ReqVise - Rejection Cycles & Exception Handling

1

Lead Qualification Rejection

CRM Module - Sales Pipeline Management

Decision Point: "Is Lead Qualified?"

Trigger: Sales team evaluates incoming lead based on qualification criteria (BANT - Budget, Authority, Need, Timeline)

YES Path

Proceed to Create Quote

NO Path

Enter Nurture Track

Nurture Track - Rejection Handling

Step 1: Categorize Rejection Reason

Reason	Action
No Budget	Add to budget cycle nurture
No Authority	Request correct contact
No Immediate Need	Long-term nurture campaign
Timeline Mismatch	Schedule future follow-up

Step 2: CRM Actions

Update Lead Status: "Nurturing" or "Disqualified"
Set Follow-up Date (30/60/90 days based on reason)
Assign to Marketing Nurture Campaign
Log Disqualification Reason for Analytics

Step 3: Re-qualification Triggers

Lead responds to nurture content
Budget cycle resets (fiscal year)
New stakeholder engagement
Inbound inquiry from same organization

Industry Standard Metrics

Lead-to-Qualified Rate

15-25%

Nurture-to-Requalification Rate

5-10%

Average Nurture Duration

3-6 months

2

Quote/Deal Rejection

CRM Module - Deal Pipeline Management

Decision Point: "Is Deal Won?"

Trigger: Customer reviews quote and makes decision

YES Path

Webhook triggers project creation in ReqVise

NO Path

Enter Quote Revision Cycle

Quote Revision Cycle

Step 1: Capture Loss Reason (Within 24 hours)

Loss Reason	Action
Price Too High	Trigger competitive analysis
Specifications Mismatch	Request detailed requirements
Competitor Won	Log competitor details for intelligence
Project Cancelled	Move to long-term nurture
Timeline Issues	Offer phased delivery options

Step 2: Revision Decision Matrix

Loss Reason	Action
Price (≤15% gap)	Revise quote with value engineering
Price (>15% gap)	Escalate to management for approval
Specs mismatch	Re-engage engineering for new TDS
Lead time	Check alternate suppliers/expedite
Competitor	Final best offer with differentiation
Cancelled	Archive and set 6-month follow-up

Step 3: Quote Revision Process (Max 2 revisions)

Version control: Quote v1.0 → v1.1 → v1.2
Approval workflow for discounts >10%
Valid for 30 days from revision date
Auto-archive after 2nd rejection

Step 4: Final Disposition

Won (after revision): Proceed to project creation
Lost (final): Update CRM, trigger loss analysis report
Deferred: Set calendar reminder, add to pipeline forecast

Industry Standard Metrics

Quote Win Rate

25-35%

Average Revision Cycles

1.5

Revision Win Rate Improvement

+15-20%

3

Engineering/TDS Approval Rejection

Engineering Module - Document Control

Decision Point: "Is TDS/Drawing Approved?"

Trigger: Internal review or customer approval of Technical Data Sheets and drawings

YES Path

Generate Transmittal and send to vendor

NO Path

Enter Engineering Revision Cycle

Engineering Revision Cycle

Step 1: Rejection Classification

Category A - Minor (24-48 hours)

Dimensional corrections
Material grade clarifications
Drawing annotation updates
BOQ quantity adjustments

Category B - Major (3-5 business days)

Design changes affecting fit/form/function
Specification changes impacting cost >5%
Compliance/certification requirements
Interface changes with other systems

Category C - Critical (5-10 business days)

Complete redesign required
Safety/regulatory non-compliance
Customer scope change (requires CR process)

Step 2: Revision Workflow

Rejection Received
Log in Document Control System (Revision Request)
Assign to Original Engineer + Reviewer
Impact Assessment (Cost, Schedule, Resources)
Engineering Makes Corrections
Internal QC Check (Mandatory for Cat B & C)
Update Revision Number (Rev A → Rev B → Rev C...)
Re-submit for Approval

Step 3: Document Version Control

Naming: [Project]-[DocType]-[Number]-Rev[X]
Example: KW2024-TDS-001-RevB
All superseded versions archived (not deleted)
Revision history maintained with change description

Step 4: Escalation Triggers

3rd revision on same document → Engineering Manager review
Schedule impact >5 days → Project Manager notification
Cost impact >10% → Commercial team involvement
Customer-driven scope change → Change Request (CR) process

Industry Standard Metrics

First-Time Approval Rate

70-80%

Average Revision Cycles

1.3

Revision Turnaround

2-3 days avg

4

Purchase Requisition (PR) Rejection

ProKure Module - Requisition Management

Decision Point: "Is PR Approved?"

Trigger: PR submitted for budget/management approval

YES Path

Proceed to RFQ or direct PO (based on contract availability)

NO Path

Enter PR Revision Cycle

PR Revision Cycle

Step 1: Rejection Reason Analysis

Reason	Required Action
Budget Exceeded	Request budget revision / Split into multiple PRs / Value engineer specifications
Incomplete Info	Add missing specifications / Attach required documents / Clarify delivery requirements
Wrong Cost Center	Correct coding / Get cost center manager approval
Duplicate PR	Cancel if true duplicate / Justify if intentional
Not in Scope	Initiate Change Request / Get customer approval first

Step 2: Approval Hierarchy & Limits

PR Value	Approver Level
< ₹50,000	Project Engineer
₹50,000 - ₹2L	Project Manager
₹2L - ₹10L	Department Head
₹10L - ₹50L	Procurement Head
> ₹50L	Director / VP

Step 3: Revision Process

Requester receives rejection notification with reason
Requester makes corrections within 48 hours
Re-submit with revision notes
Original approver reviews (fast-track if minor)
Approval or escalate to higher authority

Step 4: SLA & Escalation

Approver SLA: 24 hours for standard, 4 hours for urgent
Auto-escalation if no action in SLA period
Max 3 rejection cycles before mandatory review meeting
Urgent PRs flagged for expedited processing

Industry Standard Metrics

PR First-Time Approval Rate

85-90%

Average Approval Time

1-2 days

Rejection Rate

10-15%

5

Purchase Order (PO) Rejection

ProKure Module - Order Management

Decision Point: "Is PO Approved?"

Trigger: PO created and submitted for final approval before vendor release

YES Path

Release PO to vendor

NO Path

Enter PO Revision Cycle

PO Revision Cycle

Step 1: Rejection Categories

Commercial Rejections

Price higher than approved PR estimate (>5% variance)
Payment terms not per company policy
Missing/incorrect vendor banking details
Tax calculation errors (GST, TDS, etc.)

Technical Rejections

Specifications don't match approved TDS
Delivery schedule conflicts with project plan
Quality requirements not clearly stated
Missing inspection/test requirements

Compliance Rejections

Vendor not on approved vendor list
Missing required certifications
Insurance/bond requirements not met
Contractual terms missing or incorrect

Step 2: 3-Way Validation Before Approval

PR (Requisition) ↔ Validation Check ↔ Quote/Contract

All must match on: Qty, Specs, Price (within 5%), Delivery

Step 3: Revision Workflow

Buyer receives rejection with specific comments
Buyer contacts vendor if price/terms negotiation needed
Update PO with corrections
Add revision notes documenting changes
Re-submit for approval (same approval chain)
If approved → Release to vendor
If rejected again → Escalate to Procurement Manager

Step 4: PO Amendment vs. New PO

Amendment (same PO number)

Minor corrections (typos, dates)
Price change <5%
Quantity change <10%

New PO Required

Different vendor
Fundamental spec change
Price change >15%
Complete scope change

Industry Standard Metrics

PO First-Time Approval Rate

90-95%

Average Revision Time

4-8 hours

PO Processing Time (total)

2-3 days

6

Quality Control (QC) Rejection at GRN

ProKure Module - Goods Receipt & Inspection

Decision Point: "Is QC Passed?"

