776 lines
34 KiB
Markdown
776 lines
34 KiB
Markdown
RE Workflow Management – Not Templatized
|
||
System Requirements Specifications
|
||
13 - Oct- 2025
|
||
Version 1. 0
|
||
Contents
|
||
1 System Overview & Problem Statement
|
||
2 Use case examples
|
||
3 Intended Audience
|
||
4 HiFi Wireframe,Goals and Expected Outcomes
|
||
5 Definitions and Acronyms
|
||
6 Flow of Application
|
||
6.1 High-Level Flow
|
||
7 System Features & Requirements
|
||
7.1 SSO Login
|
||
7.2 Dashboard
|
||
7.3 Side Navigation Menu
|
||
7.4 Create New Request – Template Selection
|
||
7.5 Create New Request – Basic Information
|
||
7.6 Create New Request – Approval Workflow
|
||
7.7 Create New Request – Participants & Access
|
||
7.8 Create New Request – Documents & Attachments
|
||
7.9 Create New Request – Review & Submit
|
||
7.10 Notifications
|
||
7.11 My Requests.............................................................................................................
|
||
7.12 Request Detail View
|
||
7.13 Request Detail view - Workflow
|
||
7.14 Request Detail view - Document
|
||
7.15 Request Detail view – Activity
|
||
7.16 Add Work Note
|
||
7.17 Add Approver & Spectator
|
||
7.18 Approve / Reject Request (Popup Window)
|
||
7.19 Closure Remark
|
||
8 Client Feedback Log (Post-Review Updates)
|
||
9 Non-Functional Requirements
|
||
10 Technology Matrix
|
||
11 Infra requirements & System Hygiene
|
||
12 Not in scope
|
||
1 System Overview & Problem Statement
|
||
The Workflow Management System – Non-Templatized is a strategic digital initiative aimed at
|
||
bringing structure, traceability, and efficiency to approval-based processes within Royal Enfield
|
||
(RE).
|
||
|
||
Currently, most approvals and related communications are handled through emails , which often
|
||
results in:
|
||
|
||
Unstructured and fragmented approval chains
|
||
Loss of critical information due to scattered email threads
|
||
Lack of visibility on approval status and ownership
|
||
No defined Turnaround Time (TAT) , leading to delays and open-ended tasks
|
||
These challenges collectively reduce process transparency , accountability , and decision
|
||
efficiency across teams.
|
||
|
||
The proposed Workflow Management System – Non-Templatized will address these issues by
|
||
providing a centralized, intuitive platform where:
|
||
|
||
Users can create requests ,
|
||
Define custom approval hierarchies ,
|
||
Set and monitor TATs , and
|
||
Track real-time progress and final outcomes.
|
||
All workflows will be captured, organized, and closed within a single system of record —
|
||
ensuring clarity, control, and compliance throughout the process.
|
||
|
||
A thoughtfully designed User Interface (UI) will further enhance usability, adoption, and
|
||
productivity , ensuring smooth navigation and a clean experience across departments.
|
||
|
||
2 Use case examples
|
||
The following are some illustrative use cases for the Workflow Management System – Non-
|
||
Templatized. These examples represent common approval scenarios within the organization,
|
||
though additional use cases may be added over time as business needs evolve:
|
||
|
||
Approval for a new office location – involving multiple stakeholders such as facilities,
|
||
finance, and leadership teams.
|
||
Approval of unbudgeted incentives – requiring justification and review from HR and
|
||
finance departments.
|
||
Sponsorship or participation in an event – covering approvals from marketing, branding,
|
||
and finance.
|
||
Purchase of material from a new vendor – requiring validation, procurement, and
|
||
financial approvals.
|
||
These examples demonstrate the system’s flexibility to handle a wide range of approval
|
||
workflows across departments.
|
||
|
||
3 Intended Audience
|
||
The Workflow Management System – Non-Templatized will be accessible to all Royal Enfield
|
||
(RE) employees who have valid SSO (Single Sign-On) credentials.
|
||
|
||
Initially, the system will be introduced in a pilot environment for selected users and
|
||
departments. Based on feedback and performance, it will later be rolled out organization-wide.
|
||
|
||
The system will involve the following user roles :
|
||
|
||
Initiator – The user who creates and submits a workflow request.
|
||
Participants – Individuals involved in the workflow at different stages or approval levels.
|
||
Final Approver – The ultimate authority responsible for approving or rejecting the
|
||
workflow request.
|
||
Consultation – A user or subject matter expert whom the Final Approver may consult
|
||
before making a final decision.
|
||
Spectators – Users who are invited to view the workflow for information or transparency
|
||
purposes, similar to how individuals are copied (CC’d) on email communications.
