Making invoice exception reviews consistent

Context

A small team was reviewing supplier invoice exceptions that arrived with incomplete purchase-order context. Different notes made it hard to see which evidence was missing.

Approach

The team drafted one review note with the source invoice, the missing evidence, and the approval decision kept with a person. The note was checked against representative redacted examples.

What worked

• The note kept missing evidence visible.
• Reviewers could see who needed to decide next.
• The source record stayed beside the draft.

What failed

• The draft could not decide whether an exception was safe to approve.
• Different exception types still need clearer review questions.

Lessons

• A shared note is useful only when the handoff owner is explicit.
• Missing evidence should be recorded before a reviewer writes a conclusion.

Limitations

• The examples were prepared for testing and were not a live finance queue.
• The workflow did not approve, pay, or change a supplier record.

Still done by hand

• A finance reviewer checks the source invoice and purchase-order evidence.
• A named approver decides whether the exception can proceed.
• The team chooses new examples when an unfamiliar exception appears.

Evidence

The review note was tested against redacted examples and kept missing evidence visible. It still does not approve or pay invoices, and it has not been connected to a live finance queue.