Trigger: Goods received and inspected against PO specifications

YES Path

Accept goods, complete GRN, enable invoice processing

NO Path

Enter Goods Rejection & Return Cycle

Goods Rejection & Return Cycle

Step 1: Rejection Classification

Defect Type	Disposition
Critical Defect (Safety/Function)	Full rejection, immediate return, Vendor NCR raised
Major Defect (Specs mismatch)	Reject or accept with concession, Price reduction negotiation
Minor Defect (Cosmetic)	Accept with deviation note, Vendor informed for future
Quantity Short	Partial GRN, follow-up for balance, Short-shipment claim
Wrong Item	Full rejection, correct item needed, Logistics cost charged to vendor
Damaged in Transit	Document damage, raise claim, Insurance/transporter liable

Step 2: Non-Conformance Report (NCR) Process

QC Inspector Documents Defect
Photo/Video Evidence Captured
NCR Created with Details: PO Reference, Item Description, Defect Description, Quantity Affected, Evidence Attachments
QC Manager Reviews & Approves NCR
NCR Sent to Vendor via Portal (Auto-notification)
Vendor Response Required within 48 hours: Accept & arrange replacement, Dispute with evidence, or Request concession

Step 3: Return Material Authorization (RMA)

Vendor issues RMA number
Rejected goods segregated in QC Hold area
Return shipment arranged (vendor's cost for quality issue)
Return GRN created (negative entry)
Debit note issued to vendor
Track replacement delivery

Step 4: Vendor Scorecard Impact

Quality Issue	Score Impact
Critical defect	-10 points
Major defect	-5 points
Minor defect	-2 points
Repeated issues (3x)	Vendor review triggered
Score <60	Vendor probation
Score <40	Vendor blacklisting consideration

Industry Standard Metrics

First-Time Acceptance Rate

95-98%

Average NCR Resolution Time

5-7 days

Return Rate

2-5%

7

Three-Way Match Rejection

ProKure Module - Invoice Processing

Decision Point: "Does 3-Way Match Pass?"

Trigger: Invoice received from vendor, system attempts automatic matching

YES Path

Invoice approved for payment processing

NO Path

Enter Invoice Discrepancy Resolution

Invoice Discrepancy Resolution

3-Way Match Components: PURCHASE ORDER ↔ GOODS RECEIPT ↔ INVOICE

All three must match on: Vendor details, Item descriptions, Quantities, Unit prices, Total amounts, Tax calculations

Step 1: Discrepancy Types & Resolution

Discrepancy	Resolution Action
QUANTITY MISMATCH
Invoice > GRN	Reject excess, pay for received / Request credit note from vendor
Invoice < GRN	Process as is (vendor's loss) / Inform vendor for correction
PRICE MISMATCH
Invoice > PO	Reject, request revised invoice / If valid (price increase), get PO amendment approval first
Invoice < PO	Process at lower price / Update PO for records
TAX MISMATCH
Wrong GST rate	Reject invoice / Vendor to issue corrected invoice
Missing GST number	Cannot process, compliance issue / Vendor must reissue
ITEM MISMATCH
Wrong description	Verify if same item / If different, reject invoice
Wrong item code	Vendor to correct and reissue

Step 2: Tolerance Thresholds (Auto-Approval)

Parameter	Tolerance	Action if Exceeded
Quantity variance	±2%	Manual review
Price variance	±1%	Manual review
Total value	±₹500	Manual review
Tax variance	0%	Always reject

Step 3: Resolution Workflow

Match Failed - System generates Exception Report
AP Analyst reviews discrepancy
Internal Error → Correct GRN/PO
Vendor Error → Return invoice to vendor via Portal Notification
Vendor submits corrected invoice
Re-run 3-way match

Step 4: Payment Hold & Release

Invoice on hold until discrepancy resolved
Payment terms clock pauses during dispute
Partial payment allowed for undisputed portion
Aging report excludes disputed amount
Vendor notified of hold status via portal

Industry Standard Metrics

Auto-Match Success Rate

80-85%

Exception Resolution Time

2-3 days

Invoice Processing Cycle

5-7 days avg

8

Project Completion Check

Project Module - Progress Tracking

Decision Point: "Is Project 100% Complete?"

Trigger: Periodic progress check against project schedule and milestones

YES Path

Proceed to vendor rating and project closure

NO Path

Continue Progress Tracking & Continuation

Project Progress Tracking & Continuation

Step 1: Progress Assessment - Weighted Progress Calculation

Phase	Weight	Status	Contribution
Engineering	15%	100%	15.0%
Procurement	25%	100%	25.0%
Manufacturing	30%	80%	24.0%
Delivery	20%	50%	10.0%
Installation	10%	0%	0.0%
TOTAL	100%		74.0%

Step 2: Delay Analysis

Category	Action Required
Vendor Delay	Issue delay notice to vendor / Apply LD (Liquidated Damages) / Expedite or find alternate
Customer Delay (Approval/Access)	Document in project log / Request timeline extension / Adjust schedule with EOT claim
Internal Delay (Resource/Process)	Root cause analysis / Reallocate resources / Process improvement action
Force Majeure	Document event / Invoke FM clause / Mutual timeline extension

Step 3: Recovery Plan (If Schedule Variance >10%)

1. Project Manager creates Recovery Plan

Identify critical path activities
Resource leveling / additional resources
Fast-tracking opportunities
Crashing analysis (cost vs. time)

2. Stakeholder Communication

Customer notification (if delivery affected)
Management escalation (if cost affected)
Vendor coordination (if dependent)

3. Updated Baseline

Revised schedule (if approved)
Change request (if scope change)
Budget revision (if cost change)

Step 4: Milestone Payment Linkage

Milestone	Payment %	Trigger
PO Release	10%	Advance
Material Ready	30%	Inspection clearance
Dispatch	30%	Shipping documents
Delivery	20%	GRN acceptance
Installation	10%	Completion cert

Step 5: Continue Tracking Loop

Daily/Weekly progress updates from vendors
Automated progress % calculation
Dashboard alerts for slippage
Re-check completion status → Loop until 100%

Industry Standard Metrics

On-Time Completion Rate

70-80%

Average Schedule Variance

5-10%

Recovery Plan Success Rate

60-70%

9

Vendor-Submitted TDS/Drawings Approval

Engineering Module - Vendor Document Review

Decision Point: "Are Vendor Drawings Approved?"

Trigger: After PO acknowledgment, when PO stipulates that vendor must submit shop drawings for approval before production

When This Applies: This cycle is used when the company asks vendors to provide TDS/drawings instead of creating them internally. Common scenarios include: Fabricated steel structures, Custom equipment manufacturing, HVAC ducting and mechanical systems, Electrical panels and switchgear, Modular furniture systems, Any manufactured item designed by the vendor based on company specifications.

YES Path

Release vendor for production/manufacturing

NO Path

Enter Vendor Drawing Revision Workflow

Vendor Drawing Revision Workflow

Step 1: Review & Categorize

Status	Meaning	Action
Approved	Fully compliant	Production
Approved as Noted	Minor annotations	No resubmit
Revise & Resubmit	Significant issues	3-5 days
Rejected	Non-compliant	Restart

Step 2: Engineering Mark-up

Engineers mark up drawings with specific issues
Comments logged in Document Management System
Cloud-marked PDFs uploaded to vendor portal
RFI (Request for Information) created if clarification needed

Step 3: Vendor Notification via Portal

Drawing number and revision
Review status (Revise/Rejected)
Marked-up drawings attached
Specific issues itemized
Required correction deadline
Reviewer contact for questions

Step 4: Vendor Revision - Required Actions

Review all marked-up comments
Make corrections to drawings
Increment revision number (Rev 0 → Rev 1 → Rev A)
Prepare revision log/change summary
Resubmit via portal within deadline

Step 5: Re-review Cycle

Re-review focuses on: Verification of corrected items only (expedited), Any new issues introduced by revisions, Overall compliance check

Timeline: 1-3 days (faster than initial 5-7 day review)

Step 6: Approval Release

Drawings stamped "APPROVED FOR PRODUCTION"
Approval date and reviewer signature
Vendor notified to begin manufacturing
Approved drawings archived in project folder
Production timeline starts

Common Rejection Reasons

Issue Type	Examples	Typical Resolution
Dimensional Errors	Wrong sizes, tolerances out of spec, scale errors	1-2 days
Material Non-Compliance	Wrong grade, finish, or material type	1-3 days
Missing Information	Incomplete BOM, missing details, no hardware callouts	2-3 days
Interface Issues	Doesn't fit adjacent systems, clashes with other trades	3-5 days
Code/Standard Violations	Safety issues, accessibility problems, code violations	5-7 days

Escalation Triggers

3rd resubmission on same drawing set
Vendor response time exceeds 5 business days
Total approval cycle exceeds 3 weeks
Repeated fundamental errors (vendor capability concern)
Production start date at risk

Liability Note: Even with company approval, the vendor retains professional responsibility for the technical accuracy of their shop drawings. Company approval signifies only that the general design intent is understood. PO terms should include clauses clearly stating vendor's engineering responsibility.

