Customer Complaint Management Workflow

How is this workflow audited for regulatory and compliance purposes?

Every action taken within the workflow — including status changes, AI categorisation outputs, manual overrides, handler assignments, and escalation approvals — is recorded with a timestamp and the identity of the responsible user inside assess.one. This creates a complete, tamper-evident audit trail that can be reviewed at any point during or after the complaint lifecycle. Organisations subject to FCA, ISO 10002, or equivalent complaint-handling obligations can demonstrate procedural compliance directly from the platform's records without relying on external systems.

Who has access to complaints, and how are permissions controlled?

Access is governed by role-based permissions configured directly within assess.one, ensuring that complaint handlers, team managers, compliance officers, and executive approvers each see only the steps and data relevant to their function. Sensitive investigation evidence and escalation decisions can be restricted to named roles or individuals, preventing unauthorised access to customer data. Permissions are maintained centrally and can be updated without any development work.

How does the AI categorisation and prioritisation work, and what happens if it is wrong?

The workflow passes each new complaint through AI categorisation and prioritisation steps that analyse the complaint content and assign a category and urgency level automatically. Routing logic then determines whether the AI output meets confidence thresholds; where it does not, the workflow branches to a manual categorisation or priority assignment task presented to a qualified team member. The human decision is persisted alongside the original AI output, so both are visible in the audit record, and the manual override does not interrupt downstream SLA tracking.

How long does it take to implement this workflow?

Publishing the template on assess.one takes minutes — once live, your team can begin processing real complaints immediately without any installation, infrastructure work, or third-party development project. Customisation of steps, roles, SLA rules, and notification logic is performed directly inside the platform by your administrators. There is no weeks-long implementation cycle; the process is operational as soon as the template is published.

How does this workflow integrate with our existing communication channels such as email and Slack?

Email acknowledgements to customers and internal notifications to handlers and managers are configured as integrations within assess.one itself — no external development or middleware is required. Slack notifications for escalation triggers or SLA warnings can similarly be set up inside the platform's integration settings. This means your communication channels are connected as part of the workflow configuration, not as a separate IT project.

What happens at the escalation decision point, and who must approve it?

When the investigation step determines that a complaint requires escalation, the workflow routes to a dedicated Management Approval step where a named approver — typically a senior manager or compliance lead — must review the case and record a formal decision. The approval outcome is captured with the approver's identity and timestamp, and subsequent routing is determined by whether the escalation is approved or declined. This ensures that no complaint is escalated or de-escalated without an accountable, documented decision.

Can we customise the SLA rules, categories, and routing logic for our organisation?

All SLA due-date logic, complaint categories, prioritisation thresholds, and routing conditions are configurable directly within assess.one by your workflow administrators. You can define category taxonomies that align with your regulatory framework, set different SLA windows by complaint type or priority level, and adjust escalation criteria without writing any code. Changes take effect immediately upon republishing the workflow.

How are customer communications managed and tracked throughout the process?

Automated acknowledgements are dispatched at intake, and subsequent customer-facing communications at resolution and closure stages are triggered by workflow steps configured inside assess.one. Each communication event is logged against the complaint record, giving compliance and quality teams a complete view of what was communicated, when, and by whom. This supports obligations under consumer duty and complaint-handling regulations that require timely and documented customer contact.

What evidence can be captured during the investigation step, and how is it stored?

The Investigate Complaint and Gather Evidence step allows handlers to attach documents, screenshots, correspondence, and structured notes directly to the complaint record within assess.one. All evidence is associated with the specific complaint and retained as part of the auditable case file, accessible to authorised reviewers throughout the workflow and after closure. This eliminates the risk of investigation evidence being held in personal email or unmanaged file storage outside the governed process.

How does the workflow enforce consistent handling across multiple teams or business units?

Because the workflow runs inside assess.one and all participants interact with the same governed process, categorisation criteria, SLA rules, escalation thresholds, and approval requirements are applied uniformly regardless of which team or location handles a given complaint. Administrators can define team-specific routing rules while maintaining a single process standard, ensuring that regulatory obligations and internal policies are met consistently across the organisation.