Journal Entry Approval Workflow

Why should we automate journal entry approvals instead of using email and spreadsheets?

Email and spreadsheet approvals lack enforced segregation of duties, making it easy for entries to be posted without independent review or proper sign-off. This workflow enforces the required sequence — preparation, review, threshold-based approval, posting sign-off — automatically, and keeps a complete record of who did what and when. That reduces audit findings and closes gaps that manual tracking often misses.

What is the ROI of using this workflow for finance teams?

The main returns are time saved chasing approvals, fewer posting errors caught late in close, and reduced audit remediation costs from missing documentation. Because the workflow is a ready-to-use template, there is no implementation project cost — you publish it and it's live immediately. Ongoing savings come from faster cycle times and less manual follow-up on entries stuck in review.

How long does it take to get this workflow live?

Publishing takes minutes, not weeks. Once published, your finance team can start submitting journal entries through the live process immediately — there is no external software installation or lengthy implementation project.

Can we customise the approval threshold and routing logic?

Yes. The amount threshold that triggers senior approval, the reviewer and approver roles, and the notification rules are all configurable directly in assess.one. You can adjust these settings at any time as your controls policy or organisational structure changes, without needing developer support.

Who needs access to this workflow?

Typically, preparers who create and submit journal entries, an independent reviewer who checks each entry, and a senior approver for entries above the set threshold. Finance managers or controllers may also need visibility to monitor entries at each stage. Access and permissions for each role are managed inside assess.one.

What happens if an entry is rejected during review or approval?

If a reviewer or senior approver rejects an entry, the preparer is notified with the stated reason and the entry status is set to rejected. The workflow then restarts the entry for correction, allowing the preparer to amend and resubmit for another round of review — nothing is lost or requires manual re-creation.

How does threshold-based routing work in practice?

After independent review, each entry is automatically evaluated against the configured amount threshold. Entries below the threshold proceed directly toward posting sign-off, while entries above it are routed to a senior approver for additional sign-off before being marked ready to post. This ensures higher-risk entries receive proportionate scrutiny without slowing down routine transactions.

Does this workflow support audit and compliance requirements?

Yes. Every step — submission, review outcome, approval decision, rejections, and resubmissions — is tracked with status changes and notifications, creating a clear audit trail. This supports internal control frameworks such as segregation of duties and evidence retention that auditors typically test during financial statement reviews.

Can this workflow integrate with our existing notification tools?

Yes. Notifications to preparers and approvers, such as correction requests or ready-to-post alerts, can be configured within assess.one to work with tools like email or Slack. These integrations are set up directly inside the platform, with no separate development work required.