Automation compatibility

An automation quote can look commercially complete while the controller choice still needs review. Quote Specialist records the protocol, IO points, controller model and required date against the quote. Pricing Reviewer independently decides the submitted compatibility revision before the team commits the option price.

Keep technical compatibility and quote value as separate decisions. The compatibility record has its own status and revision. Its approval and completion preserve that decision history while leaving the parent quote’s commercial amount and lifecycle unchanged. The team then prices and reviews the quote through the commercial process.

• Prepare the compatibility request. Keep the proposed protocol and controller model together with the requested IO points. Link the request to its quote and operating organization. Use the required date to show when the team needs the decision for its offer.
• Review the submitted revision. Submission moves a Draft request to Submitted. Pricing Reviewer checks the exact revision and records an Approved or Rejected outcome through the guarded action. Independence and revision checks keep the preparer’s request distinct from the decision.
• Complete the approved work. Completion follows the Approved request and records its outcome with operation evidence. Keep the approved details stable as the work moves to Completed. Quote pricing proceeds through its own action and expected quote revision.

Agree which protocol and controller combinations the team can offer and what evidence the reviewer expects for the requested IO points. Decide how engineering evidence reaches the quote attachment record and which files can be shared with the customer. Define who resolves a rejected request and how the specialist prepares a corrected revision.

Agree the meaning of the required date. It can guide attention to a compatibility decision without promising shipment or commissioning. Use a customer request that your reviewer understands, and make the review criterion explicit before the first operating cycle. The data model shows the link between the compatibility request and quote.

Use a rehearsal quote for a conveyor controller upgrade. Quote Specialist enters the required protocol, requested IO points and proposed controller model, then submits the compatibility revision. Pricing Reviewer compares the request with the supporting technical evidence and records the decision.

Repeat the attempt with the preparer acting as reviewer and with an old revision. Both attempts should stop before a new approval is recorded. Return to the authorized reviewer and finish the current request. Check the decision date and receipt, then inspect the parent quote: its commercial state and net amount should still match the pre-review record. This makes the technical handoff clear before the team tests pricing.

For a rejected controller choice, retain the outcome and prepare a corrected request with its own revision handling. The specialist should be able to explain what changed and why the reviewer is being asked to decide again.

• Automation Worklist — Draft, Submitted and Approved requests with controller details and required dates.
• Automation Review Queue — Submitted compatibility requests waiting for Pricing Reviewer.
• Automation Due — Requests whose required date has arrived, with the current decision state visible.

Use automation compatibility for submission and decision. Continue to quote preparation and pricing when the compatibility decision supports the proposed offer.