Industry Standard Metrics

First-Time Approval Rate

50-60%

Average Submission Cycles

1.8

Average Total Approval Time

7-10 days

Typical SLA

5-7 days initial, 3-5 re-review

Stage	Decision	NO Action	Max Cycles	Escalation Trigger
Lead Qualification	Qualified?	Nurture/Archive	N/A	Requalification opportunity
Quote	Won?	Revise quote	2	3rd revision or >20% discount
Engineering	Approved?	Revise TDS/Drawings	3	3rd revision or schedule impact
PR Approval	Approved?	Revise PR	2	Budget exceed or 3rd rejection
PO Approval	Approved?	Revise PO	2	Price variance >15%
Vendor Drawings	Approved?	Revise & Resubmit	3	3rd resubmission or 3-week delay
QC/GRN	Passed?	Return to Vendor	1	Critical defect or repeat issue
3-Way Match	Match?	Resolve Discrepancy	N/A	Tax issues or >5% variance
Project Complete	100%?	Continue Tracking	N/A	>10% schedule variance

10

E-Invoice IRN Generation Rejection

Regulatory Module - GST E-Invoice Compliance

Decision Point: "Is E-Invoice IRN Generated Successfully?"

Trigger: After invoice creation, when the system submits invoice data to the IRP (Invoice Registration Portal) for IRN generation. Mandatory for businesses with turnover > ₹5 Cr.

Regulatory Mandate: Under GST rules, e-invoices must be generated within 30 days of invoice date. Failure to generate IRN means the invoice is not valid for GST credit. The IRP validates schema, GSTIN, HSN codes, and tax calculations before issuing a 64-character IRN with a signed QR code. Cancellation window is 24 hours from generation.

YES Path

IRN generated → QR code signed → Invoice valid for GST filing → Proceed to payment

NO Path

Enter E-Invoice Error Resolution Workflow

E-Invoice Error Resolution Workflow

Step 1: Categorize IRP Error

Error Type	Common Causes	Resolution
Schema Validation	Missing mandatory fields, invalid format	Fix data & retry
GSTIN Mismatch	Buyer/Seller GSTIN invalid or cancelled	Verify GSTIN & update
HSN Code Error	Invalid HSN, wrong digit count	Correct HSN mapping
Tax Calculation	CGST+SGST ≠ total, rate mismatch	Recalculate taxes
Duplicate IRN	Same invoice submitted twice	Use existing IRN

Step 2: Auto-Retry Logic

System auto-retries transient errors (timeout, 5xx) up to 3 times with exponential backoff
Permanent errors (4xx) flagged immediately for manual review
Failed invoices queued in einvoice_submissions table with status FAILED
Retry attempts logged in einvoice_api_logs MongoDB collection

Step 3: Manual Correction

Finance team reviews error details from IRP response
Corrects invoice data (GSTIN, HSN, tax rates, amounts)
Resubmits to IRP via system
If structural issue, invoice may need to be cancelled and re-created

Step 4: Escalation

If unresolved after 24 hours → Escalate to Finance Manager
If GSTIN issue → Escalate to vendor for updated registration
If IRP system downtime → Queue for batch retry when IRP is available
Track compliance SLA: IRN must be generated within 30 days of invoice date

Key Metrics: IRN first-attempt success rate target: 95%+ | Average resolution time: <4 hours | Monthly compliance rate: 100% mandatory

11

TReDS Invoice Financing Rejection

Regulatory Module - MSME Invoice Discounting

Decision Point: "Is TReDS Invoice Accepted by Buyer?"

Trigger: When an MSME vendor uploads an invoice to TReDS platform (RXIL/M1xchange/Invoicemart) for factoring, the buyer (company) must accept/reject within 48 hours.

MSME Mandate: Under MSME Development Act and RBI guidelines, buyers with turnover > ₹500 Cr must register on TReDS. Invoices accepted on TReDS are then available for bidding by financiers (banks/NBFCs). MSME receives payment at T+2 after financier acceptance, significantly improving cash flow vs. typical 45-90 day payment terms.

YES Path

Invoice accepted → Financier bidding opens → Best bid selected → MSME paid at T+2 → Buyer pays financier at maturity

NO Path

Enter TReDS Dispute Resolution Workflow

TReDS Dispute Resolution Workflow

Step 1: Classify Rejection Reason

Rejection Reason	Description	Resolution Path
Amount Mismatch	Invoice amount doesn't match PO/GRN	Reconcile with 3-way match
Goods Not Received	GRN not yet completed	Wait for GRN completion
Quality Dispute	QC rejection pending resolution	Resolve QC issue first
Documentation Gap	Missing challan, test certificate	Vendor uploads documents
Duplicate Upload	Same invoice already on TReDS	Withdraw duplicate

Step 2: Buyer-Vendor Coordination

System notifies vendor of rejection with specific reason code
Vendor portal shows rejection details and required actions
Internal procurement team reviews if rejection is valid
If invalid rejection, buyer's finance team overrides with approval

Step 3: Resubmission

Vendor corrects invoice and resubmits on TReDS platform
System auto-matches corrected invoice with PO and GRN
48-hour acceptance timer resets for buyer
If no action by buyer within 48h, deemed accepted (platform rules)

Step 4: Escalation

If 2+ rejections on same invoice → Escalate to Procurement Head
If buyer consistently misses 48h window → Flag for compliance review
TReDS platform may impose penalties for repeated unjustified rejections
MSME vendor can raise dispute with TReDS platform directly

Key Metrics: Buyer acceptance rate target: 90%+ within 48h | Average factoring rate: 6-9% p.a. | MSME payment timeline: T+2 after financier bid acceptance

12

ESG Assessment Compliance Failure

ESG Module - Supplier Sustainability Scoring

Decision Point: "Does Vendor Meet ESG Threshold?"

Trigger: During vendor evaluation or periodic reassessment, when supplier's ESG composite score (Environmental 40% + Social 35% + Governance 25%) falls below the configured minimum threshold (default: 60/100).

Sustainability Compliance: ESG scoring is used for BRSR (Business Responsibility and Sustainability Reporting) compliance and Scope 3 emissions tracking under the GHG Protocol. Vendors with low ESG scores represent supply chain risk and may impact the company's own ESG ratings, CDP disclosures, and SBTi (Science Based Targets initiative) commitments.

