Vendor Master Data Change Workflow

What happens if a change involves both sensitive and non-sensitive fields?

The workflow flags the entire request as sensitive if any field on it qualifies, routing it through independent verification before it can reach finance approval. You can customise the sensitivity check logic inside assess.one to define exactly which fields trigger verification, so mixed requests are always handled by the stricter path.

Can this handle a vendor change that fails verification but the requester wants to resubmit with corrected evidence?

Yes. When verification fails, the request is set to 'Returned (Verification Failed)' and the requester is notified with the reason, and they can submit a new request with corrected supporting evidence. Each submission is tracked separately so you retain a clear history of what was rejected and why.

What if finance approves a change but verification was skipped by mistake?

Verification is a mandatory gate in the workflow logic, so a sensitive request cannot progress to finance approval without first passing the verification step. This sequencing is built into the routing rules, removing the risk of a sensitive change bypassing independent checks.

Who needs access to this workflow?

You need at least three roles: a requester (typically accounts payable or procurement staff), a verifier independent of the requester for sensitive changes, and a finance approver for final sign-off. All roles are configured inside assess.one with permissions scoped to their step, so verifiers and approvers only see what they need to act on.

How do we customise this workflow for our own approval hierarchy?

You can adjust roles, add extra approval tiers, change notification recipients, and modify the sensitivity criteria directly in assess.one without any coding. Common customisations include adding a second finance approver for high-value vendors or routing verification to a specific team based on vendor region.

What compliance considerations does this workflow address?

Segregation of duties between requester, verifier, and approver directly supports SOX and internal audit requirements around master data controls. Every status change, approval decision, and rejection reason is logged automatically, giving auditors a complete trail without manual record-keeping.

What happens at the finance approval decision point?

Finance reviews the request, the supporting evidence, and the verification outcome, then either approves or rejects it. Approval triggers the vendor record update and a confirmation notification to the requester, while rejection returns the request with a documented reason and notifies the requester immediately.

How long does implementation take?

This template is ready to use — you publish it in minutes and your team can start submitting vendor change requests immediately. There's no lengthy setup project; you configure roles, notifications, and approval logic directly in assess.one as you go.

Can this handle high-volume vendor change requests during a batch update?

Yes, each vendor change request runs as its own independent workflow instance, so multiple requests move through verification and approval simultaneously without blocking one another. This lets finance teams process bulk supplier updates while still applying the same sensitive-change controls to each one.

What if the requester needs to check on a request's status without emailing finance?

Every request has a live status such as Submitted, Under Verification, Under Approval, Approved, or Returned, visible to the requester directly in assess.one. This removes the need for status-check emails and gives requesters real-time visibility into exactly where their request sits.