{"id":1859,"date":"2014-09-25T17:55:34","date_gmt":"2014-09-25T17:55:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.peeriosity.com\/shared-services\/articles\/?p=1859"},"modified":"2022-08-11T13:59:14","modified_gmt":"2022-08-11T13:59:14","slug":"transaction-approval-hierarchy-for-shared-services","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.peeriosity.com\/shared-services\/articles\/2014\/09\/transaction-approval-hierarchy-for-shared-services\/","title":{"rendered":"Transaction Approval Hierarchy for Shared Services"},"content":{"rendered":"

The approval process for the huge number of transactions that are recorded within each functional area of any multi-billion dollar business becomes more daunting as work processes are centralized into large processing centers<\/span>. Approval processes often evolve over time with different approaches and philosophies used by different functional areas, making coordination and the sourcing of a common system difficult. <\/span><\/p>\n

A Peeriosity member at a large global manufacturing company was evaluating replacement options for their custom-developed \u201cTransaction Approval Matrix\u201d, including a better understanding of what the scope should be for the approval matrix.\u00a0 For example, the Purchase-to-Pay team uses the approval matrix to review spend authorizations (including viewing signature samples) and the General Ledger team uses the matrix to review authorization levels by position and employee name.\u00a0 Other authorizations have been added over the years for other functional areas.\u00a0 Because the custom-developed system was created on a platform that was no longer supported, finding a replacement solution was a high priority. <\/span><\/p>\n

To understand the options being used, the member worked with Peeriosity to create an iPollingTM<\/sup> question to quickly understand the range of design alternatives being used by leading companies<\/a> around the world.\u00a0 \u00a0The focus of the poll was to understand if peer companies have implemented a software tool<\/a>, and if they had, the scope of process areas that were covered by the tool.\u00a0\u00a0 Many also commented with specific details about the solutions that their companies had selected. <\/span><\/p>\n

The poll results indicate that 77% of member companies have implemented a software tool to manage the approval process, with 11% currently evaluating a software tool.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\"Transaction<\/p>\n

Regarding the scope of the system or hierarchy used for approvals, for 46% of member companies the scope is focused on Accounts Payable and Procurement<\/a>, with 13% focused exclusively on Accounts Payable processing. Interestingly, 20% have an approval system or hierarchy<\/a> that includes many functional areas, that are not limited only to Accounts Payable, Procurement, and General Ledger work processes.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"Transaction<\/p>\n

Here are examples of some of the additional comments from Peeriosity members: <\/span><\/p>\n