations that want consistent vendor logic and reporting.
Is this only for urgent repairs?
No. It works for routine, priority and SLA-critical workflows depending on the company’s operational needs.