Import the evidence.
Service-order PDFs and supporting spreadsheets enter a local workspace. The original documents remain available for review.
CLIENT PROJECT · CUSTOM BUSINESS SOFTWARE · 2026
From scattered files
to a clearer review.
Commission Desk
A local application that brings service-order documents, supporting evidence and commission checks into one review workflow.
My roleWorkflow design & development
Built forCommission-review operations
Portfolio presentationShared with client permission
THE PROBLEM
The evidence lives in files.
The decision needs context.
A commission review can depend on several sources: a service order, an agreement and a sales tracker. A matching number alone does not establish who should receive credit or whether the evidence is complete.
The brief was to make those checks easier to work through in a dedicated application, with missing or conflicting evidence visible to the reviewer.
THE WORKFLOW I BUILT
Surface the exceptions.
Orders are matched against available evidence. Missing details and conflicts are flagged; complete cases can follow configured review rules.
Prepare the reports.
Reviewers inspect the results and export per-person CSV statements. Review status stays distinct from a decision to pay.
SEE THE IDEA IN ACTION
Three orders.
Three different decisions.
A simplified, interactive illustration of the workflow. Every record below is invented; this is not the client application.
Commission DeskFICTIONAL EXAMPLE · NO PAYMENTS
Review queue
3 ordersDEMO-101 · FICTIONAL ORDER
Harbour Studio
Evidence completeService-order documentPresent
Supporting agreementPresent
Salesperson evidenceConsistent
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT
The example has the required evidence for a rules-based review. A reviewer still checks the result before any payment decision.
Illustration only. No client records, payout amounts or payment actions are included.
DESIGN & ENGINEERING
Make uncertainty visible.
Evidence beside the decision
Keep the source available so someone can understand and question the extracted information.
Different dates stay different
Applied, effective and taken dates serve different purposes. The application preserves those distinctions.
Rules before guesswork
Financial checks use explicit logic. Missing or conflicting evidence should lead to review, not an invented answer. No AI service is required to run the application.
Local by design
The application runs locally. This public case study uses a separate fictional illustration and cannot access the client’s workspace.
WHAT WAS DELIVERED
A working review tool,
with a clear path through the evidence.
Document import, evidence matching, exception review and CSV reporting brought together in one application. This case study describes the implemented workflow; it makes no claim about measured hours saved, commission accuracy or financial returns.
Let’s simplify one of your workflows← Back to all work