YES Path

Vendor meets ESG threshold → Approved for procurement → ESG score recorded → Certifications verified

NO Path

Enter ESG Remediation Workflow

ESG Remediation Workflow

Step 1: Identify Deficiency Areas

ESG Pillar	Weight	Common Deficiencies	Remediation
Environmental (E)	40%	High carbon intensity, no waste management	Carbon reduction plan, ISO 14001
Social (S)	35%	Labor violations, no safety certifications	SA8000 certification, safety audit
Governance (G)	25%	No anti-corruption policy, poor transparency	Policy implementation, audit trail

Step 2: Corrective Action Plan (CAP)

System generates CAP with specific actions per deficient area
Vendor receives CAP via portal with deadlines (typically 90 days)
Interim assessment scheduled at 45-day mark
Vendor uploads evidence of improvements (certifications, audit reports)

Step 3: Conditional Procurement Decision

Score 50-59: Conditional approval with CAP mandatory — vendor can participate in bids with ESG improvement clause in PO
Score 40-49: Restricted — only emergency procurement allowed, CAP with monthly review
Score <40: Blocked — vendor suspended from new POs until reassessment passes threshold
All decisions logged in esg_audit_logs with approver and justification

Step 4: Reassessment

Scheduled reassessment after CAP deadline (90 days)
Independent ESG auditor conducts on-site/desk review
New score calculated and compared against threshold
If passed → vendor restored to full status; If failed again → escalate to vendor delisting review

Key Metrics: Supplier ESG pass rate target: 80%+ | Average CAP completion: 75 days | ESG score improvement after CAP: +15 points avg

13

AI Autonomous Action Reversal

Agentic AI Module - Human-in-the-Loop Override

Decision Point: "Is AI Action Approved by Human?"

Trigger: When an Agentic AI agent (RFQ_CREATOR, BID_EVALUATOR, PO_GENERATOR, COMMUNICATION_AGENT, EXCEPTION_HANDLER) executes an autonomous action that either requires human confirmation or is flagged for review post-execution.

Human-in-the-Loop: AI agents operate with configurable confidence thresholds. Actions above the auto-execute threshold (default: 85%) execute autonomously but can be reversed within the reversal window. Actions below the threshold generate recommendations that require human approval before execution. All AI actions are logged in ai_agent_logs for audit trail and learning feedback.

YES Path

Human approves → Action confirmed → Positive feedback logged → AI confidence model reinforced

NO Path

Enter AI Action Reversal Workflow

AI Action Reversal Workflow

Step 1: Classify Reversal Type

Agent Type	Example Action	Reversal Method
RFQ_CREATOR	Auto-created RFQ from demand signal	Cancel RFQ, notify vendors
BID_EVALUATOR	Auto-ranked vendor bids	Reset ranking, manual re-evaluation
PO_GENERATOR	Auto-generated purchase order	Cancel PO (if not acknowledged)
COMMUNICATION_AGENT	Sent follow-up to vendor	Send correction notice
EXCEPTION_HANDLER	Auto-approved price variance	Revert approval, flag for review

Step 2: Execute Reversal

Check if action is still within reversal window (configurable, default: 30 minutes for auto-executed actions)
If within window → System auto-reverses the action and restores previous state
If outside window → Manual intervention required; may need compensating actions (cancel PO, send correction)
All reversals logged in ai_autonomous_actions with reversal_reason and reversed_by

Step 3: AI Learning Feedback

Human provides feedback: reason for rejection (wrong vendor, bad timing, incorrect quantity, policy violation)
Feedback stored in ai_learning_feedback table with rating (1-5) and correction details
AI model adjusts confidence weights for similar future scenarios
If 3+ reversals on same action type → auto-execute threshold raised for that agent

Step 4: Threshold Adjustment

System suggests threshold adjustment based on reversal patterns
Admin reviews and approves new confidence thresholds per agent type
Agent may be downgraded from autonomous to recommendation-only mode
Monthly AI governance review examines all reversals and threshold changes

Key Metrics: AI action acceptance rate target: 90%+ | Reversal rate: <10% | Average confidence score: 82% | Learning improvement: +2% accuracy per quarter

14

PO Amendment Approval

Procurement Module - Purchase Order Lifecycle

Decision Point: "Is PO Amendment Approved?"

Trigger: After PO issuance, when quantity, price, delivery date, specifications, or scope need to change. Amendment types: QTY_INCREASE, QTY_DECREASE, PRICE_CHANGE, DATE_EXTENSION, SCOPE_CHANGE, SPEC_CHANGE, SHIP_TO_CHANGE, TERMS_CHANGE, CANCELLATION.

Amendment vs. New PO: Amendment (same PO number) applies when: price change <15%, quantity change <25%, delivery date shift <30 days. If changes exceed these thresholds, a new PO may be required with fresh approval. All amendments require vendor consent — vendor can ACCEPT, ACCEPT_WITH_CONDITIONS, COUNTER_PROPOSE, or REJECT.

YES Path

Amendment approved → Vendor notified → Vendor accepts → PO updated with new revision number → Downstream GRN/Invoice updated

NO Path

Enter PO Amendment Resolution Workflow

PO Amendment Resolution Workflow

Step 1: Classify Amendment Type

Amendment Type	Approval Level	Vendor Consent
Quantity (<10%)	Procurement Manager	Required
Quantity (10-25%)	Procurement Head	Required + Negotiation
Price Change	Finance + Procurement Head	Required
Date Extension (<30d)	Project Manager	Acknowledgment
Scope / Spec Change	Engineering + Finance + Director	Full Negotiation
Cancellation	VP / Director	Settlement Required

Step 2: Impact Analysis

Budget impact: Calculate cost difference between original and amended PO
Schedule impact: Effect on project timeline and milestones
Inventory impact: Effect on material availability and safety stock
Downstream impact: Check if GRN, ASN, or invoices already exist against this PO
Amendable quantity = PO qty - received qty - in-transit qty

Step 3: Vendor Response

Vendor receives amendment request via portal with full change details
Vendor has 48h to respond (configurable per amendment type)
If ACCEPT → Amendment executed, PO updated
If COUNTER_PROPOSE → Negotiation round opens; vendor suggests alternate terms
If REJECT → Escalate to Procurement Head for alternative sourcing
If NO_RESPONSE within 48h → Auto-reminder at 24h, escalation at 48h

Step 4: Escalation

If amendment rejected by approver → Revise justification or cancel amendment request
If vendor rejects → Source alternative vendor (new PO) or negotiate further
If partial receipts already made → Cannot reduce qty below received qty
All amendment history maintained in po_amendment_audit with before/after snapshots

Key Metrics: Amendment approval rate: 85% | Average turnaround: 2-3 days | Vendor acceptance rate: 92% | Amendment frequency: ~8% of POs

15

RFQ Amendment During Active Bidding

Procurement Module - RFQ Lifecycle (FR-RFQ-006)

Decision Point: "Should RFQ Be Amended While Bids Are Open?"

Trigger: Specification error discovered, scope change requested, or timeline adjustment needed while vendors are actively submitting bids.

YES Path (Minor Amendment)

Issue corrigendum → Extend deadline → Notify all bidders → Allow bid revision → Continue evaluation

NO Path (Major Change)

Cancel RFQ → Issue fresh RFQ with corrected specifications

RFQ Amendment Workflow

Step 1: Classify Amendment Severity

Change Type	Severity	Action
Clarification / Typo Fix	Low	Issue addendum, no deadline extension
Quantity Change (<20%)	Medium	Issue corrigendum + extend deadline 3-5 days
Spec Change (non-critical)	Medium	Issue corrigendum + extend deadline 5-7 days
Major Scope Change (>20%)	High	Cancel and re-issue RFQ
Vendor List Change	High	Re-issue or extend to new vendors

Step 2: Vendor Notification

All registered bidders notified via email + portal alert simultaneously
Corrigendum document attached with tracked changes
Vendors who already submitted can revise their bids
New deadline clearly stated (minimum 3 days extension for medium changes)
Q&A period reopened if specification changed

Step 3: Bid Management

Previously submitted bids marked as "Pre-Amendment" for reference
Vendors may submit revised bids (post-amendment) or confirm original
Evaluation uses only latest bid version per vendor
If RFQ cancelled, all bids invalidated with notification to vendors

Key Metrics: RFQ amendment rate: ~5% | Bid revision rate post-amendment: 60% | Average extension: 5 days

16

Contract Amendment & Termination

CLM Module - Contract Lifecycle Management

Decision Point: "Is Contract Amendment / Termination Approved?"

