01
Gather the evidence
Retrieve only the permitted invoice, purchase, receipt, and policy records for the case.
Illustrative scenario / Finance operations
Give finance reviewers
evidence, not legwork.
Gather permitted invoice, purchase, receipt, and policy records, explain the discrepancy, and prepare each exception for the accountable owner.
How to read this page
Illustrative scenario — not a named customer result. The profile, baseline, and arithmetic below are a worked example. Replace every input with evidence from your own workflow before making an investment decision.
Illustrative profile & problem
Where the work
stalls today.
Illustrative profile: a finance team handling about 800 invoice exceptions a month in an ERP, where reviewers repeatedly leave the system to find purchase and receipt evidence.
The judgment in an exception is usually quick. Finding and assembling the supporting records is not. Reviewers repeat the same searches, document their reasoning inconsistently, and discover missing evidence after work has already started.
Measure before building
Establish the baseline
you will be judged against.
- Exceptions per month by type, value band, and root cause.
- Minutes per exception split into collecting records, comparing evidence, deciding, and documenting.
- Share returned for missing evidence and share requiring a second reviewer.
- Aging of open exceptions and effort spent on cases that should have matched automatically.
Record who measured each input, over what period, and which cases were excluded. A baseline nobody trusts cannot support an investment decision.
Illustrative solution
Connect the steps
that create value.
02
Prepare the review
Compare amounts, references, and dates; explain the discrepancy and flag missing or conflicting evidence.
03
Keep approval explicit
Present the package to the accountable finance owner. Payment and accounting actions stay in native systems under native permissions.
04
Record the outcome
Retain the decision, evidence used, and corrections so recurring causes can be fixed at the source.
Controls & evaluation
Keep judgment
and evidence explicit.
- Native ERP permissions, separation of responsibilities, and approvals remain authoritative.
- The workflow prepares work; it does not execute payment or post accounting entries without separate scope and acceptance.
- Evaluation includes duplicates, changed beneficiaries or amounts, missing receipts, and cases the workflow must escalate.
- Every figure in the package traces to a source record. Calculated totals use deterministic checks, not model assertion.
Illustrative value model
Do the arithmetic.
Then test the assumptions.
Worked example at 800 exceptions a month. Baseline effort is 38 minutes per exception. The illustrative prepared-review path is 21 minutes where evidence is available. Treat both as assumptions to replace with timed observation.
Scroll across the table to read all columns.
| Effort | Illustrative baseline | Illustrative future state |
|---|---|---|
| Collect supporting records | 22 min | 6 min |
| Compare evidence and decide | 10 min | 11 min |
| Document the review | 6 min | 4 min |
| Total per prepared exception | 38 min | 21 min |
| Monthly capacity effect | — | 17 min × 800 = about 227 hours before support |
Not every exception will be preparable. If 25% still need the full 38-minute manual path, blended future effort is about 25 minutes and the monthly effect falls to roughly 170 hours before about 15 hours of support and evaluation upkeep. Value also depends on fixing recurring mismatch causes, not only preparing them faster.
Released capacity is not automatically cash saved. Agree with the operating owner how time would be redeployed and which recurring technology and support costs must be deducted.
Acceptance & handover
Agree what “working”
must prove.
- Prepared packages agree with source records on representative and difficult exceptions, with discrepancies correctly explained.
- Missing, duplicate, or conflicting evidence is escalated rather than resolved by assumption.
- No consequential finance action occurs without the accountable owner and native approval.
- Review effort, return rate, and exception aging improve against baseline at unchanged or better decision quality.
When we would recommend stopping
Stop or choose conventional automation if most exceptions come from one fixable matching rule, source records cannot be retrieved reliably, or reviewers must redo the comparison to trust the package.
Your next step
Test this scenario against your workflow.
Bring your volumes, systems, and difficult cases. We will help establish the baseline and whether an assessment is worthwhile.