Less processing time
Across the invoice-processing workflow.
Client case study
Xalta connected invoice extraction, vendor checks and finance-system updates for an oil and gas enterprise. The workflow reduced repeated data entry while keeping uncertain records and failed updates with the AP team.
Discuss a Similar ProjectReported outcomes for the invoice-processing workflow.
Across the invoice-processing workflow.
Across uploads, validation and account entry.
Processing follows configurable vendor rules.
Low-confidence data and failed updates return to people.
Client & project context
The client is an oil and gas enterprise working with more than 800 vendors and processing over 1,500 invoices each month. Vendors submitted different invoice layouts, sometimes using several formats for the same supplier.
The AP team needed to read invoice details, validate information in DocVue, create account entries in OGSQL/OGSYS and return to DocVue to request approval. Xalta connected those steps into a rule-driven workflow.
The challenge
The work depended on staff moving between applications and applying vendor-specific rules by hand. As invoice volume grew, the same steps became harder to complete consistently.
Each invoice needed the correct vendor details and fields extracted before it could move forward.
Staff checked DocVue, entered data in OGSQL/OGSYS and returned to the document workflow for approval.
Account codes, tax checks and routing could vary by vendor. Consistent processing required experienced people.
Manual uploads, corrections and system navigation limited how much work the team could complete.
The solution
Xalta combined document extraction, configurable rules and application automation, with review and recovery built into the processing path.
An A360 bot collects invoice PDFs from the shared folder and sends them to Document Automation. Extracted information is validated before it drives updates in DocVue and OGSQL/OGSYS.
Extract the required fields and send missing or low-confidence values for human validation.
Use a vendor rule sheet to control field values and processing choices.
Update the document record and create the required finance entry using validated information.
Send invoices back to a named AP user if the finance update cannot be completed.
AP reviewers validate uncertain data and handle failed updates. The bot submits the invoice into the configured approval workflow; it does not replace the designated approval decision.
How it works
The workflow links the source document, extracted fields and finance entry. Each stage uses the same validated invoice information.
Read invoice files from the daily folders on the shared drive.
Shared network folderRead the required fields. Send missing or uncertain values to human validation.
Document Automation + AP reviewUpload the invoice to a DocVue batch and use the validated extraction to update its fields.
DocVue / SmartVueRead the vendor reference sheet and apply the agreed account codes, checks and routing.
Vendor rule sheet + DocVueEnter the required data in OGSQL/OGSYS and save the invoice record.
OGSQL / OGSYSReturn to DocVue and submit the document into the configured approval workflow.
DocVue approval routingImplementation
The build connected the existing document and finance applications. Vendor rules stayed in a reference workbook, and the workflow included a return path for records that could not be completed.
Organise vendor names and field rules in an Excel workbook. Add or remove vendor-specific sheets as the supported scope changes.
Use validated Document Automation fields to update DocVue and drive the account entry in OGSQL/OGSYS.
Route uncertain fields to AP validation and return failed finance entries to a designated employee.
An invoice still needed its vendor-specific checks, required finance fields and configured approval route. Faster processing had to preserve those controls.
A360 coordinates the work. Document extraction, vendor rules and the existing applications each keep a defined role.
Collects PDFs and performs the supported application steps.
Extracts invoice fields and routes uncertain data to validation.
Stores invoice records and routes approval requests.
Receives the validated invoice and account information.
Holds vendor-specific fields, conditions and routing choices.
Results & business impact
Automation reduced repetitive uploads, validation work and account entry. The AP team retained the records that needed judgement or correction.
| Workflow measure | Before | After | Reported result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Processing time | Manual extraction, checks and navigation across several applications. | Connected extraction, validation and system updates. | 75%Less processing time |
| Manual effort | Staff uploaded invoices, checked fields and entered account data manually. | Automation handles the repeatable steps and routes exceptions for review. | 70%Less manual effort |
| Rule application | Experienced operators applied vendor-specific rules during processing. | An external rule sheet drives field values and routing. | Rule-basedVendor checks |
| Exception handling | Routine handling and problem-solving competed for the same team capacity. | Uncertain fields go to validation; failed finance entries return to an assigned AP user. | AP reviewFor uncertain records |
The same validation and routing rules are applied to the supported vendor invoices.
Vendor-specific changes can be managed through the rule workbook rather than hard-coded into each processing step.
Related offerings
Explore the relevant solution, the supporting engineering service and the industry context.
Define the scope, integrations and expected business outcomes.
Show us the documents, systems and exceptions involved. We will help define a practical scope and the outcomes worth measuring.
Talk to Our Team