Trigger: Scope change, rate adjustment, term extension, or early termination requested for an active contract. Stored in clm.contract_amendments.

YES Path

Amendment: Legal review → Vendor negotiation → Amendment executed → Dependent POs updated
Termination: Settlement calculated → Exit procedures → Final payment → Archival

NO Path

Amendment rejected → Revert to original terms or renegotiate
Termination denied → Continue under existing contract with dispute resolution

Contract Change Workflow

Step 1: Classify Change

Change Type	Requires Legal Review?	Approval Level
Value Change (<10%)	No	Procurement Head
Value Change (10-25%)	Yes	Finance Director
Term Extension	Yes	Legal + Procurement Head
Scope Change	Yes	Legal + Finance + VP
Early Termination	Mandatory	Legal + Finance + CEO/MD

Step 2: Legal Review & Negotiation

Side-by-side comparison of original vs. proposed terms
Legal reviews clause implications and liability exposure
Vendor negotiation round (may require multiple iterations)
Both parties sign amendment addendum

Step 3: Termination Procedures (if applicable)

Outstanding obligations calculated (committed POs, delivered but unpaid)
Termination fee per contract clause (if any)
Remaining inventory / WIP resolution
Final settlement payment processed
Vendor access revoked, documents archived

Key Metrics: Contract amendment rate: ~12% annually | Termination rate: <3% | Average amendment cycle: 7-14 days

17

ASN / Delivery Discrepancy

Logistics Module - Shipment Verification

Decision Point: "Does ASN Match PO and Physical Delivery?"

Trigger: When Advanced Shipment Notice (ASN) data doesn't match PO terms or when physical goods received differ from ASN claims (quantity, items, delivery location, or timing).

YES Path

ASN validated → Approve for GRN creation → Goods moved to QC area

NO Path

Enter Discrepancy Resolution: Quantity mismatch → Adjust GRN | Wrong items → Reject & return | Location error → Redirect

ASN Discrepancy Workflow

Step 1: Classify Discrepancy

Discrepancy	Severity	Action
Qty within tolerance (±5%)	Low	Accept with note, adjust GRN
Qty mismatch >5%	Medium	Partial GRN + vendor notification
Wrong items shipped	Critical	Reject, initiate return
Early / Late delivery	Medium	Accept + update schedule
Damaged in transit	Critical	Document damage, insurance claim

Step 2: Resolution

Partial GRN created for accepted quantity; remaining tracked as pending
Vendor notified via portal with discrepancy details and photos
For critical discrepancies: Hold entire shipment pending resolution
Vendor must respond within 24-48h with corrective action
Impact on 3-way match: Invoice cannot exceed GRN accepted qty

Key Metrics: ASN accuracy rate target: 95%+ | Discrepancy resolution: <48h | Partial GRN rate: ~8%

18

GRN Short / Excess Variance

Inventory Module - Goods Receipt Variance

Decision Point: "Is Received Quantity Within Tolerance?"

Trigger: During GRN creation when received quantity differs from PO ordered quantity. Tolerance configurable per item category (default: ±5%).

YES Path

Quantity within tolerance → GRN completed → Inventory updated → Invoice processing enabled

NO Path

Short delivery: Create partial GRN + track pending qty
Excess delivery: Accept to tolerance, return excess or negotiate

GRN Variance Workflow

Short Delivery Handling

Create GRN for received quantity only
PO remains open for balance quantity
Options: Wait for follow-up delivery | Issue PO amendment reducing qty | Source from alternate vendor
If >2 short deliveries on same PO → Flag vendor performance
Invoice can only be processed for received qty (3-way match enforced)

Excess Delivery Handling

Accept up to tolerance limit; reject excess beyond tolerance
If excess accepted: PO amendment required to increase qty (if not within tolerance)
If excess rejected: Create GRN Return for excess qty, vendor arranges pickup
Finance notification: Budget impact if accepting excess
Warehouse: Segregate excess goods pending decision

Escalation

Short >25% of PO qty → Escalate to Procurement Head for alternate sourcing
Excess >25% → Escalate to Finance for budget review
Repeated variance by same vendor → Trigger performance review (Cycle 24)

Key Metrics: GRN accuracy target: 92%+ | Short delivery rate: ~6% | Excess delivery rate: ~3%

19

Invoice Dispute Resolution

Finance Module - AP Exception Management

Decision Point: "Is Invoice Exception Resolved?"

Trigger: When 3-way match fails beyond auto-tolerance (Cycle 8) and manual intervention is needed. Includes quantity, price, tax, and description mismatches.

YES Path

Exception resolved → Invoice cleared → Payment scheduled per terms

NO Path

Enter Dispute Resolution: Debit note issued to vendor | Invoice rejected for correction | Partial payment for undisputed portion

Invoice Exception Workflow

Step 1: AP Analyst Review

System presents itemized comparison: PO vs. GRN vs. Invoice
Classify: Internal error (wrong GRN entry) vs. Vendor error (wrong price/qty)
If internal → Correct GRN/PO and retry match automatically
If vendor → Generate rejection notice with specific variances

Step 2: Vendor Communication

Vendor portal shows invoice status: "Disputed" with line-item details
Vendor can accept dispute and submit corrected invoice
Vendor can challenge dispute with supporting documents
Partial payment option: Pay undisputed lines, hold disputed portion

Step 3: Escalation & Resolution

Dispute open >15 days → Auto-escalate to Finance Manager
Dispute open >30 days → Escalate to CFO with impact analysis
Resolution: Debit note, credit note, or revised invoice accepted
Vendor scorecard impacted: Invoice accuracy rate tracked

Key Metrics: First-pass match rate target: 85%+ | Dispute resolution: <10 days | Partial payment usage: ~15% of disputed invoices

20

Payment Processing Failure

Finance Module - Payment Execution & Recovery

Decision Point: "Is Payment Successfully Processed?"

Trigger: When payment execution fails — bounced cheque, failed NEFT/RTGS, invalid bank details, payment reversal by bank, or TDS miscalculation.

YES Path

Payment cleared → Bank reconciliation matched → Vendor notified → Invoice marked as paid

NO Path

Enter Payment Recovery Workflow

Payment Recovery Workflow

Step 1: Classify Failure

Failure Type	Cause	Resolution
Bounced Cheque	Insufficient funds / Invalid account	Re-issue NEFT or reissue cheque
Failed NEFT/RTGS	Invalid IFSC/Account, bank downtime	Verify details, retry
TDS Mismatch	Wrong TDS rate or section applied	Recalculate TDS, reprocess
Bank Reversal	Duplicate payment detected	Reconcile and adjust

Step 2: Recovery Actions

Verify vendor bank details from vendor master (request updated details if needed)
Recalculate payment amount if TDS issue
Reprocess payment via alternate method if primary method fails repeatedly
Vendor notified of delay with expected re-payment date
MSME vendors: Priority re-processing to maintain 45-day compliance

Key Metrics: Payment success rate: 98%+ | Average recovery time: 1-3 days | MSME payment compliance: 100% target

21

Budget Exception & Emergency PO

Workflow Module - Exception Handling

Decision Point: "Is Budget Exception / Emergency PO Justified?"

Trigger: PR exceeds allocated budget, or production downtime requires urgent procurement bypassing standard cycle. Managed via workflow.budget_exceptions.

YES Path

Budget exception: Budget reallocated → PR proceeds normally
Emergency PO: Fast-track approval (VP/Director) → Reduced vendor quotes → Expedited PO

NO Path

Budget exception denied → Value engineer / reduce scope / defer to next budget cycle
Emergency denied → Follow standard procurement cycle

Exception Handling Workflow

Budget Exception Path

Requester submits exception with business justification and impact analysis
If overage <10% → Cost Center Manager can approve
If overage 10-20% → Department Head approval required
If overage >20% → Finance Director + VP approval
Budget reallocation from other cost centers (if available)

Emergency PO Fast-Track

Emergency declaration by Plant Manager / VP with downtime cost justification
Reduced RFQ: Minimum 1 vendor quote (vs. standard 3)
Compressed approval: Single VP/Director approval (vs. multi-level)
Expedited PO with rush delivery terms and premium pricing allowed
Post-procurement review mandatory within 7 days (was it truly emergency?)