|
||
This defined role structure ensures clarity, accountability, and collaboration throughout the
|
||
workflow lifecycle.
|
||
|
||
4 HiFi Wireframe,Goals and Expected Outcomes
|
||
Hi-Fi Wireframe: https://sway-dense-03017508.figma.site
|
||
|
||
The Workflow Management System – Non-Templatized is designed with a user-centric
|
||
approach, supported by a high-fidelity (Hi-Fi) wireframe that visually represents the layout,
|
||
navigation flow, and user interactions.
|
||
|
||
Through the implementation of this system, Royal Enfield (RE) aims to achieve the
|
||
following measurable goals :
|
||
|
||
Centralization: Consolidate all approval workflows and related communications within a
|
||
single unified platform.
|
||
Transparency: Provide real-time visibility into each workflow’s stage, status, and assigned
|
||
approvers.
|
||
Accountability: Define clear ownership at every stage and maintain a complete audit trail
|
||
of all user actions.
|
||
Efficiency: Reduce approval cycle times by implementing TAT-based
|
||
tracking , automated reminders , and smart notifications.
|
||
Traceability: Maintain structured and retrievable records of all approvals to support easy
|
||
reference, audit, and reporting.
|
||
Scalability: Enable flexible configuration of non-templatized workflows that can adapt to
|
||
various departmental and business needs.
|
||
User Experience: Deliver a clean, intuitive, and responsive interface that enhances
|
||
usability and encourages regular adoption.
|
||
5 Definitions and Acronyms
|
||
Term Definition
|
||
Workflow A sequence of tasks, approvals, or activities linked to a business process.
|
||
Non-
|
||
Templatized
|
||
A flexible structure where each workflow can be created dynamically without a fixed
|
||
format.
|
||
Admin System user with full privileges.
|
||
6 Flow of Application
|
||
This section describes the end-to-end flow of the Workflow Management – Non-Templatized
|
||
application. It outlines how users interact with the system, how approvals move through
|
||
different stages, and how data transitions between modules until final closure.
|
||
|
||
6.1 High-Level Flow
|
||
Login (SSO Integration)
|
||
o Users access the system via the RE SSO Bridge using their organizational
|
||
credentials.
|
||
o Upon successful authentication, users are redirected to the Dashboard.
|
||
Dashboard & Navigation
|
||
o The Dashboard provides a summary of pending, approved, and rejected requests.
|
||
o The left Side Menu gives access to My Requests , Open Requests , Closed Requests ,
|
||
and Raise New Request.
|
||
Creating a New Request
|
||
o User clicks “Raise New Request” and chooses between:
|
||
▪ Custom Request – Create a flexible, non-templatized workflow.
|
||
▪ Existing Template – (Future scope) Use a predefined structure.
|
||
o The user proceeds through a 6 - step wizard :
|
||
▪ Template Selection
|
||
▪ Basic Information
|
||
▪ Approval Workflow
|
||
▪ Participants & Access
|
||
▪ Documents & Attachments
|
||
▪ Review & Submit
|
||
Defining Approval Workflow
|
||
o The user configures approval levels dynamically , assigning approvers via @
|
||
tagging.
|
||
o Each approver level has a defined TAT (in hours or days).
|
||
o System calculates the total TAT by summing all levels.
|
||
o TAT starts only when a request reaches that approver’s level.
|
||
Adding Participants
|
||
o User can add Spectators (view-only participants) who can comment but not
|
||
approve.
|
||
o Spectators receive notifications and see the request in read-only mode.
|
||
Uploading Documents
|
||
o User attaches supporting files (PDF, Word, Excel, PPT, or images) or links Google
|
||
Docs/Sheets.
|
||
o PDFs and images are previewable , while other formats can be downloaded.
|
||
Submitting the Request
|
||
o The user reviews all information in the Review & Submit step.
|
||
o Once submitted, the request enters the Approval Workflow and notifies the first
|
||
approver.
|
||
Approval Process
|
||
o Approvers receive a notification and can:
|
||
▪ Approve Request – Moves to the next level or closes if final approver.
|
||
▪ Reject Request – Sends remarks to the initiator and marks as closed.
|
||
o Each action requires comments and remarks (mandatory).
|
||
o TAT tracking is visible with color-coded status (Green = Within TAT, Yellow =
|
||
Approaching Deadline, Red = Breached).
|
||
o Auto-reminders are sent at configured thresholds (e.g., 80% TAT usage).
|
||
Work Notes & Collaboration
|
||
o Participants communicate via the Work Notes (Chat View).
