Rivane

Accounting
made smart

ERP Use CasesTier 1Published March 19, 2026

Run Automated Dunning / Collections Workflow

Run Automated Dunning / Collections Workflow for US and UK finance teams: ERP requirements, controls, audit evidence, data model, APIs, state transitions, and implementation checks.

Collections & Dunning is where ERP discipline either begins or breaks.

Run Automated Dunning / Collections Workflow looks operational from far away. In a real finance team, it is a chain of assertions: the right actor started the work, the required records existed, the control policy was applied, the state change was preserved, and the outcome can be explained later without rebuilding the transaction from emails and spreadsheets.

The expected business outcome is specific: Overdue invoices are systematically followed up; DSO decreases; collections staff effort focuses on high-value exceptions.

The control flow a finance team actually needs.

Workflow map showing control steps, exceptions, and evidence for this ERP process.Dunning Levels A...Start conditionEmail Templates ...Required checksA Customer Can B...Owner and SLADunning History ...System updatePromise-To-Pay S...Exception handlingAudit packetEvidence trailException loopCollections & Dunning should preserve every override and rejection.
Workflow map for this ERP process, including exception handling and audit evidence.

Step 1

Dunning Levels And Day Thresholds Be...

Step 2

Email Templates Variable Substitution

Step 3

A Customer Can Be Excluded From Dunning

Step 4

Dunning History Be Auditable

Step 5

Promise-To-Pay Set A Follow-Up Date

The ERP surface involved.

Module

Collections & Dunning

Actors

Collections Engine, AR Clerk, Customer, Email System

Tier

Tier 1

Finance area

Accounts Receivable & Order-to-Cash

Region lens

US and UK finance teams

Publication date

March 19, 2026

Dunning levels and day thresholds must be configurable per customer segment; email templates must support variable substitution (invoice number, amount, due date, payment link); a customer can be excluded from dunning (VIP hold); dunning history must be auditable; promise-to-pay must set a follow-up date; dispute must route to dispute management workflow; system must not send dunning emails to customers with active payment plans; non-functional: nightly run for 10,000 overdue invoices < 10 minutes.

US and UK teams have different compliance hooks, but the same control problem.

US teams usually care about clean evidence for audit support, vendor records, payment controls, tax reporting, and management review. UK teams usually care about VAT-ready records, approval evidence, digital-record discipline, and traceable postings. The country-specific details differ, but the operating pattern is the same: the ERP needs controlled records, explicit ownership, defensible state changes, and evidence that survives beyond the person who completed the task.

The control matrix.

Control areaRequirementAcceptance proof
Control 1Dunning levels and day thresholds must be configurable per customer segmentGiven open overdue invoices with dunning levels configured by days-overdue threshold
Control 2email templates must support variable substitution (invoice number, amount, due date, payment linkwhen the nightly collections engine runs
Control 3a customer can be excluded from dunning (VIP holdthen each overdue invoice transitions to the appropriate dunning level, a template email is sent, a collections case is created or escalated, and invoices on dispute hold or with payment plans are excluded from dunning
Control 4dunning history must be auditablenegative) when a customer has VIP hold flag set then no dunning email is sent and status remains unchanged.
Control 5promise-to-pay must set a follow-up dateOverdue invoices are systematically followed up; DSO decreases; collections staff effort focuses on high-value exceptions.
Control 6dispute must route to dispute management workflowOverdue invoices are systematically followed up; DSO decreases; collections staff effort focuses on high-value exceptions.

Audit evidence is a chain, not a folder.

