Intake and document traceability
Connect selected inboxes or upload sources and retain the original document, receipt state and duplicate checks.
Invoice processing
Invoice processing with review where it matters.
Automate selected invoice-processing steps while keeping finance approvals and exception ownership explicit. Evaluate your invoice formats, reference data and ERP interfaces before deciding what can proceed without review.
Workflow design
From incoming invoice to a checked posting
The workflow separates reading a document from approving a business transaction. Extracted values are checked against reference records and business rules before an authorized posting is attempted.
- 01
Capture and identify
Receive documents from the agreed channels, preserve the original and identify duplicates or unsupported inputs.
Output
A tracked document and intake status
- 02
Extract and reconcile
Read the required fields and line items; compare vendor, totals and purchase-order data where available.
Output
Structured fields with validation findings
- 03
Resolve exceptions
Route missing, conflicting or uncertain values to the appropriate reviewer with the source document visible.
Output
An approved record or a documented exception
- 04
Post and confirm
Submit authorized records through the ERP interface, detect retries and retain the resulting system reference.
Output
A confirmed posting or a recoverable failure
Controls across the workflow
- Finance approval rules
- Duplicate handling
- Vendor-change review
- Posting audit trail
Decisions that shape the scope
- Which invoices can proceed without review?
- Agree criteria using representative documents and business risk. Successful extraction alone does not justify automatic posting; reference checks, approvals and exception rules still apply.
- What happens when purchase-order data is missing?
- Define a separate non-PO or unresolved-PO path. The workflow should expose missing evidence rather than infer that a purchase was authorized.
- Who approves changes to payment details?
- Keep supplier-master and payment-detail changes within the existing authorized process. An invoice should not silently overwrite trusted vendor records.
Evidence before expansion
Define what better means.
These are proposed evaluation measures, not reported client results. Agree the baseline, sample and acceptance threshold before the pilot, then review the evidence with the workflow owner.
- Field correctness
- Compare required fields and line items against human-reviewed reference data, separating critical-field errors from formatting differences.
- Review effort
- Measure reviewer time and exception causes for a defined invoice sample, including the work needed to correct failed extractions.
- Posting integrity
- Reconcile accepted invoices to ERP records and test retries, duplicate submissions and rejected postings before expanding automation.
Before you commit
Is this the right engagement?
Invoice entry and reconciliation take time when formats vary, purchase-order data is incomplete and exceptions lack a clear owner.
- What we need from you
- Representative invoices including difficult examples, required fields, vendor and purchase-order data, approval rules and a permitted ERP test interface.
- How you accept the work
- Compare required fields with reviewed reference values, test duplicate and exception paths, and reconcile accepted postings with ERP records. Review errors separately by document type and supplier pattern.
- Scope & alternatives
- The initial scope covers agreed invoice types and interfaces. Payment execution, tax advice and supplier-master changes are separate responsibilities; unsupported documents remain reviewable exceptions.
Capabilities
Implementation scope
The proposal selects the relevant components and records the systems, review responsibilities and exceptions covered.
Field and business validation
Implement required-field, total, vendor and PO checks with documented treatment of missing or contradictory values.
Finance review and ERP integration
Provide an exception path and controlled posting with approval evidence, integration errors and a reconciliation reference.
Pricing
Engagement options and pricing factors.
A proposal follows review of the workflow and its dependencies. It identifies implementation deliverables, client responsibilities, acceptance criteria and any platform or operating charges separately.
Discovery and scope
Representative invoices including difficult examples, required fields, vendor and purchase-order data, approval rules and a permitted ERP test interface.
Defined implementation
Connect invoice capture, field validation, reviewer decisions and controlled ERP posting in one traceable workflow.
Ongoing operation
Agree maintenance, coverage, exception ownership and changes as an explicit operating scope.
Frequently asked questions
Questions before starting
01Can you process every invoice format?
Can you process every invoice format?
The supported scope is established using representative samples. New layouts, poor scans and unusual tables may need additional handling or human review; support is not assumed for every format.
02Does an extraction confidence score determine approval?
Does an extraction confidence score determine approval?
No. Where a provider exposes confidence information, it is one signal to evaluate. Business validation, source quality and finance approval rules determine whether a record can proceed.
03Can this connect to our ERP?
Can this connect to our ERP?
We review the permitted API or import route, field mappings, test access and posting rules. The implementation must account for duplicate submissions, error responses and reconciliation.
04How is this different from general document processing?
How is this different from general document processing?
Invoice processing adds finance-specific validation, vendor and PO context, approval rules and posting reconciliation. General document processing covers classification and extraction across broader document workflows.
05What determines pilot scope and cost?
What determines pilot scope and cost?
Document variation, line-item complexity, reference-data quality, integration access and review rules drive the scope. The proposal separates implementation from provider usage and operating support.
Related
Related capabilities and workflow options
Start a conversation
Map the workflow before expanding the scope.
Bring the process, representative inputs and the systems involved. We will help define the next useful increment and the evidence needed to accept it.