Workflow Sample: Episode 559: Reason for Not Using Cloud Expense Management System

Operation: Reporting and reimbursement of expense

So-called "cloud expense management" is easy for system introduction.

Since it is a system specialized in management of expenses (out-of-pocket expense), both the reporting screen and the management screen are oriented to expense management from the beginning. There is no need to deeply worry about initial setting.

On the other hand, systematization of "expense management" is possible even in "cloud based Workflow".

However, since the workflow system is a general-purpose system, it is unexpectedly cumbersome to think up about items to be reported and to consider procedures such as supervisor approval, ledger entry, and reimbursement remittance...

However, from the viewpoint of employees who actually make report, there is no difference between "Expense management system" and "Cloud Workflow system". Eventually, the answer for "Specialized system vs general purpose system, which one is better?", is simply up to "organizational policy". Ah, it reminds me a controversy about "word-processor vs. personal computer" raised at the end of the 20th century.

Challenge: Delay in submission

However, the problem is that the accounting department gets angry that "There is no application for expenses!"

For example, a person in charge of preparing for an exhibition does his best until taking an approval in "flow of decision-making" (preliminary application). But when the the exhibition ends, he is not good at "reporting for expenses" concerning the contents of expenditure.

If a reporting task of "Exhibition at CERTAIN Exhibition" were already listed up on the "My Tasks" screen of the person in charge...

If it had already been automatically entered "ID of the approval document" or "Summary of the approval document" on the expense report screen...

[Expense Report flow]

Solution: Automatic start by linkage with the Approval request flow

If you connect "Approval request Flow" with "Expense report flow", the expense reporting corresponding to the approval will be automatically started.
That is, at the moment when a plan is decided by the flow of the approval, the expense report task of "Exhibition at CERTAIN exhibition" will be lined up in the "My Tasks" list of person in charge. Every time the person in charge logs into the Workflow, the task of "Expense report: Exhibition at CERTAIN Exhibition" will catch his or her eyes. As a result, you can greatly reduce the risk of forgetting reports.

Incidentally, as a Business Process definition, applications for transportation expenses etc. which do not require preliminary approval are started from the human Task of "1. Report", whereas applications collaborating from the flow of the decision-making is started from the human Task of "1r. Report". Either of screens for application consist of exactly the same input form.
However, in columns on the forms of the automatically started application, data such as "ID of the approval document" or "Summary of approval" have been set in advance. (If you configure is so that "deadline" to be set automatically, you will be able to reduce delays in reporting further.)

Discussion: Complex flow Splitting

In this example Flow diagram, a rule, that is "section manager make decisions on issues of up to 50000 JPY", "section manager makes approval and department manager make decision on issues of more than 50000 JPY", is expressed.

Especially, it is excelled that it is devised so that it can operate with the same Process Definition even if a department does not have "section" in it as the organization structure. That is, if an employee who belongs to a department which "section" does not exist" makes report, the Step of "2. Manager Approval" will be skipped. (Error Boundary Event)

Specifically, make settings as the following, for candidates of undertaking Swimlane of "section manager"

A User who is a leader in the same organization which the User who operated Task on Swimlane of "Employee (Auto)" and with "Section manager Role"
A User who is a leader in the same organization which the User who operated Task on Swimlane of "Employee (Manual)" and with "Section manager Role"
A User who is a leader in the UPPER organization which the User who operated Task on Swimlane of "Employee (Auto)" and with "Section manager Role"
A User who is a leader in the UPPER organization which the User who operated Task on Swimlane of "Employee (manual)" and with "Section manager Role"

and for Swimlane of "department manager"

A User who is a leader in the same organization which the User who operated Task on Swimlane of "Employee (Auto)" and with "Department manager Role"
A User who is a leader in the same organization which the User who operated Task on Swimlane of "Employee (manual)" and with "Department manager Role"
A User who is a leader in the UPPER organization which the User who operated Task on Swimlane of "Employee (Auto)" and with "Department manager Role"
A User who is a leader in the UPPER organization which the User who operated Task on Swimlane of "Employee (manual)" and with "Department manager Role"

With these settings, it will advance to Error Boundary Event when it progresses to "2. Section manager approval" and matches "No User exists to meet the operator setting". As a result, this reporting flows can be managed with the same Business Process definition even in indirect departments etc. where "section" does not exist.

P.S.
In addition to this setting example, it is possible to generate an event of "when there is no User corresponding to the operator setting" by making settings for candidate who will underwrite "section manager Swimlane", such as