Solutions
Built for the people who live between the documents.
Procure-to-pay problems sit in the gaps: between the order and the invoice, the quote and the BOM, one ERP and the other. Here is what CYOP checks for each team that inherits them.
Accounts payable
Stop paying for what didn't arrive. Before the payment run, not after the audit.
AP sees the invoice and the PO number. CYOP brings the order line, the receipt and every earlier invoice from the same supplier to the same screen, and checks them before money moves.
| R2 | Quantity billed beyond what was ordered or received |
|---|---|
| R1 | Unit price above the PO beyond a 2% tolerance |
| R4 | Duplicates by number, or by supplier, PO and amount within 30 days |
| R3 | No PO reference, with the likely PO suggested |
| R5 | Payment terms different from the PO |
| R12 | Invoice currency different from the PO, once mapped |
Where it usually startsPartial shipments invoiced in full, or receiving not posting goods receipts in the ERP: common after M&A, when receiving works differently by site.
Procurement and engineering
Catch drift before it becomes a dispute. Between the quote and the build.
Engineering changes the BOM after the RFQ goes out. Nobody re-quotes. Three months later it arrives as an invoice nobody can reconcile. CYOP compares the latest RFQ revision with the latest BOM, item by item.
| R7 | An item on the BOM the RFQ never asked suppliers to quote |
|---|---|
| R8 | Same item, different quantity on the RFQ and the BOM |
| R9 | Same item, different specification |
| R10 | A PO released against an RFQ revision that has been superseded |
Where it usually startsEngineering design change after the RFQ went out, and the project template has no 'BOM changed, re-quote' trigger.
Controllers and internal audit
Evidence you can sign off on. Every number traceable to a record.
Confidence is deterministic and every finding carries its reasons, the records side by side, a fix and a root cause. First-pass yield is measured against the APQC benchmark, and each finding is marked reviewed or dismissed by a person.
| All | Twelve rules, the same result on the same records, every time |
|---|---|
| FPY | Invoices processed right the first time, by month |
| $ | Findings ranked by the money at stake, vendors by error rate |
| Log | Reviewed and dismissed, decided by people |
Where it usually startsThe consultant report that goes stale the day it lands. A check that runs on every record replaces the one-off review.
After a merger
Two ERPs. One set of checks.
The second ERP never quite merges. CYOP reads an export from each with the same rules, and goes looking for the problems a merger leaves behind.
| R6 | One supplier under two names, or two legal entities under one |
|---|---|
| R4 | The same invoice keyed by two AP inboxes |
| R2 | Receipts missing where receiving works differently by site |
Where it usually startsDuplicate vendor records after a merger, or a vendor rebranded or acquired and the master never updated.
Growing fast
Workflows nobody wrote down. Found, and named.
Growth outruns process. Work starts on a verbal agreement, terms are renegotiated by email, and the PO is cut when the invoice turns up. CYOP makes the habits visible, record by record, with the fix that stops them.
| R11 | A PO created after the invoice it pays |
|---|---|
| R3 | Invoices from suppliers working without the buyer’s PO number |
| R5 | Terms agreed by email and never updated in the ERP |
Where it usually startsWork started on a verbal agreement; the PO was created only when the invoice arrived. The classic symptom of an undefined workflow.
Which of these is yours?
Send us a sample export and we will walk you through what CYOP finds in it. No ERP changes, no procurement cycle.
Read-only. CYOP never writes to your ERP.