|
||
o Supports @mentions, file sharing, and reactions.
|
||
o All discussions are stored chronologically and linked to the request.
|
||
Activity Tracking
|
||
o Every event — creation, comment, document upload, approval, rejection, or TAT
|
||
alert — is captured in the Activity Tab with timestamps.
|
||
Request Closure & Conclusion
|
||
o After final approval, the request returns to the Initiator with AI-generated
|
||
conclusion remarks.
|
||
o The initiator reviews, optionally edits, and marks the request as closed.
|
||
o The Conclusion Remark summarizing the workflow becomes part of the final
|
||
record and appears under:
|
||
▪ My Requests (Approved)
|
||
▪ Open Requests
|
||
▪ Closed Requests
|
||
Post-Closure Access & Sharing
|
||
o Closed requests remain accessible to all participants and spectators.
|
||
o Requests can be shared internally via Add Spectator ;
|
||
download permissions apply only to Work Note attachments.
|
||
o All actions and comments remain viewable for audit purposes.
|
||
7 System Features & Requirements
|
||
Here, we describe the system features along with their respective Width and Depth to provide
|
||
complete visibility of each requirement.
|
||
|
||
The Width defines the functional coverage of a feature — outlining what the feature does,
|
||
its boundaries, use cases, and user interactions. It answers the question: “What scenarios and
|
||
actions are covered by this feature?”
|
||
|
||
The Depth captures the operational and behavioral details — describing how the feature
|
||
behaves through its logic, workflow, system responses, and edge-case handling. It answers the
|
||
question: “How does the system execute and respond in these scenarios?”
|
||
|
||
7.1 SSO Login
|
||
The system will integrate with the existing RE SSO Bridge to enable secure, seamless login for all
|
||
authorized Royal Enfield employees. This ensures unified authentication, eliminating the need
|
||
for separate credentials and maintaining compliance with RE’s security standards.
|
||
|
||
Width:
|
||
|
||
Integrates with the existing RE SSO Bridge for secure authentication.
|
||
Allows access only to authorized Royal Enfield employees.
|
||
Automatically retrieves user details ( name, employee ID, department ).
|
||
Depth:
|
||
|
||
Uses token-based authentication and HTTPS for secure sessions.
|
||
Handles session timeout and re-authentication per RE’s IT security policy.
|
||
Dependency
|
||
|
||
SSO implementation guide and sample users are required.
|
||
7.2 Dashboard
|
||
The Dashboard is an open element that is currently under discussion and will be finalized in later
|
||
phases. It is expected to serve as a central view for users to monitor workflow status, pending
|
||
approvals, and key metrics once its structure and content are defined.
|
||
|
||
7.3 Side Navigation Menu
|
||
The Side Menu provides users with quick and consistent navigation across the application. It
|
||
includes the following primary sections:
|
||
|
||
Dashboard: Overview of workflow activities, key metrics, and pending actions.
|
||
My Requests: Displays all workflow requests created by the logged-in user.
|
||
Open Requests: Lists all active or in-progress workflows requiring action. These may
|
||
include requests initiated by or assigned to the logged-in user.
|
||
Closed Requests: Shows all completed or approved workflows for reference. These may
|
||
include requests created by or processed by the logged-in user.
|
||
Raise New Request: Allows users to initiate and submit a new workflow request.
|
||
Width:
|
||
|
||
Offers persistent navigation to Dashboard , My Requests , Open Requests , Closed
|
||
Requests , and Raise New Request.
|
||
Ensures consistent access throughout the system.
|
||
Depth:
|
||
|
||
Implements active route highlighting and role-based visibility.
|
||
Includes search, sort, and filter capabilities.
|
||
Supports pagination and stable ID-based navigation to detail screens.
|
||
7.4 Create New Request – Template Selection
|
||
This screen appears when the user clicks “Raise New Request.” It introduces a wizard-style
|
||
navigation that guides users through the request creation process in sequential steps.
|
||
|
||
Custom Request (Non Templatized): Allows users to create a fully flexible workflow tailored to
|
||
unique business needs.
|
||
|
||
To initiate the request flow, users must select “Custom Request.” The system then progresses
|
||
step by step to capture all required details, ensuring clarity and completeness before submission.
|
||
|
||
Width:
|
||
|
||
Enables users to choose Custom Request (non-templatized)
|
||
Displays wizard navigation with progress indicator.
|
||
Depth:
|
||
|
||
In the current version, only Custom Request is enabled.
|
||
Enforces mandatory selection before proceeding.
|
||
Saves the chosen configuration as part of the workflow metadata.