Key Metrics: Budget exception rate: <5% of PRs | Emergency PO rate: <2% | Post-review compliance: 100%

22

MSME 45-Day Payment Compliance

Finance Module - Regulatory Compliance

Decision Point: "Is MSME Payment Within 45-Day Deadline?"

Trigger: System monitors all invoices from MSME-registered vendors. At Day 30, 38, and 43 — escalating alerts. Statutory requirement under MSME Development Act; non-compliance attracts compound interest.

YES Path

Payment processed within 45 days → Compliance logged → MSME-I reporting data updated

NO Path

Day 45 breach → Interest calculation triggered → Compliance violation flagged → CFO alert

MSME Compliance Workflow

Proactive Alert Cascade

Day 30: Reminder to AP team — "15 days remaining for MSME invoice #XXX"
Day 38: Escalation to Finance Manager — "7 days remaining, resolve blockers"
Day 43: Critical alert to CFO — "2 days to statutory deadline"
Day 45: Auto-flag as non-compliant, calculate interest per MSME Act (3× bank rate)

Breach Handling

Interest calculated: Compound interest at 3× bank rate from Day 46
Payment prioritized with interest in next payment run
MSME-I half-yearly return updated with delayed payment data
Root cause analysis: Was delay due to dispute, GRN pending, or process gap?
Process improvement: Add MSME invoices to fast-track payment queue

Key Metrics: MSME compliance target: 100% | Current average: 95%+ | Interest exposure: tracked monthly

23

Vendor Onboarding Rejection

SLM Module - Supplier Qualification

Decision Point: "Does Vendor Pass Onboarding Qualification?"

Trigger: New vendor registration undergoes compliance check: GSTIN validation, PAN verification, MSME certificate, bank account verification, exclusion list screening, and quality certification review.

YES Path

All checks passed → Vendor activated → Portal access granted → Eligible for RFQs

NO Path

Enter Onboarding Remediation Workflow

Onboarding Remediation Workflow

Step 1: Classify Rejection Reason

Check	Issue	Remediation
GSTIN Validation	Invalid / Cancelled GSTIN	Vendor updates registration
PAN Verification	PAN mismatch with name	Vendor provides correct PAN
Bank Verification	Account details mismatch	Penny-drop re-verification
Quality Certs	Missing ISO / industry certs	Vendor obtains certification
Exclusion List	Vendor on government blacklist	Permanent rejection

Step 2: Remediation

Vendor notified via email with specific rejection reasons and required actions
Vendor portal shows checklist of pending items with upload capability
Vendor has 30 days to complete remediation (configurable)
Resubmission triggers automatic re-verification
If on exclusion list → Permanent rejection, no remediation possible

Key Metrics: First-pass onboarding success: 70% | Average remediation time: 7-10 days | Exclusion list hits: <1%

24

Vendor Performance & PIP

SLM Module - Performance Improvement Plan

Decision Point: "Does Vendor Meet Performance Threshold?"

Trigger: Quarterly vendor scorecard review. Composite score based on: Quality (40%) + Delivery (35%) + Cost (15%) + Service (10%). Threshold: Excellent >90, Good 80-90, Satisfactory 70-79, Poor <70.

YES Path

Score ≥70 → Vendor continues as active supplier → If >90, eligible for preferred vendor benefits

NO Path

Score <70 → Enter Performance Improvement Plan (PIP)

PIP Workflow

Step 1: PIP Creation

Identify specific deficiency areas (quality failures, late deliveries, etc.)
Define measurable improvement targets with deadlines
Assign procurement POC for vendor coaching
PIP duration: 90 days (default)
Monthly review checkpoints at Day 30 and Day 60

Step 2: PIP Outcome

If improved to ≥70 → Vendor restored to active status, monitoring continues
If improved but still <70 → PIP extended 30 days (max 1 extension)
If no improvement → Trigger Vendor Debarment process (Cycle 25)
During PIP: Vendor can participate in bids but flagged as "Under PIP"

Key Metrics: PIP trigger rate: ~8% of vendors | PIP success rate: 65% | Average improvement: +12 points

25

Vendor Debarment / Blacklisting

SLM Module - Vendor Suspension & Delisting

Decision Point: "Should Vendor Be Debarred?"

Trigger: Repeated performance failures (failed PIP), compliance violations, fraud, ethics breach, financial default, or government blacklisting.

YES Path (Debarment Approved)

Temporary suspension (90 days) or permanent blacklist → Block new POs → Vendor notified with appeal window

NO Path (Debarment Denied)

Continue with enhanced monitoring → Extended PIP → Restricted to non-critical purchases only

Debarment Workflow

Step 1: Classify Debarment Type

Trigger	Debarment Type	Duration
Failed PIP (score <70)	Temporary Suspension	90 days
Repeated quality failures	Category-specific block	180 days
Compliance violation	Full suspension	1 year
Fraud / Ethics breach	Permanent blacklist	Indefinite
Government blacklist	Permanent blacklist	Per government order

Step 2: Execution & Appeal

All new POs blocked; existing POs assessed case-by-case (complete or cancel)
Vendor notified formally with debarment reason and duration
Appeal window: 15 days for temporary, 30 days for permanent
Appeal review by Procurement Committee (cross-functional)
Reinstatement: Re-onboarding with enhanced due diligence after suspension ends

Key Metrics: Annual debarment rate: <2% of active vendors | Appeal success rate: ~20% | Reinstatement rate: ~40%

26

Vendor Deduction Dispute

Finance Module - Penalty & Deduction Management

Decision Point: "Does Vendor Accept the Deduction?"

Trigger: Deduction applied to vendor payment for: quality defects, late delivery LD, short shipment, non-compliance penalty, or warranty claim.

YES Path

Vendor accepts → Debit note issued → Amount deducted from next payment → Closed

NO Path

Vendor disputes → Enter Deduction Dispute Resolution

Deduction Dispute Workflow

Step 1: Vendor Challenge

Vendor submits dispute via portal with supporting evidence
Evidence types: Delivery proof, quality certificates, force majeure documentation
Dispute must be filed within 15 days of debit note

Step 2: Internal Review

Cross-functional review: Procurement + QC + Finance
If vendor evidence valid → Reverse deduction (full or partial)
If deduction justified → Maintain deduction with detailed response to vendor
Compromise: Negotiate reduced deduction amount

Step 3: Settlement

If reversed → Credit note issued, amount restored to next payment
If upheld → Deduction finalized, vendor relationship impact assessed
If unresolved >30 days → Escalate to Procurement Committee
All dispute history maintained for vendor performance analytics

Key Metrics: Deduction dispute rate: ~15% | Resolution time: <15 days | Reversal rate: ~25%

27

Delivery Performance & Liquidated Damages

Logistics Module - Late Delivery Management

Decision Point: "Is Delivery On Schedule?"

Trigger: PO delivery date passed without goods receipt. System tracks delivery schedule and triggers alerts at D-7, D-3, D-Day, and D+1.

