Digitise delivery notes: answer invoice queries faster

A supplier invoice query should be answerable from the relevant documents. In practice, the office often starts by searching for a delivery note in the warehouse, a personal inbox or a pile someone brought back after work. Meanwhile, it is unclear whether the invoiced quantity arrived or only the paperwork is missing. Digital delivery notes provide a better starting point for the answer.

The business benefit is a shorter journey from the invoice reference to an understandable delivery. Purchasing and administration do not need to ask the entire team for paper whenever a question arises. They can find the available documents, check their relevance and establish exactly what remains unknown. This does not promise a fixed saving, but it makes recurring work measurable and easier to organise.

webRichtung Documents accepts uploads and email imports and makes records searchable by content, type, date or amount. The Documents module page explains these capabilities and the visible analysis attached to a document. Content search is particularly useful for delivery notes because a delivery reference may matter more than the filename or an amount that the note does not contain.

Capture the delivery note where it arrives

Start with the actual arrival of deliveries. A paper note in the warehouse and a PDF received by purchasing take different routes into the business. Both should enter the shared collection in a form the office can use later. Decide who captures paper and who brings electronic documents into the agreed location.

Capture becomes useful only when the complete document is readable. Check cropped edges, faint details and multiple pages. If the delivery reference or quantity line is missing, merely having a digital file does little to resolve the later query. A short check at entry prevents the office from requesting the same document again when time is tighter.

Keep a handwritten annotation with the document when it helps explain the delivery. An added note should remain recognisable as an annotation. “Two cartons damaged” does not automatically mean the supplier has agreed to issue a credit. The document initially shows what someone recorded on site; subsequent agreements are a separate part of the context.

Avoid creating another permanent filing route on an employee’s personal phone. The important point is that responsible colleagues can access the agreed collection. You do not need to digitise every historical paper immediately. Begin with new deliveries so the next invoice query has a better foundation and the old backlog does not continue growing.

Explore Documents and make new delivery notes accessible to your team

Search using what the invoice query already tells you

When checking an invoice, you often know the supplier, period and a purchase order or delivery reference. Use those details as the starting point. If a reference appears in the document, content search can open the route to it. You do not first need to guess the name someone chose when saving the file.

Begin with the strongest known identifier. A specific delivery number is usually more useful than a broad product term. If it is unavailable, use the supplier and likely period to guide the search and subsequent review. The purpose is a small plausible selection to check against the originals. A large number of matches is not yet an answer.

Do not confuse invoice date and delivery date. One invoice can cover several earlier deliveries, so searching only the date at the top of the invoice may miss relevant records. Knowing the likely delivery period helps the office narrow the collection and notice whether another part of the order arrived on a different day.

Check the found document itself. Do supplier, recipient, reference and relevant line match the transaction? A similarly named record may belong to another site or an earlier order. Search brings the document within reach; its business relevance comes from the actual details. That distinction prevents a quick answer based on the wrong delivery note.

Keep partial deliveries and transactions distinct

Several delivery notes for one purchase order are an important purchasing case. Looking only at the first may make a later invoice appear excessive even though a second delivery has arrived. Conversely, an outstanding quantity must not be treated as delivered merely because the original order included it. The order and the delivery answer different questions.

Distinguish ordered quantities, quantities shown on each document and quantities confirmed for the actual transaction. A delivery note provides evidence for clarification. Where goods-receipt information differs, that needs consideration too. You do not need to redesign the whole warehouse process for this query; you need an understandable relationship between existing records and the responsible people.

Agree how the team describes that relationship. A short project or purchase reference may be enough if everyone understands it. Several improvised abbreviations for the same transaction create more searching. A shared identifier is more helpful than perfect filenames known only to the colleague who originally handled the delivery.

Documents shares the data core with Core, as its module page explains. That does not establish automatic, complete reconciliation of purchase orders, goods receipts and invoices. Check the actual relationship available for your use. The starting approach here relies on findable documents, visible analysis and the subsequent business review carried out by your team.

Example: clarify an invoice for twelve units

The following case is entirely hypothetical. A service business has ordered twelve identical units of material for a job. The supplier invoices twelve units at €25 each before other invoice components. The line under review therefore totals €300. These figures are chosen only for the calculation; they are neither material recommendations nor webRichtung prices.