|
||
Activates after completion of wizard
|
||
7.5 Create New Request – Basic Information
|
||
In this step, users outline the what, why, and how soon of their request, creating clarity for all
|
||
participants involved in the approval process.
|
||
|
||
Users are required to enter:
|
||
|
||
Request Title: A short and descriptive title that summarizes the purpose of the request
|
||
(e.g., Approval for new office location ).
|
||
Detailed Description: A comprehensive explanation outlining the need, background, and
|
||
expected outcome of the request.
|
||
Priority Level: Selection between two options —
|
||
o Express (Urgent): Includes calendar days in the TAT for faster processing.
|
||
o Standard (Default): Includes working days in the TAT for regular processing.
|
||
This step ensures that each request is well-defined, prioritized appropriately, and easily
|
||
understood by all participants in the approval flow.
|
||
|
||
Width:
|
||
|
||
Captures core request details :
|
||
o Request Title
|
||
o Detailed Description
|
||
o Priority Level – Express or Standard
|
||
Depth:
|
||
|
||
Express: Uses calendar days in TAT calculation.
|
||
Standard: Uses working days (default).
|
||
Supports rich text formatting and pasted tables for better clarity.
|
||
Support comprehensive email like formatting features , including table insertion, links,
|
||
and text formatting such as bold and italics
|
||
•
|
||
7.6 Create New Request – Approval Workflow
|
||
In this step, users define the approval hierarchy and assign approvers for each level. The number
|
||
of approvers is dynamically configurable based on the workflow’s complexity, with a maximum
|
||
of ten levels supported.
|
||
|
||
Each approver’s Turnaround Time (TAT) must be defined individually in hours or days ,
|
||
depending on the urgency and scope of the request. The system automatically calculates
|
||
the overall TAT by summing the TAT values of all approval levels.
|
||
|
||
An important behavior to note: the TAT timer for each participant starts only when the request
|
||
reaches that level. Any delay at a previous level impacts only that approver’s TAT and does not
|
||
affect subsequent ones.
|
||
|
||
Approvers can be tagged using the “@” symbol for easy identification, and each level’s
|
||
configuration is summarized in real time under the Approval Flow Summary and TAT
|
||
Summary sections for complete visibility. All the taggable users must be available in Active
|
||
Directory (AD).
|
||
|
||
Width:
|
||
|
||
Allows defining a multi-level approval hierarchy with dynamic levels (up to 10).
|
||
Each level includes a TAT (in hours or days).
|
||
Approvers can be added using @ tagging.
|
||
Depth:
|
||
|
||
System computes overall TAT by summing all levels.
|
||
TAT timer starts only when a level becomes active — delays are isolated per level.
|
||
Displays real-time Approval Flow Summary and TAT Summary for transparency.
|
||
7.7 Create New Request – Participants & Access
|
||
The system allows adding Spectators — users who can view the workflow, add comments, and
|
||
stay informed , but cannot approve or modify the request. Spectators can be added using
|
||
the “@” tag , ensuring relevant stakeholders remain in the loop throughout the approval process.
|
||
|
||
Width:
|
||
|
||
Allows adding Spectators who can view and comment but cannot approve.
|
||
Ensures visibility is restricted to participants and spectators only.
|
||
Depth:
|
||
|
||
@ tagging used to add spectators easily.
|
||
Spectators can add comments but have no edit or approval privileges.
|
||
All changes are logged in the audit trail.
|
||
7.8 Create New Request – Documents & Attachments
|
||
In this step, users can upload supporting documents and reference materials required for the
|
||
workflow request. The system supports file formats such as PDF, Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and
|
||
images , with a maximum upload size of 10 MB per file.
|
||
|
||
Users can drag and drop files directly into the upload area or use the Browse Files option to
|
||
attach them.
|
||
|
||
PDF and image files can be previewed directly within the system.
|
||
Other formats such as Word, Excel, or PowerPoint must be downloaded to view.
|
||
Additionally, users can associate Google Docs and Google Sheets links as part of the
|
||
request for collaborative reference.
|
||
This feature ensures that all relevant documents are easily accessible and centralized for
|
||
smoother review and approval.
|
||
|
||
Width:
|
||
|
||
Supports uploads of PDF, Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and image files (up to 10 MB each ).
|
||
Allows linking of Google Docs and Google Sheets.
|
||
Depth:
|
||
|
||
Provides inline preview for PDFs and images.
|
||
Other formats must be downloaded to view.
|
||
Stores file metadata (name, size, uploader, timestamp) for traceability.
