Test it on orders you already know.

You don’t need to start by handing an AI system your live purchasing process. Start with a set of orders your team already knows.

A historical review reconstructs what happened, what needed attention, and what Mandel could have done with the information available at the time. It sends no supplier messages and makes no ERP changes.

Bring both sides of the order

Include supplier correspondence and the records it refers to: POs, confirmations, quotes, invoices, and relevant contract terms. Add the approval rules your team would have applied.

Include routine orders as well as difficult ones. Otherwise the review may show how the system finds problems without showing whether it leaves normal work alone.

Check the finding against the evidence

For each finding, ask to see the source. Was the supplier actually late, or was the need date changed? Was the invoice wrong, or had your buyer agreed to new terms?

A useful review records those corrections. It separates unresolved work from issues your team already handled and shows where the available records are incomplete.

Check which financial outcomes the records support

The review can identify a discrepancy and a possible next step. It cannot prove that a supplier would have accepted a claim nobody sent.

Keep potential exposure, proposed actions, and outcomes already supported by historical records separate. Only count recovery when a correction, credit, or payment is verified.

Choose the first live workflow

Use the review to choose work that is frequent enough to matter and clear enough to evaluate. Missing PO confirmations, incomplete quotes, or invoice discrepancies can each make a manageable starting point.

Agree the systems in scope, which actions need approval, and what counts as done. Measure the live result before expanding. Use the findings to decide where Mandel can take on useful work.