The office initially finds a delivery note showing eight units. At the same assumed unit price, eight times €25 equals €200. Four units, representing €100 of the line value, remain unexplained between the invoice and this first document. That does not yet establish an incorrect invoice. There may be another delivery or an additional document still to find.

The employee reads the invoice reference and searches using the supplier and relevant purchase reference. The first match confirms eight units for the correct job. She extends her review to the following delivery period and finds a second note showing four units. Its recipient and order reference also match. Eight plus four now account for the twelve invoiced units.

Her response records the relationship: the invoice covers two deliveries, first eight units and then four. At the assumed €25 each, the twelve units correspond to the €300 line. The office can explain the quantity using both records. Whether every other invoice component is correct remains a separate check and is not automatically resolved by finding the delivery notes.

Work through the missing second document as well

Suppose the second search produces no matching delivery note. A missing match does not prove the goods never arrived. The document may still be in the warehouse or in someone’s inbox. The office first checks document receipt with the responsible person instead of turning a search result directly into a supplier complaint.

A useful internal question is: “For this job’s purchase order, I can find a delivery note for eight units. The invoice shows twelve. Was there another delivery, and is there a document for the remaining four?” This explains the starting evidence and the open quantity. The colleague does not have to guess which order or period the question concerns.

If a document needs requesting from the supplier, the office prepares a specific enquiry: the invoice and purchase order reference, the note already available and a request for the record covering the other four units. Sending occurs through your normal communication route. Documents finds and analyses the records; automatic supplier correspondence is not assumed in this process.

When the second note arrives, capture a readable version in the shared collection and connect it with the open issue. Then review the same quantity question again. If the delivery itself remains uncertain, the responsible person decides the next clarification. An extra file does not settle every business question merely by filling the previously empty place in the archive.

Give an answer that lets the next person proceed

A good response to purchasing or invoice processing states the result and its basis. In the successful example, “found it” is insufficient. Explain that two relevant delivery notes show eight and four units and therefore account for the twelve units being checked. The recipient can then use the result without repeating your search to discover what it meant.

Include the clear reference to the documents used in your existing team process. A long history of the search is unnecessary. Another authorised colleague should be able to find the records and check the same relationship. The explanation should make the decision understandable, rather than preserve every search term and intermediate click.

If something remains open, name that exact point and the next responsible person. “Still unclear” without an object is of little use. “The second delivery of four units has not yet been confirmed by goods receipt” gives a concrete task. The office will not need to explain the original discrepancy again at the next contact.

Avoid saying the entire invoice has been approved when you only answered the quantity question. Price, other lines or different agreements may need their own checks. A precise answer is more useful than a broader-sounding status. It shows what is complete and what further work is actually required before the transaction can move on.

Compare search effort across months

To measure usefulness, observe a limited set of similar queries. Record when searching starts, when a usable answer is available and, separately, time spent waiting for other people. A document supplied late should not be mistaken for slow search. At the same time, the overall time the matter remained open should still be visible.

In a hypothetical comparison, the team handles twenty similar queries in each of two months. Active search and allocation take 160 minutes in the first month and 90 in the second. The difference is 70 minutes. Per query, that is eight minutes compared with four and a half. Every figure is an illustrative assumption, not a promised Documents result.

Check whether the cases are reasonably comparable. If the second month contains mainly straightforward single deliveries, that may explain part of the difference. Briefly note how many cases involved several records or missing documents. You do not need an academic study, but you do need an honest basis for the next operational decision.

Include the extra checking at entry. If the warehouse spends more time capturing complete records, that effort belongs in the overall assessment. The goal is less avoidable work across the process. Moving some effort from the office to the warehouse can make sense when it prevents more work later, but the transfer should remain visible in your calculation.

Start with the next real invoice query

Choose a supplier or a manageable group of current orders for which the team regularly needs delivery documents. Agree the entry route, responsibility for missing records and a short statement of the result. Test retrieval with a colleague who does not know the filename. This reveals early whether content-based filing helps in an actual office situation.

On the Documents page, explore upload, email import, analysis and archive search, then create access through the existing start route. Bring a relevant delivery note and a typical query. The first useful outcome is clear: the team finds the right delivery, explains a particular invoice line and requests only what is genuinely missing for that case.

Explore Documents and simplify your next delivery note search