|
||
7.9 Create New Request – Review & Submit
|
||
This is the final step before the request enters the approval cycle. Users can review all captured
|
||
details and ensure the accuracy of every input. The screen provides a structured summary of:
|
||
|
||
Request Overview: Displays key attributes such as Request Type, Priority, Workflow
|
||
Type, and Request Title.
|
||
Basic Information: Shows the request description and priority level entered earlier.
|
||
Approval Workflow: Summarizes approval hierarchy, approvers, and defined TAT for
|
||
each level.
|
||
Participants & Access Control: Lists spectators, permissions, and comment settings.
|
||
After verification, the user can either save the request as draft or click “Submit Request.” Once
|
||
submitted, the workflow is activated, and notifications are automatically triggered to all
|
||
assigned approvers and spectators.
|
||
|
||
This final step ensures each request is validated, structured, and complete before moving into
|
||
execution.
|
||
|
||
Width:
|
||
|
||
Displays a complete summary of all entered details before submission:
|
||
o Request Overview
|
||
o Basic Information
|
||
o Approval Workflow
|
||
o Participants & Access
|
||
Provides options to Save as Draft or Submit Request.
|
||
Depth:
|
||
|
||
Performs final validation of all required fields.
|
||
Computes total TAT and confirms approver hierarchy.
|
||
Upon submission, sends notifications to approvers and spectators.
|
||
7.10 Notifications
|
||
The system provides real-time notifications to keep users informed about workflow activities
|
||
and pending actions. Notifications appear through a bell icon in the application header with a
|
||
visible count of unread alerts.
|
||
|
||
Users receive updates such as:
|
||
|
||
Approval Reminders: Alerts when a request requires action or when its SLA/TAT is about
|
||
to expire.
|
||
Comments and Mentions: Notifications when someone adds a comment or tags the user
|
||
in a workflow discussion.
|
||
Each notification includes the request ID, message, and timestamp , allowing users to respond
|
||
quickly and maintain timely workflow progress.
|
||
|
||
Width:
|
||
|
||
Centralized bell icon for all system alerts with unread count.
|
||
Covers events like:
|
||
o Approval assignments
|
||
o SLA/TAT warnings
|
||
o Comments or mentions
|
||
o Status updates and closures
|
||
Depth:
|
||
|
||
Delivers real-time in-app alerts (optional email integration).
|
||
Each alert includes request ID, event type, user, and timestamp.
|
||
Supports click navigation , read/unread states , and auto-cleanup of old alerts.
|
||
Highlights high-priority or SLA-related notifications distinctly.
|
||
7.11 My Requests.............................................................................................................
|
||
This screen allows users to view, track, and manage all workflow requests they have created
|
||
within the system. It provides a consolidated view of request status, type, and progress for easy
|
||
monitoring.
|
||
|
||
Width:
|
||
|
||
Displays all workflow requests submitted by the logged-in user , categorized as Total, In
|
||
Progress, Approved, Rejected, and Draft.
|
||
Each record shows critical details like Request Title, Priority (Express/Standard),
|
||
Template Type, ID, Submission Date, and Current Level.
|
||
Includes search and filter options for status and priority to quickly locate specific
|
||
requests.
|
||
Depth:
|
||
|
||
Each request card provides real-time tracking of the current approver , workflow level ,
|
||
and estimated completion date.
|
||
Supports click navigation to open the detailed workflow view.
|
||
Uses color-coded indicators for status identification (e.g., green for Approved, red for
|
||
Rejected, yellow for Pending).
|
||
Data refreshes upon page load when new requests are created or status updates occur,
|
||
ensuring users always see the latest information.
|
||
7.12 Request Detail View
|
||
This screen allows users to view, review, and act on individual workflow requests. It
|
||
consolidates all key information — request details, approver actions, documents, and activity
|
||
logs — into a single, interactive view for efficient decision-making.
|
||
|
||
Width:
|
||
|
||
Displays comprehensive request details , including title, description, initiator info,
|
||
department, and contact details.
|
||
Shows priority , TAT progress bar , and remaining time until the TAT expires.
|
||
Provides a tab-based layout for:
|
||
o Overview (request details and status)
|
||
o Workflow (approval hierarchy and progress)
|
||
o Documents (uploaded files)
|
||
o Activity (comments and action log)
|
||
Includes Quick Actions for approvers: Add Work Note, Add Approver, Add Spectator,
|
||
Approve Request, and Reject Request.
|
||
Lists Spectators with view-only access.
|
||
Depth:
|
||
|
||
TAT progress bar dynamically updates based on elapsed and remaining time, color-coded
|
||
for urgency (e.g., red for nearing expiry).
|
||
Each action (approval, rejection, addition of approver/spectator) is logged in
|
||
chronology within the activity tab for full traceability.
