Skip to main content
Question

sinwof-Two Authorizers Required activating despite Invoice Amount below the defined threshold

  • August 17, 2026
  • 2 replies
  • 9 views
H
Do Gooder (Partner)
Forum|alt.badge.img+1

Hi IFS Community,

I have a question regarding the Authorization Parameters for Posting Proposal in the Supplier Invoice Workflow.

Configuration in our company:

  • Authorization Routing : Use Consecutive Authorization

  • Two Authorizers Required : Enabled (Checked)

  • Amount that requires two authorizers : 50,000.00

  • EXlude Posting Authorization : Not checked 

Scenario:
I am processing a supplier invoice with the following details:

  • Invoice Amount: 12,000

  • Purchase Order Amount: 11,000

  • Difference (Variance): 1,000

The Issue:
Since the invoice amount (15,000.00) is below the defined threshold of 50,000.00, I expected the system to require only one authorizer (following the consecutive sequence). However, the system is still forcing two authorizers to approve the posting proposal sequentially (the first authorizer approves, but the workflow does not finish and continues to request a second authorizer).

Are there any other parameters missing to get the expected behavior ? 

Any insights or troubleshooting steps would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!

2 replies

T
Superhero (Employee)
Forum|alt.badge.img+20
  • Thomas Peterson
  • Superhero (Employee)
  • August 17, 2026

Hi, 

It would be important to include both authorization routing rule, and the assigning rule. 

In short, how many steps are in the assigning rule that was used via that authorization routing rule? I suspect you have two steps for that given rule. 

Assuming the authorization only had 1 authorizer and the invoice (your example was over 50K) you would receive an error message that the invoice requires 2 authorizers.  

I see no evidence that if the authorization rules includes two authorizers that only one is needed. IFS acts upon the authorization rules, and if the rule dictates two authorizers, you need the two authorizers to act, even if the invoice (your example) was less than 50K. 

In short, IFS follows the authorization rules and steps you defined in the rules.   Then “IF” an invoice was over 50K you then need two authorizers even if only one authorizer was assigned due to the rules.  

Best regards, 

Thomas

 

    H
    Do Gooder (Partner)
    Forum|alt.badge.img+1
    • H.HAFSA
    • Author
    • Do Gooder (Partner)
    • August 18, 2026

    Hi, 

    It would be important to include both authorization routing rule, and the assigning rule. 

    In short, how many steps are in the assigning rule that was used via that authorization routing rule? I suspect you have two steps for that given rule. 

    Assuming the authorization only had 1 authorizer and the invoice (your example was over 50K) you would receive an error message that the invoice requires 2 authorizers.  

    I see no evidence that if the authorization rules includes two authorizers that only one is needed. IFS acts upon the authorization rules, and if the rule dictates two authorizers, you need the two authorizers to act, even if the invoice (your example) was less than 50K. 

    In short, IFS follows the authorization rules and steps you defined in the rules.   Then “IF” an invoice was over 50K you then need two authorizers even if only one authorizer was assigned due to the rules.  

    Best regards, 

    Thomas

     

    thank you for your reply. 

    Indeed, in my routing rule, I have two authorization levels.

     

    If I fully understand, I only need to define the first step in my routine rule. This means that the second authorizer will not be filled in automatically and will require manual intervention.

    Is there a best practice I could follow to ensure that both authorizers are triggered automatically, without any manual intervention?

     

    Thank you for your help. 

     

    Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement