300 emails, one wrong field: the consequences of an error multiplied by automation

Setup: Automating invoice dispatch for hundreds of clients

It all starts with a routine task. A further education provider serving several hundred corporate clients wants to make its invoicing process more efficient. Currently, data is imported from the CRM system. The accounts department then uses this data to prepare the invoices, assign them to the correct contacts, and send them out by email. These steps are repeated every month. Automation is the obvious solution: it reduces the amount of manual routine work and the time spent on the task, while ensuring the process runs reliably in the background.

A virtual assistant specialising in digital processes and no-code automation takes on the automation task. She connects the CRM system, accounting software and email tool via an automation platform. In future, the workflow will retrieve the necessary data, assign the correct invoice to the relevant contact, and send everything automatically.

The automation begins its work. Until the first feedback arrives.

Incident: More than 300 emails went out with the wrong invoice

The virtual assistant prevents any further emails from being sent. However, messages that have already been sent cannot be retrieved. Upon checking, it becomes apparent that, while the email recipient is correct, the attachment is an invoice for a different business client.

It is now urgent to establish which messages are affected and what information has ended up with the wrong recipients. The client begins investigating the incident and seeks external support to assess the situation from technical and data protection perspectives.

This raises an important question for the virtual assistant: is she liable for the financial consequences of the error?

The training provider holds the virtual assistant responsible for the incorrect configuration of the workflow and is claiming 10,500 euros in damages. This includes, among other things, costs for investigating the incident and data protection consultancy, as well as further financial losses which the client claims arose as a result of the mistaken dispatch. The configuration error thus becomes a liability case.

Playing it safe, the virtual assistant reports the claim to exali. From there, the case is forwarded to the insurer for assessment. Before the insurer can assess the claim, however, it must first be established how the loss arose and whether the error was indeed attributable to the virtual assistant’s work. Thus begins the reconstruction of the workflow.

Cause: Two mapping fields were swapped

The virtual assistant goes through the process step by step. Ultimately, the cause is found in an inconspicuous place: the mapping.

For different applications to be able to exchange data correctly, their fields must be mapped to one another properly. Which customer ID belongs to which contact? Which email address belongs to which record? Which invoice belongs to which recipient?

It was precisely in this mapping that two fields had been swapped. Consequently, for some transactions, the workflow incorrectly linked the recipient to the invoice.

Technically, the error can be corrected quickly. Nevertheless, the impact is considerable.

Claim: A small configuration error leads to a €10,500 claim

This clarifies the cause. The insurer can now assess the liability claim and will cover justified claims for damages amounting to around €10,500 under the terms of the Professional Indemnity coverage.

The error itself was minor: two fields were incorrectly mapped. However, it proved costly because an automated process amplified it reliably. This is precisely where the risk of such workflows lies. While they make good processes more efficient, they also cause errors to occur more quickly and on a larger scale.