|
||
Approvers can add comments or attachments before taking a decision.
|
||
When the request reaches its final approver , the system allows closure and triggers an AI-
|
||
generated conclusion remark summarizing the discussion (as per feedback notes).
|
||
Page refresh updates data to reflect new comments, document uploads, or action
|
||
changes.
|
||
7.13 Request Detail view - Workflow
|
||
This screen provides a stage-by-stage view of the approval hierarchy within a specific workflow.
|
||
It helps users and approvers track progress, review comments, and monitor TAT (Turnaround
|
||
Time) performance at each approval level.
|
||
|
||
Width:
|
||
|
||
Displays each approver level , showing their name, designation, and TAT allocation.
|
||
Shows real-time progress of approvals — Completed, Pending, Waiting, or Approaching
|
||
Deadline.
|
||
Includes TAT tracking with both elapsed and remaining time indicators.
|
||
Highlights whether each step was completed within or beyond TAT.
|
||
Lists approver comments for visibility and decision traceability.
|
||
Auto-sends system-generated reminders when TAT thresholds are reached (e.g., 50% or
|
||
100% usage).
|
||
Depth:
|
||
|
||
The system tracks individual TAT usage per approver level , ensuring delays are isolated
|
||
to that stage only.
|
||
TAT bars dynamically update color (e.g., green for Within TAT , yellow for Approaching
|
||
Deadline , red for Breached ).
|
||
Automatically sends TAT reminders based on configured thresholds — manual reminders
|
||
are disabled as per design notes.
|
||
Supports chronological logging of every action and comment, visible in the activity trail.
|
||
Approvers can add notes, attach files, or escalate to higher levels if TAT expires without
|
||
action.
|
||
The final approver’s action closes the workflow , triggering summary notifications and AI-
|
||
generated closure remarks.
|
||
7.14 Request Detail view - Document
|
||
This tab provides a centralized space to view, manage, and access all documents attached to the
|
||
workflow request. It ensures that approvers and spectators have visibility into all supporting
|
||
materials necessary for informed decision-making.
|
||
|
||
Width:
|
||
|
||
Displays a list of uploaded documents associated with the request, showing:
|
||
o File name , size , type/category , uploader , and timestamp.
|
||
Supports standard file types such as PDF, Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and images.
|
||
Allows users to preview or download files directly from the list.
|
||
PDF and image files can be previewed inline ; other file types must be downloaded.
|
||
Shows Quick Actions (e.g., Add Work Note, Add Approver, Add Spectator ) on the side
|
||
panel for easy context switching.
|
||
Depth:
|
||
|
||
Ensures document version integrity — if the same file name is uploaded again, the latest
|
||
version is timestamped and saved separately.
|
||
Records audit entries whenever a file is uploaded, deleted, or viewed.
|
||
Provides metadata-based filtering (by file type, uploader, or date).
|
||
Allows association of Google Docs and Google Sheets links for live collaboration.
|
||
Refreshes file list upon page load or when a new document is uploaded , ensuring users
|
||
always view the most updated set of attachments.
|
||
7.15 Request Detail view – Activity
|
||
The Activity Tab serves as a chronological timeline that records every action, event, and update
|
||
associated with a workflow request. It provides complete transparency for users to trace
|
||
approvals, comments, document uploads, and system-generated notifications.
|
||
|
||
Width:
|
||
|
||
Displays a real-time activity timeline , including events such as:
|
||
o Request creation
|
||
o Approvals and rejections
|
||
o Comments and notes added
|
||
o Document uploads or deletions
|
||
o System-generated TAT warnings or reminders
|
||
Each activity entry shows:
|
||
o Event type , description , timestamp , and initiator name.
|
||
Differentiates between user actions (e.g., “Document Added”) and system events (e.g.,
|
||
“TAT Warning Sent”).
|
||
Depth:
|
||
|
||
Activities are displayed in reverse chronological order , with the latest updates at the top.
|
||
Color-coded event icons visually represent action types (e.g., green for approval, red for
|
||
warnings).
|
||
Automatically logs system-generated events such as TAT breach alerts or reminder
|
||
dispatches.
|
||
Records file uploads with metadata (file name, uploader, timestamp) for audit
|
||
traceability.
|
||
Ensures immutable logging — entries cannot be modified or deleted once created.
|
||
Data refreshes upon page load , ensuring users always view the most updated timeline.
|
||
7.16 Add Work Note
|
||
The Work Notes section enables participants to communicate and collaborate directly within a
|
||
workflow request , ensuring that all discussions, clarifications, and shared files remain tied to the
|
||
request record. This eliminates dependency on external email threads and improves traceability.