Evidence layerWhat should be preserved
Business event
Nightly collections engine scans all open invoices exceeding their due date;
invoices are assigned to a dunning level based on days-overdue thresholds configured per customer segment (e.g., Level 1 at 7 days, Level 2 at 30 days, Level 3 at 60 days);
for each level transition the system generates a dunning email from a configurable template and sends it to the customer's billing contact;
a collections case is opened or escalated in the system;
AR clerk receives a daily collections task list;
customer responses (promise-to-pay, dispute) are logged against the case;
on receipt the invoice exits the dunning queue.
Control rulesDunning levels and day thresholds must be configurable per customer segment; email templates must support variable substitution (invoice number, amount, due date, payment link); a customer can be excluded from dunning (VIP hold); dunning history must be auditable; promise-to-pay must set a follow-up date; dispute must route to dispute management workflow; system must not send dunning emails to customers with active payment plans; non-functional: nightly run for 10,000 overdue invoices < 10 minutes.
Acceptance proofGiven open overdue invoices with dunning levels configured by days-overdue threshold; when the nightly collections engine runs; then each overdue invoice transitions to the appropriate dunning level, a template email is sent, a collections case is created or escalated, and invoices on dispute hold or with payment plans are excluded from dunning; (negative) when a customer has VIP hold flag set then no dunning email is sent and status remains unchanged.
Data record
dunning_policy { id: string, customer_segment: string, levels: [{level: int, days_overdue: int, template_id: string}] };
collections_case { id: string, invoice_id: invoice_*, customer_id: cust_*, dunning_level: int, opened_at: timestamp, status: enum, promise_to_pay_date: date };
dunning_event { case_id: string, level: int, sent_at: timestamp, delivery_status: enum };
(reference, product may differ).
System event
POST /v1/dunning/run { entity_id, as_of_date } -> 202 { run_id, invoices_processed: int };
GET /v1/collections-cases?customer_id=&status=;
POST /v1/collections-cases/{id}/promise-to-pay { pay_date } -> 200;
emits ar.dunning.sent per level transition;
idempotent re-run produces no duplicate emails.
Lifecycle state
OPEN -> LEVEL_1 -> LEVEL_2 -> LEVEL_3 -> ESCALATED;
terminal CLOSED;
guard: dispute hold and payment plan hold pause all level transitions;
VIP hold blocks entry to dunning.

The useful version of this workflow is not only fast. It is inspectable. A controller, auditor, or operator should be able to move from source event to system record to state transition to final business outcome without guessing.

Implementation contracts.

Reference data model

`dunning_policy` { id: string, customer_segment: string, levels: [{level: int, days_overdue: int, template_id: string}] }; `collections_case` { id: string, invoice_id: invoice_*, customer_id: cust_*, dunning_level: int, opened_at: timestamp, status: enum, promise_to_pay_date: date }; `dunning_event` { case_id: string, level: int, sent_at: timestamp, delivery_status: enum }; (reference, product may differ).

API and events

`POST /v1/dunning/run` { entity_id, as_of_date } -> 202 { run_id, invoices_processed: int }; `GET /v1/collections-cases?customer_id=&status=`; `POST /v1/collections-cases/{id}/promise-to-pay` { pay_date } -> 200; emits `ar.dunning.sent` per level transition; idempotent re-run produces no duplicate emails.

State transitions

`OPEN -> LEVEL_1 -> LEVEL_2 -> LEVEL_3 -> ESCALATED`; terminal `CLOSED`; guard: dispute hold and payment plan hold pause all level transitions; VIP hold blocks entry to dunning.

Common implementation traps.

Treating the workflow as data entry

If the ERP only stores the final record, the team loses the decision trail that explains how the record became valid.

Hiding exception logic

Exceptions need owners, reason codes, and time stamps. A vague pending state is not a control.

Posting without recovery design

Retries, duplicate submissions, and partial failures must be explicit so the system does not create inconsistent records.

Skipping evidence design

A workflow that cannot produce evidence on demand will eventually push finance teams back into manual screenshots and spreadsheets.

Where Rivane fits.

Rivane is built for finance workflows where automation must stay tied to source documents, approvals, state transitions, ledger impact, reporting, and audit evidence. Use this guide as a checklist for evaluating whether an ERP workflow is merely digitized or actually controlled.

References and source basis.

These sources provide the standards, regulatory, or government context around the flow. They are included so the guide is useful to finance operators, auditors, and implementation teams, not only buyers reading software copy.

Back to ERP use cases