YES Path

Delivered on/before date → On-time score updated → No LD applicable

NO Path

Late delivery → LD calculation triggered → Vendor notified

LD Application Workflow

Step 1: LD Calculation

LD rate as per PO terms (typical: 0.5% per week, max 5% of PO value)
Grace period: 3-7 days (configurable per PO)
Calculation: Delay days × daily LD rate × undelivered value
Cap: Maximum LD cannot exceed contract-specified limit

Step 2: Vendor Communication

Formal delay notice with LD calculation sent to vendor
Vendor can request LD waiver with justification (force majeure, buyer-caused delay)
If buyer-caused (late engineering release, site not ready) → LD waived
If vendor-caused → LD deducted from invoice or future payment

Step 3: Escalation

Delay >30 days → Escalate to Procurement Head for alternate sourcing
Delay impacting project critical path → Emergency sourcing authorized
Repeated delays (3+ POs) → Trigger Performance Review (Cycle 24)

Key Metrics: On-time delivery target: 90%+ | Average delay: 4.2 days | LD application rate: ~12% of POs

28

Rate Contract Renewal / Expiry

Procurement Module - Contract Management

Decision Point: "Should Rate Contract Be Renewed?"

Trigger: System alert at 60, 30, and 15 days before rate contract expiry. Decision to renew, re-bid, or let expire.

YES Path

Renew: Extend terms (with/without price revision) → New validity period → Vendor confirmation

NO Path

Re-bid: Issue new RFQ for competitive pricing | Expire: Block further POs against this contract

Rate Contract Review Workflow

Step 1: Utilization Analysis

Contract utilization %: How much of contracted value/qty was consumed
Price competitiveness: Compare contract rates vs. current market rates
Vendor performance during contract period
Demand forecast for next contract period

Step 2: Renewal Decision

If utilization >70% and vendor performance >80 → Recommend renewal
If market prices >10% lower → Recommend re-bid for competitive pricing
If utilization <30% → Recommend expiry or reduced-scope renewal
Price escalation negotiation: Max escalation per contract clause (e.g., CPI-linked)

Key Metrics: Renewal rate: ~65% | Re-bid rate: ~25% | Expiry rate: ~10%

29

Service SLA Breach

Service Procurement - SLA Monitoring

Decision Point: "Is Service Vendor Meeting SLA Targets?"

Trigger: Service delivery metrics fall below SLA thresholds defined in contract (response time, resolution time, uptime, resource availability).

YES Path

SLA met → Invoice approved for full amount → Continue monitoring

NO Path

SLA breach → Apply service credits / penalties → Remediation plan

SLA Breach Workflow

Resolution Steps

Calculate service credits per SLA penalty clause (e.g., 2% per missed SLA target)
Vendor provides root cause analysis within 48h
Remediation plan with specific corrective actions and timeline
If 3+ consecutive SLA breaches → Service review meeting mandatory
If chronic SLA failure → Contract termination clause triggered
Service invoice reduced by penalty amount before payment

Key Metrics: SLA compliance target: 95%+ | Service credit application rate: ~8% | Contract termination for SLA: <2%

30

Offline Negotiation Approval

Procurement Module - Catalog & Price Agreements

Decision Point: "Is Offline Negotiated Price Approved?"

Trigger: Sourcing team conducts email/phone negotiation outside system and enters negotiated rates for approval. Also covers catalog price updates and price agreement renewals.

YES Path

Approved → Catalog updated with negotiated rates → Direct PO creation enabled (bypass RFQ)

NO Path

Rejected → Renegotiate with vendor or issue formal RFQ for competitive bidding

Offline Negotiation Workflow

Approval & Cataloging

Sourcing team enters negotiated prices with vendor quote reference
System compares against historical prices and market benchmarks
Approval matrix: <₹5L Procurement Manager | ₹5-25L Procurement Head | >₹25L Finance + VP
If approved → Rates stored in catalog with validity period
Catalog-based PO: Future orders for these items use catalog rates without new RFQ
Price agreement document generated for vendor signature

Key Metrics: Catalog PO rate: ~30% of all POs | Price agreement count: ~200/year | Approval rejection rate: ~10%

31

Reverse Auction Dispute

Procurement Module - Auction Management

Decision Point: "Is Auction Result Accepted by All Parties?"

Trigger: After reverse auction closes, losing bidder challenges result or winning bidder retracts bid. Also covers auto-extension disputes and technical disqualification appeals.

YES Path

Result accepted → Award to lowest qualified bidder → PO generated

NO Path

Dispute raised → Review bid logs → Re-evaluate or re-auction

Auction Dispute Workflow

Resolution Steps

System maintains immutable bid log with timestamps (tamper-proof audit trail)
Technical disqualification appeal: Vendor provides additional documentation within 48h
Bid retraction by winner: Award to 2nd lowest bidder (L2) or re-auction
Connectivity dispute: Check system logs for timeout/disconnect during bidding
If valid dispute → Extend auction or award to next eligible bidder
If frivolous → Dismiss with documented reasoning; repeat offenders flagged

Key Metrics: Auction dispute rate: ~3% | Resolution time: <48h | L2 award rate: ~5%

32

Return Material Authorization (RMA)

Inventory Module - Goods Return & Credit

Decision Point: "Is Return Authorized and Credit Received?"

Trigger: Quality rejection, excess goods, wrong items, or warranty claim requiring return to vendor and credit/replacement.

YES Path

RMA issued → Return shipped → Credit note received → Settlement complete

NO Path

Vendor disputes return → Negotiation → Partial credit or scrap locally

RMA Workflow

Return Process

RMA request created with return reason, photos, and QC report
Vendor issues RMA number and arranges pickup (or buyer ships)
Shipping cost allocation: Vendor bears cost if quality/wrong item; buyer if excess return
Negative GRN created to reverse original receipt from inventory
Credit note expected within 15 days of vendor receiving returned goods
If credit not received → Auto-deduct from next invoice payment
Replacement option: Vendor ships replacement instead of credit (tracked separately)

Key Metrics: Return rate: ~3% of GRNs | RMA cycle time: <21 days | Credit recovery rate: 95%+

33

Quality Assurance & NCR

Quality Module - Inspection & Non-Conformance

Decision Point: "Does Inspection Pass Quality Criteria?"

Trigger: Incoming goods inspection using AQL sampling plan. Inspection checklist covers dimensions, appearance, functionality, material composition, and documentation completeness.

YES Path

QC Pass → GRN created → Goods moved to warehouse → Invoice processing enabled

NO Path

Enter NCR (Non-Conformance Report) Workflow

NCR Workflow

Step 1: NCR Classification

NCR Level	Description	Action
Minor	Cosmetic, non-functional	Accept with deviation note
Major	Functional but usable with rework	Rework or accept at reduced price
Critical	Safety/compliance failure	Full rejection, RMA (Cycle 32)

Step 2: Disposition

Minor NCR: Accept with deviation approval from Engineering (documented)
Major NCR: Vendor rework on-site or return for rework → Re-inspection required
Critical NCR: Full lot rejection → RMA process → Vendor corrective action mandatory
Vendor CAPA (Corrective and Preventive Action) required for Major and Critical NCRs
NCR history tracked in vendor quality scorecard

Key Metrics: First-pass QC rate: 88%+ | NCR rate: ~12% | Critical NCR rate: <2%

34

Approval Delegation & Escalation

Workflow Module - Approval Matrix Management

Decision Point: "Is Approval Obtained Within SLA?"

Trigger: Any approval request (PR, PO, Amendment, Budget, etc.) exceeds its SLA deadline without action from the assigned approver.

YES Path

Approval obtained within SLA → Process continues normally

NO Path

SLA breached → Auto-delegation to backup approver → If still pending, escalate to next level

Delegation & Escalation Workflow

Escalation Cascade

SLA 80%: Reminder notification to assigned approver
SLA 100% (deadline): Auto-delegate to backup approver (pre-configured)
SLA 150%: Escalate to next higher authority (skip-level)
SLA 200%: Critical alert to Department Head / VP
Vacation/OOO: Pre-configured delegation rules apply automatically
Parallel approvals: If one approver delays, others' decisions still recorded
Conditional routing: Additional approver triggered by amount/type/vendor status
All delegation and escalation actions logged in approval audit trail

Key Metrics: Average approval time: 1.2 days | SLA compliance: 90%+ | Escalation rate: ~8%

35

Reconciliation Discrepancy

Finance Module - Bank / AP / Inventory Reconciliation

Decision Point: "Is Reconciliation Balanced?"