|
||
|
||
Width:
|
||
|
||
Displays a chronological chat-style conversation between workflow participants.
|
||
Supports @mentions to tag users for feedback or updates.
|
||
Allows file sharing within messages — uploaded files appear as inline attachments with
|
||
download options.
|
||
Each message displays the sender’s name, role, timestamp, and message content.
|
||
Offers reaction options
|
||
Includes a message composer at the bottom with:
|
||
o Text box for entering messages (max 2000 characters).
|
||
Automatically differentiates roles using colored badges (e.g., Initiator, Approver,
|
||
Spectator ).
|
||
Depth:
|
||
|
||
Messages are displayed in reverse chronological order , preserving a clear dialogue
|
||
history.
|
||
@mentions trigger system notifications to the tagged users.
|
||
Each message is time-stamped, immutable, and stored as part of the request’s
|
||
permanent record.
|
||
Inline attachments are linked to the Documents Tab for centralized access.
|
||
Priority tags (e.g., P – Priority ) appear inline when approvers mark messages as urgent.
|
||
The chat interface automatically refreshes upon page load to reflect the latest messages
|
||
and reactions.
|
||
Chat data remains available throughout the workflow lifecycle and is archived upon
|
||
closure.
|
||
If there is a query at any level, user will mention it here and ask additional details.
|
||
7.17 Add Approver & Spectator
|
||
This feature allows users to add new participants —either as Approvers or Spectators —to an
|
||
ongoing workflow request. It provides flexibility for dynamically updating the workflow hierarchy
|
||
or visibility list during the approval process.
|
||
|
||
Width:
|
||
|
||
Displays a modal popup titled “Add Approver” or “Add Spectator,” depending on the
|
||
selected action.
|
||
Provides a single input field for email address entry using the @ mention convention.
|
||
Allows users to search and add participants by email or username.
|
||
Includes two action buttons: Confirm (Add) and Cancel.
|
||
Approvers: Gain the ability to review, approve, or reject the request.
|
||
Spectators: Gain view-only access with the ability to comment and receive notifications.
|
||
Both participant types receive automated notifications upon being added.
|
||
Depth:
|
||
|
||
The Approver is inserted into the approval hierarchy in the defined sequence;
|
||
the Spectator is added to the visibility list.
|
||
All additions are recorded in the activity timeline for audit and transparency.
|
||
Notifications are sent automatically to the newly added users via the system’s alert
|
||
service.
|
||
Approver TAT begins only when their stage becomes active in the workflow.
|
||
The popup closes automatically upon successful addition, refreshing the request view to
|
||
reflect the change.
|
||
7.18 Approve / Reject Request (Popup Window)
|
||
This feature enables approvers to write their decision on a workflow request by either
|
||
approving or rejecting it. It ensures that each decision is properly documented with remarks,
|
||
creating a transparent and traceable approval trail.
|
||
|
||
Width:
|
||
|
||
Displays a modal window titled “Approve Request” or “Reject Request.”
|
||
Shows key request information:
|
||
o Request ID
|
||
o Request Title
|
||
o Action Type ( Approve or Reject ).
|
||
Includes a mandatory Comments & Remarks field (up to 500 characters) for justifying the
|
||
decision.
|
||
Contains two buttons:
|
||
o Approve Request / Reject Request — confirms and submits the decision.
|
||
o Cancel — closes the modal without any action.
|
||
Shows a contextual message:
|
||
o Approval Confirmation for approval flow.
|
||
o Rejection Guidelines encouraging constructive feedback.
|
||
Depth:
|
||
|
||
Comments are mandatory for both approval and rejection to ensure context for future
|
||
reference.
|
||
Upon approval:
|
||
o The system forwards the request to the next approver in the hierarchy or closes
|
||
it if this is the final level.
|
||
o If the final approver needs to consult with someone, he can use work note to
|
||
specify that user, conclude and put the final closing remarks
|
||
o Status updates automatically across all linked screens.
|
||
Upon rejection:
|
||
o The system sends a notification to the initiator along with rejection remarks.
|
||
o The request is marked as “Rejected” and closed for further approval.
|
||
All actions are logged in the Activity Tab with timestamps and user details.
|
||
The popup automatically closes upon successful submission , refreshing the view to
|
||
display the updated status.
|
||
7.19 Closure Remark
|
||
This stage marks the final closure of a workflow request after all approvals are completed.
|
||
Once the final approver submits their decision, the request automatically returns to the
|
||
Initiator with an AI-generated Conclusion Remark summarizing the entire workflow journey.
|
||
|
||
The Initiator reviews, optionally edits, and marks the request as closed , completing the
|
||
lifecycle.
