What happens when the two systems disagree, or one is unavailable?

A difference it cannot resolve under your written rules is held for a named person rather than resolved by preference, and a system it could not read is reported as unread rather than counted as agreement.

Is this the month-end close?

No. The close keeps its own page, which owns the checklist and the sign-off and names continuous comparison as its mechanism. This page is that comparison as the subject, running on your daily cycle, and it posts nothing.

Cross-system reconciliation on a daily cycle

Two systems hold the same fact and disagree by the end of the month

Today

A difference gets settled by whoever argues longest

Two systems hold the same fact and disagree by the end of the month.
The reconciliation gets rebuilt from scratch each period, because nothing carried forward.
A difference gets settled by whoever argues longest rather than by the record.
And the gap left by a system that was unavailable that day gets filled with an assumption.

With agents

Differences named from the record, carried forward, with an unreadable source reported rather than assumed

A difference is a list item rather than an argument.
Each cycle starts where the last one ended.
An unreadable system reads as unknown.

How an agent runs it

The month-end argument about which system is right moves into the period and becomes a list. Both records stay where they are, and the comparison runs against the keys your rules name.

Reads

Takes the records you authorize from each system you name, on the daily cadence you set.

Matches

Compares them against each other on the keys your rules name, and only those keys.

Carries

Brings the agreement from one cycle into the next, so a run starts from the last agreed state rather than from nothing.

Names

States the record, the field and the direction of each difference, with both sides shown rather than summarized.

Marks

Says which system it could not read and which records were missing, so a gap reads as a gap rather than as agreement.

Holds

Keeps anything your rules cannot resolve for a named person instead of choosing a side.

Human gate

Routes the difference list to the named finance owner for the decision, and records what was decided against the difference it answered. It posts nothing, books nothing and writes no adjusting entry. Both records stay in your systems, so the comparison can be run by hand at any point without the agent.

Results

What changes when the record settles it

A difference becomes a list item

Both sides and the disagreeing field are named, so the conversation starts from the record.

Each cycle starts where the last ended

The agreement is carried forward rather than rebuilt.

Unreadable reads as unknown

What could not be read is reported rather than treated as a match.

Where this fits

Workflow / Automate a Workflow

The Workflow tier, Tier 1, through the Automate a Workflow door: one process end to end, from the records in two systems to the decision a person makes. A workflow proves it, a role scales it, a department transforms it, and an agent-run finance back office is the direction rather than a promised state. The period close keeps its own page and is where the agreed state gets used. How It Works describes the gates.

Tier 1 / Prove

How It Works

Questions, answered

No. It names the difference with both sides shown and routes the decision, and the adjustment and the write are both gated. Both records live in your systems, so the comparison can be run by hand at any point without the agent.

AI Opportunity Audit

Bring the two systems that disagreed at the last close, and see whether that rule can be written down

Bring the two systems that disagreed at the last close and the rule somebody used to settle it, and see whether that rule can be written down.

Book an audit