Talk:Authorisation of Expenditure: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(a couple of suggestions) |
(re) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
# As well as making responsibilities clear, make procedures clear as well. When I was trying to work out a system of controls, I intended there to be actual forms with (electronic) signatures on so it was very clear who had authorised what - I would recommend that approach. | # As well as making responsibilities clear, make procedures clear as well. When I was trying to work out a system of controls, I intended there to be actual forms with (electronic) signatures on so it was very clear who had authorised what - I would recommend that approach. | ||
# Rather than have some expenditure that doesn't need authorisation, have a system of granting authorisation once for recurring expenditure. The end result is pretty much the same, but it makes sure there is a clear paper trail. (You don't want someone paying something thinking it was an exemption and then that being disputed.) --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 12:02, 7 November 2012 (UTC) | # Rather than have some expenditure that doesn't need authorisation, have a system of granting authorisation once for recurring expenditure. The end result is pretty much the same, but it makes sure there is a clear paper trail. (You don't want someone paying something thinking it was an exemption and then that being disputed.) --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 12:02, 7 November 2012 (UTC) | ||
::Thanks Tango - fantastic suggestions. Will put them in. [[User:Richard Symonds (WMUK)|Richard Symonds (WMUK)]] ([[User talk:Richard Symonds (WMUK)|talk]]) 14:27, 8 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 15:27, 8 November 2012
It's good to see someone working on this. A couple of suggestions from me:
- As well as making responsibilities clear, make procedures clear as well. When I was trying to work out a system of controls, I intended there to be actual forms with (electronic) signatures on so it was very clear who had authorised what - I would recommend that approach.
- Rather than have some expenditure that doesn't need authorisation, have a system of granting authorisation once for recurring expenditure. The end result is pretty much the same, but it makes sure there is a clear paper trail. (You don't want someone paying something thinking it was an exemption and then that being disputed.) --Tango (talk) 12:02, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks Tango - fantastic suggestions. Will put them in. Richard Symonds (WMUK) (talk) 14:27, 8 November 2012 (UTC)