GSPANN and an anonymised specialty retailer: Manhattan Active Omni test automation case analysed

Verdict: what is checkable

Client profile as published

Client

A multi-brand specialty retailer. (the vendor's description; the vendor does not name the client)

Segment

Specialty retail

Region

not stated in the source

Channels

stores and ecommerce

Size indicators

global multi-channel retailer; multi-brand specialty retailer

The client description and size indicators are quoted from the source; segment, region and channels are this site's classification. [ev-0977]

Systems in scope

• OMS (order management system: software that routes, splits and tracks customer orders across stores, warehouses and carriers.) (Manhattan Active Omni): named in the summary and the Challenge section
• Payments: named in the Our Solution section (New payment gateway testing)
• Loyalty: named in the Our Solution section (loyalty program and gift cards)
• Integrations (Retail Management Systems (RMS); S4 (SAP validation for Finance)): named in the Our Solution section

Where the source names each system is quoted or summarised from the case page. [ev-0977]

Problem as stated

The retailer chose Manhattan Active Omni to replace an order management system it found complex and inadequate. Neither the retailer nor its main technology partner had any quality engineering setup. GSPANN was asked to build automated end-to-end testing for orders placed online, in store and through partners, including carts that mix home delivery and in-store pickup. It was also asked to add new test management tools. [ev-0977]

no quality engineering infrastructure in place (quoted from the source)

Approach

Testing types

automation and functional (main scope: automation)

Team shape

not stated

Duration

not stated

Engagement model

not stated

Tooling named in the source

GCP, Firebase Analytics, Firebase Crashlytics, Swift, PostgreSQL, Objective-C, Java, Oracle, Hibernate

Metrics claimed

What the case does not say

• Baseline before the engagement.
• Measurement method.
• Team size on both sides.
• Cost.
• Whether the client is still a client.
• Date of the work.

Reading notes for a buyer

This case speaks to the scenario “OMS or WMS (warehouse management system: software that runs receiving, storage, picking and shipping inside a distribution center.) replacement” and feeds dimension D2 (Retail system coverage) of the methodology. A question to put to GSPANN:

Which test automation framework did you build for the Manhattan Active Omni order flows, given the case lists no test tool? [ev-0977]

Source and verification

Source

Quality Engineering Streamlines Order Management System Migration

Published

not dated by the vendor

Verified

2026-10-30

Evidence grade

secondary

Corroborating sources

none found

Vendor profile: GSPANN. System facet: OMS and WMS testing vendors.