Introduced claiming with Quesnalia and now want to expand on it
Configure integrations in organization record to permit claiming and allow it to go via EDIFACT and email claiming
Bjorn introduced email ordering
Plan is to collaborate to ensure consistency
Is there a valid integration or not?
No - Manual claiming
Yes - Looking for some automation
Piece status late
Status changed to “send claim” (Manually v. automatically)
Overnight or triggered job by vendor
Claims generated on per vendor basis
EDIFACT and Email integrations
EDIFACT - standard EDIFACT process
Successful? - claim sent
Not? - error logged for additional troubleshooting
Email
Email template applied for claiming
Sent via email
Successful? - claim sent
Not? - stat set to claim error
Do people want to do manual review of all claims?
Susanne Gill (BVB) 8:08 AM I'm sorry, I have no voice today..got a cold. There is interest in automatic claiming
Peter Sbrzesny | VZG 8:08 AM Same here at GBV
Lisa Smith, Mich State 8:09 AM MSU would review claim POLs prior to sending them out.
Desire to have it configurable
Peter - ~:9 - interested in automatic claiming. Most claims are sent automatically. In some cases (standing orders/subs) librarians like to review claims before they are sent out. Would prefer that both capabilities are available.
If you want to set up automatic claiming, would you want that per vendor or per PO line?
Used to getting all claims via POL not per vendor.
Would be good opportunity if possible. When ordering from certain countries takes a lot of time.
Susanne Gill (BVB) 8:12 AM +1 for Peter
Default autoclaim per vendor w/ POL override?
Makes sense to do the process at the organization level - organization with multiple claims will receive a single EDIFACT file. Also makes sense to send one email with multiple claims in that email.
Have receiving manage what needs to happen - hand it off to integration and let the integration handle the rest.
Automatic claiming interval is it something we can set or determine? How frequently will the automatic claiming run?
Will define further as we get closer
Already claim interval defined at the POL level / Vendor
When claim interval passes - piece would become automatically claimable. Will respect that work and build on it.
Peter Sbrzesny | VZG 8:14 AM I think it is good to send all claims for a vendor as one mail or EDI message
Will need some kind of review/don’t review status - process will run every night and look at status to see if they are ready to be claimed.
Susanne Gill (BVB) 8:18 AM In the BVB there are libraries who check the Status of the Claims and send them afterwards and some libraries just send them out
:18
Dennis Bridges
Releasing encumbrances in unique situations - when paying invoice against previous fiscal year
Two possibilities
Ongoing order - end up with PO status ongoing - processing invoice even when release encumbrances toggle checked will not change status POL at the moment. Status will remain ongoing. Order will not close. Can process invoice against current fiscal year or previous fiscal year and will not impact line status.
One-time - payment status is either pending (draft form), awaiting payment, partially paid, fully paid. Whne you process an invoice against a one-time order. If released encumbrance checkbox, system will update the POL status when invoice approved to fully paid.
Have a one-time order for FY1. Have done a rollover. Didn’t have opportunity to pay invoice in time, have rolled over to FY2. Going to process an invoice against that order. You want to process invoice against FY1. Expectation that that order would actually close. If order was open and rolled over based on remaining amount, remaining amount encumbered in fiscal year 2. Open encumbrance in FY1 and FY2. Pay invoice and release encumbrance = true. Pay against FY1. System should update the POL status of order to fully paid. It’s going to create a payment against FY1 budget, release encumbrance from FY1 and it will look like that invoice was processed in FY1. Because POL status has been set to fully paid. If the order has also been received or receipt not required. Will trigger the order to closed. Payment status = paid. Workflow status = closed. Release any encumbrance that existed in FY2. Order is no longer having any impact on budgets in any fiscal year. Paid and all encumbrances released.
Question - Would you want to see some kind of warning? When you are paying that invoice against year 1, would users expect to see some kind of warning about the encumbrance that exists in year 2 or would that just be confusing? Is there value in knowing that? Would just be happier to have the system take care of that for you?
Scott Perry (UChicago) 8:26 AM I would rather have the system take care of it for me.
Only way could see it being relevant is if paying invoice against last year but still only maybe a partial payment?
How often would you post-rollover be paying only part? - Partially paid, but still encumbered in year 2. Encumbrance would be full amount of order.
Sara Colglazier 8:27 AM Partially paid would then not close the order If you are doing this type of thing, you know what is happening
Date