Priorities live in a spreadsheet
The team exports receivables from the ERP and manually sets the work order each day.
Interactive MVP / demonstrator
Receivables operations systemMove standard receivables cases from today’s priority to confirmed payment
For finance directors and recovery managers. The Claimsio demonstrator shows a daily queue, contact history, promises to pay, next actions, and payment checks. A target system requires client integrations and rules; uncertain matches and legal or credit decisions remain with a person.
Illustrative interface
01Case APromise due todayReview payment ↗
02Case BNo next actionAssign owner ↗
03Case CPayment candidateConfirm match ↗
Human reviewMatches requiring reviewMissing next actionVisible in queue
Fit check
This is worth mapping when…
History is fragmented
Contacts, promises, and dates are split across email, phone, notes, and calendars.
Reporting means assembling sources
Managers cannot see cases without a next step, risk, and confirmed receipts in one place.
Workflow
From repeated handoffs to visible states.
Today
- 01Export
Open items move from the ERP into a spreadsheet.
- 02Contact
A collector calls or writes and records the outcome in a selected tool.
- 03Next step
The date goes into a calendar while context remains in several systems.
- 04Receipt and report
Bank or accounting data is checked separately and status is updated by hand.
Target workflow
- 01
An import or integration moves open receivables into the case register.
- 02
A daily queue presents priority set by rules agreed with the process owner, plus history, notes, and previous actions.
- 03
The user records the contact outcome, promise, and dated next action.
- 04
The system suggests a receipt match; a person confirms or rejects it.
- 05
After confirmation, case, pipeline, and risk views update while exceptions return to the queue.
Workflow modules
Each module is defined by a specific job.
Choose today’s cases
The dashboard and daily queue organize work on open receivables.
Recover full context
The customer record combines case history, notes, and recorded actions.
End contact with a next step
The workflow stores a promise and the next-action date.
Check the receipt
The demonstrator compares statement entries and requires human confirmation.
See portfolio state
Pipeline, forecast, and risk views support management review.
Send exceptions to a person
A dispute, missing data, uncertain match, or legal or credit decision returns to the responsible role.
Operating change
What changes for the person doing the work.
AreaBeforeAfter
PriorityManual spreadsheet listDaily queue in the case register
ContextEmail, calls, and notesCustomer and case history in one view
Next stepCalendar and team memoryRecorded promise and next action
Receipt and reportManual check and updateSuggested match, human confirmation, refreshed views
Data and responsibility
Inputs, state changes, and exception paths.
Inputs
Receivables from an ERP or export, notes, promises, next actions, and statement data.
Integrations
Production ERP, bank, accounting, and telephony connections do not exist yet. They need API access, mapping, and tests.
Exceptions and responsibility
Uncertain matches, disputes, missing data, and legal or credit decisions go to a person.
Measurement
No target before the baseline.
The pilot compares the same workflow and keeps quality guardrails visible.
On-time follow-up
Actions completed by their recorded date / all dated actions.
- Baseline
- Missing — measured before pilot
- Data
- Spreadsheets and calendars; then pilot log
- Comparison
- Comparable cohorts before and during pilot
- Guardrail
- Complaints and disputes do not rise
- Review
- Frequency and owner agreed before pilot
- Decision
- A guardrail breach pauses the pilot; repair or scale follows review
Promises followed up on time
Promises checked by the agreed date and closed with a confirmed state / all promises whose review date fell in the cohort.
- Baseline
- Missing — measured before pilot
- Data
- Notes and accounting; then case register
- Comparison
- Cohorts by review date
- Guardrail
- Wrong assignments and post-payment contacts do not rise
- Review
- Frequency and owner agreed before pilot
- Decision
- A guardrail breach pauses the pilot; repair or scale follows review
Receipt update latency
Median time from visible payment to confirmed case-state update.
- Baseline
- Missing — measured before pilot
- Data
- Bank/accounting data and event log
- Comparison
- Baseline vs pilot
- Guardrail
- Uncertain matches stay in the human queue
- Review
- Frequency and owner agreed before pilot
- Decision
- A guardrail breach pauses the pilot; repair or scale follows review
Implementation
A bounded path from evidence to rollout.
- 01
Discovery
Map roles, rules, sources, and exceptions.
- 02
Baseline
Audit an agreed, stratified sample and current follow-up dates.
- 03
Prototype
Adapt the queue, case record, and states.
- 04
Integrations
Design and test agreed data exchanges.
- 05
Pilot
Run a bounded workflow with manual fallback.
- 06
Rollout
Expand after a KPI- and exception-quality decision.
Proof and limits
What exists today, and what still needs validation.
Verified in the current material
- The interactive MVP includes a dashboard, daily queue, customer record, history, notes, promises, and next actions.
- A demonstrator shows statement matching with human confirmation plus pipeline, forecast, and risk views.
- This proves an interface and workflow mechanism, not a production architecture.
Not yet evidenced
- There are no production ERP, bank, or telephony integrations, real-client evidence, or compliance proof.
- No DSO, recovery, or before-and-after outcome data exists. Effects remain pilot hypotheses.
Next step
Let’s review an agreed receivables sample
We will select cases across relevant stages, portfolio types, and disputes, then identify where context is lost and what data a safe pilot requires.
Start with the workflow