|
||
|
||
Width:
|
||
|
||
Becomes available after the final approver’s action is recorded.
|
||
Displays an AI-generated Conclusion Remark summarizing:
|
||
o Discussion highlights and decision points
|
||
o Key approval or rejection reasons
|
||
o Notable attachments or supporting references
|
||
Allows the Initiator to review and, if required, edit or enhance the remark before final
|
||
closure.
|
||
Once confirmed, the request status changes to “Closed” , and the final remark becomes
|
||
part of the permanent workflow record.
|
||
The Conclusion Remark is visible under:
|
||
o My Requests (Approved)
|
||
o Open Requests
|
||
o Closed Requests
|
||
If no remark exists, a placeholder message is displayed:
|
||
“No conclusion remarks added yet. This section will highlight the main points or core
|
||
conclusions of the request.”
|
||
Depth:
|
||
|
||
The AI engine compiles the initial remark using inputs from Work Notes, Approver
|
||
Comments, and Activity Logs.
|
||
The remark generation occurs immediately after the final approval action is completed.
|
||
The Initiator can make final edits or confirmations before closing the request.
|
||
Once marked as closed, the remark becomes read-only for all other participants and
|
||
spectators.
|
||
The finalized conclusion is stored with workflow metadata for audit, compliance, and
|
||
reporting.
|
||
Closed requests retain full visibility of their conclusion remarks for traceability and
|
||
knowledge retention.
|
||
8 Client Feedback Log (Post-Review Updates)
|
||
This section tracks all client-driven changes, clarifications, or design validations received after
|
||
initial wireframe or SRS review. Each point is linked to the relevant feature section for traceability.
|
||
|
||
# Client Request / Feedback Response / Action Taken (Rohit) Linked
|
||
Feature
|
||
Section
|
||
1 Remove the TAT
|
||
modification option for
|
||
approvers, allowing only during
|
||
initiation.
|
||
Accepted – TAT edit will be available
|
||
only at request initiation, not at
|
||
approval stages.
|
||
Approval
|
||
Workflow
|
||
2 Display Conclusion
|
||
Remarks in My Requests for
|
||
approved requests, consistent
|
||
with Open and Closed Requests.
|
||
Agreed – Will be implemented during
|
||
development. To align with design
|
||
limitation noted in section 6.20.
|
||
My Requests,
|
||
Conclusion
|
||
Remark
|
||
3 Need to see how conclusion
|
||
workflow works ; final approver
|
||
should have ability to enter
|
||
conclusion.
|
||
Confirmed – After final approval,
|
||
request returns to initiator with AI-
|
||
generated comments for review/edit
|
||
before closure.
|
||
Conclusion
|
||
Remark
|
||
4 Add restrictive view for sharing
|
||
approved requests with non-
|
||
participants.
|
||
Accepted – To be managed via Work
|
||
Notes option with permission control.
|
||
Work Notes
|
||
5 Clarify sharing and
|
||
download permissions for
|
||
requests.
|
||
Approved – Requests can be shared
|
||
internally using Add
|
||
Spectator. Download option will be
|
||
enabled for Work Notes attachments
|
||
only.
|
||
Add
|
||
Participant,
|
||
Work Notes
|
||
9 Non-Functional Requirements
|
||
Category Requirement
|
||
Performance Average response time < 3 seconds for standard operations.
|
||
Scalability Should scale horizontally on GCP.
|
||
Security JWT tokens, encrypted passwords, HTTPS enforced.
|
||
Usability Intuitive UI, consistent icons, and simple navigation.
|
||
Reliability 99% uptime target.
|
||
Backup & Recovery Daily database backup and weekly full snapshot.
|
||
Compliance Follows RE IT data privacy guidelines.
|
||
10 Technology Matrix
|
||
Component Specification
|
||
Database PGSQL (Managed or local instance)
|
||
Application Stack Node.js (Backend) + React.js (Frontend)
|
||
Authentication RE SSO Bridge
|
||
11 Infra requirements & System Hygiene
|
||
Component Specification
|
||
Environment QA / Testing
|
||
# of Virtual Machines (VMs) 1
|
||
CPU Configuration 4 - Core
|
||
Memory (RAM) 16 GB
|
||
Disk Size 500 GB
|
||
Operating System Ubuntu 24.04 LTS
|
||
Storage Type Cloud
|
||
Backup and Recovery
|
||
|
||
Daily incremental and weekly full backups.
|
||
Restore process must not exceed 2 hours.
|
||
12 Not in scope
|
||
Anything which comes beyond the scope defined above in terms of Width and depth |