Issue

Syensqo currently use Readsoft as an Invoice Management tool

This tool handles hte processing and approval of Inbound Supplier Invoices - eg who has to approve an Invoice higher price than the PO? Or perform a missing GR if required.

With the transition to S/4 HANA Private Cloud edition this will need to be reviewed. The options are

• use a new 3rd party tool
• use the SAP recommended tools - Readsoft or OpenText 
• do not use any Invoice Approval tool

Recommendation

The recommended option is to use the SAP proposed tools - Readsoft or Opentext. 

Background & Context

Supplier invoices coming into Syensqo will need a process to approve invoice in the following scenarios

• PO Based Invoices where there is a price discrepancy
• PO Based invoices where there is a quantity discrepancy or no GR has been entered
• Non PO Based Invoices that need to be coded to a cost object and approved by  the cost object owner

Assumptions

The volume of invoices that will require some kind of approval will be too high for a purely manual process.

Constraints

The Invoice Management tool should be 

• Able to handle invoices coming into the system from a number of sources - eg eMail PDF scans, Government Portals, SAP Business Network, EDI Inputs
• Able to ID the correct approvers and transmit Invoices to them with minimal manual input

Impacts

If the invoices are not processed and approved in a timely fashion then the suppliers of Syensqo may begin to refuse to supply Syensqo and so cause disruption to the business

If the Invoice Management tool is not reliable or does not integrare ot SAP smoothly then invoices payment may be delayed

Business Rules

The decision may translate into business rules which enforce the decision and will require configuration. List these business rules here. For example, "An Outline Agreement cannot be created via the RFQ process. An awarded RFQ can only result in a Purchase Order". 

Options considered

List the options (viable options or alternatives) you considered. These often require a longer explanation with diagrams, or references to other documents (links are best, but attachments are also possible). Use enough detail to adequately explain what you considered so that a project or business stakeholder reviewing this decision will not come back and ask "did you think about...?"; this leads to loss of credibility and questioning of other decisions. This section also helps ensure that you considered enough suitable alternatives rather than just copy/pasting SAP's recommendations.

Option A: Use a new 3rd Party Tool

Use a "best of breed" invoicing platform utilised for simplicity and efficiency but not recommended by SAP

Option B: Use an SAP proposed tool (Readsoft or Opentext)

Use one of hte tools already recommended by SAP and (where possible) approved or validated for working with S/4 HANA Cloud

Option C: Do not use an Invoice Management tool

Have invoices come into SAP and Block then handle the unblocking process as a manual setup

Evaluation

Outline why you selected a position. The best format could be a pro/con table (sample below), but is up to you as the author. You must consider complexity, feasibility, cost/effort to implement, but also ongoing operational impact and cost. You must consider the program principles and explain any deviations in detail. This is probably as important as the decision itself.

	Use a new 3rd Party Tool	Use an SAP proposed tool (Readsoft or Opentext)	Do not use an Invoice Management tool
Ability to handle High Volumes	Pro Con	Pro Pro	Pro Con
Ability to handle Multiple Sources	Pro Con	Con	Pro Pro
Ease of integration / compatibility to SAP	Pro	Con	Con

See also

Insert links and references to other documents which are relevant when trying to understand this decision and its implications. Other decisions are often impacted, so it's good to list them here with links. Attachments are also possible but dangerous as they are static documents and not updated by their authors.

Change log

Workflow history