Trigger: Monthly/periodic reconciliation reveals discrepancies: bank statement vs. payment records, vendor AP statement vs. system records, or physical stock count vs. inventory system.

YES Path

Balanced → Reconciliation approved → Period closed

NO Path

Discrepancy found → Investigation → Adjustment or correction

Reconciliation Workflow

Resolution by Type

Bank: Match statement entries → Identify outstanding cheques, timing differences, bank charges → Adjust
Vendor AP: Match vendor statement against invoices/payments → Identify missing invoices, unapplied payments → Resolve with vendor
Inventory: Physical count vs. system → Investigate variance (damage, theft, count error) → Stock adjustment with approval
Stock adjustments: ≤₹5K Manager approval | >₹5K Director approval | Write-offs need Finance Director
Unresolved items aged >90 days → Escalate to CFO for write-off decision

Key Metrics: Bank recon accuracy: 99.5%+ | Inventory variance: <2% | Recon completion: within 5 days of month-end

36

Gate Entry Rejection

Logistics Module - Physical Security & Delivery

Decision Point: "Is Gate Entry Authorized?"

Trigger: Vehicle arrives at facility gate for goods delivery. Gate guard verifies: valid ASN reference, vehicle/driver authorization, delivery scheduled for today, and goods match expected items.

YES Path

Entry approved → Vehicle logs in → Directed to unloading bay → GRN process starts

NO Path

Entry denied → Vehicle turned away or held pending verification

Gate Entry Workflow

Verification & Resolution

No ASN: Contact vendor / procurement team to confirm delivery legitimacy
Unscheduled delivery: Stores/warehouse team decides to accept or reschedule
Missing documentation: Hold at gate, vendor sends documents electronically
Security concern: Escalate to facility security manager
Entry/exit timestamps recorded for all vehicles (logistics KPI tracking)
Vehicle turnaround time measured for warehouse efficiency analysis
Gate entry linked to GRN for complete delivery audit trail

Key Metrics: Gate entry approval rate: 95%+ | Average gate-to-unload time: <30 min | Unscheduled delivery rate: ~5%

37

PO Short Closure

Procurement Module - Early PO Termination

Decision Point: "Should PO Be Closed Before Full Delivery?"

Trigger: Remaining undelivered quantity no longer needed due to: project scope change, vendor discontinued item, quality issues, alternate sourcing, or project cancellation.

YES Path

Short closure approved → PO status updated → Budget released for undelivered portion → Vendor notified

NO Path

Closure denied → PO remains open → Vendor expected to complete delivery

Short Closure Workflow

Closure Process

Requester submits short closure request with justification
System calculates: Delivered qty, in-transit qty, remaining committable qty
Approval: Procurement Manager for value <₹5L | Procurement Head for >₹5L
Vendor notification with reason and final settlement details
Budget uncommitment: Released amount returned to cost center available balance
Partial invoices: All delivered goods must be invoiced before closure
If vendor has goods in production → Negotiate cancellation charges
PO marked as "Short Closed" (distinct from "Completed" or "Cancelled")

Key Metrics: Short closure rate: ~5% of POs | Average budget release: ₹2.3L per closure | Closure cycle: <5 days

38

Budget Commitment Variance

Finance Module - Budget Control & Tracking

Decision Point: "Is Actual Spend Within Budget Allocation?"

Trigger: Monthly budget review or when PR/PO creation would cause cost center to exceed allocated budget. Budget stages: Allocated → Committed (PR approved) → Ordered (PO issued) → Invoiced → Paid.

YES Path

Within budget → PR/PO proceeds → Committed amount updated

NO Path

Over budget → Budget exception request (Cycle 21) or defer / reduce scope

Budget Control Workflow

Budget Management

Real-time budget check on every PR creation: Available = Allocated - Committed - Ordered
Hard block: PR cannot be submitted if it exceeds available budget (exception path required)
Soft warning: Alert at 80% utilization for proactive planning
Budget reallocation: Transfer unused budget between cost centers (Finance Director approval)
Variance analysis: Monthly actual vs. budget report with trend forecasting
Year-end: Unused budget reviewed for carry-forward or release
Commitment tracking: PO amendments auto-update committed amounts

Key Metrics: Budget adherence target: 95%+ | Exception rate: <5% | Average variance: ±8%

39

Vendor Scorecard Review

SLM Module - Quarterly Performance Evaluation

Decision Point: "Does Vendor Scorecard Warrant Action?"

Trigger: Quarterly automated scorecard generation. Weighted score: Quality (40%) + Delivery (35%) + Cost Competitiveness (15%) + Service/Responsiveness (10%). Actions triggered by score bands.

YES Path (Score ≥ 70)

Excellent (>90): Preferred vendor benefits (priority award, extended payment terms)
Good (80-90): Continue as normal vendor
Satisfactory (70-79): Monitor with quarterly check-ins

NO Path (Score < 70)

Poor → Performance Improvement Plan (Cycle 24) → If no improvement → Debarment (Cycle 25)

Scorecard Review Workflow

Review Process

System auto-calculates scorecard from transaction data (no manual entry)
Dimensions: On-time delivery %, QC pass rate, invoice accuracy, response time
Vendor receives scorecard via portal with metric breakdown
Vendor can provide feedback/context for low scores within 7 days
Procurement reviews vendor feedback and adjusts if justified
Score trends tracked over time (improving, declining, stable)
Preferred vendor list updated quarterly based on scores
Scorecard feeds into bid evaluation: Higher-scored vendors get bonus points

Key Metrics: Vendors scored quarterly: 100% | Excellent vendors: ~20% | PIP triggers: ~8% | Average score: 78/100

Rejection Cycles & Exception Handling

Decision Point: "Is Lead Qualified?"

YES Path

NO Path

Nurture Track - Rejection Handling

Industry Standard Metrics

Decision Point: "Is Deal Won?"

YES Path

NO Path

Quote Revision Cycle

Industry Standard Metrics

Decision Point: "Is TDS/Drawing Approved?"

YES Path

NO Path

Engineering Revision Cycle

Category A - Minor (24-48 hours)

Category B - Major (3-5 business days)

Category C - Critical (5-10 business days)

Industry Standard Metrics

Decision Point: "Is PR Approved?"

YES Path

NO Path

PR Revision Cycle

Industry Standard Metrics

Decision Point: "Is PO Approved?"

YES Path

NO Path

PO Revision Cycle

Commercial Rejections

Technical Rejections

Compliance Rejections

Amendment (same PO number)

New PO Required

Industry Standard Metrics

Decision Point: "Is QC Passed?"

YES Path

NO Path

Goods Rejection & Return Cycle

Industry Standard Metrics

Decision Point: "Does 3-Way Match Pass?"

YES Path

NO Path

Invoice Discrepancy Resolution

Industry Standard Metrics

Decision Point: "Is Project 100% Complete?"

YES Path

NO Path

Project Progress Tracking & Continuation

1. Project Manager creates Recovery Plan

2. Stakeholder Communication

3. Updated Baseline

Industry Standard Metrics

Decision Point: "Are Vendor Drawings Approved?"

YES Path

NO Path

Vendor Drawing Revision Workflow

Industry Standard Metrics

Rejection Cycle Quick Reference

System Configuration Recommendations

Notification Settings

Audit Trail Requirements

Analytics & Reporting

Integration Points

Decision Point: "Is E-Invoice IRN Generated Successfully?"

YES Path

NO Path

E-Invoice Error Resolution Workflow

Decision Point: "Is TReDS Invoice Accepted by Buyer?"

YES Path

NO Path

TReDS Dispute Resolution Workflow

Decision Point: "Does Vendor Meet ESG Threshold?"

YES Path

NO Path

ESG Remediation Workflow

Decision Point: "Is AI Action Approved by Human?"

YES Path

NO Path

AI Action Reversal Workflow

Decision Point: "Is PO Amendment Approved?"