Qualify the service request
Capture requester, location, described issue, access conditions, supplied urgency and evidence gaps before treating it as authorised work.
Workflow blueprint
A work order should show who authorised the work and who accepted the result
A request-to-acceptance custody model, without dispatch optimisation, technical diagnosis, stock promises, billing automation or safety clearance.
Keep the original request, clarified scope, assigned attendance, site observation, scope variation, action evidence, testing reference, acceptance response and reopening reason connected but distinct.
TL;DR — Keep the original request, clarified scope, assigned attendance, site observation, scope variation, action evidence, testing reference, acceptance response and reopening reason connected but distinct.
Issue a bounded work instruction
Name the owner, attendee, permitted scope, appointment window and external technical or safety authorities that remain outside the record.
Control changes and completion evidence
Record newly observed conditions, variation request, authoriser, actions reported, parts references and test source without inventing conclusions.
Request acceptance or reopen the case
Present delivered evidence, exclusions and open questions so an authorised party can accept, reject or reopen with a dated reason.
Page-specific decision aid
A request authority and acceptance card exposing scope changes, attendance evidence, testing and reopening
The card follows a tenant request, a location correction, access failure, authorised inspection scope, newly observed condition, declined variation, second attendance, reported adjustment, attached test reading, customer question, conditional acceptance and reopening after the symptom returns.
- ✓A request is not authority to perform any work.
- ✓Attendance is not evidence of a repair.
- ✓Acceptance does not erase a documented exclusion.
Scope first
What Codeblix would confirm before implementation
This page is an operational blueprint. The final workflow, screens, permissions and integrations depend on your current process and agreed implementation scope.
- ✓A reported issue is not an approved instruction
- ✓Attendance evidence never proves work quality
- ✓Variations identify the precise scope and human authority
- ✓Diagnosis safety priority dispatch repair inventory billing and acceptance validity excluded
Relevant Codeblix foundations
Review the existing product areas that support the proposed workflow.
Use the related planning tools
Run the operational calculation, save the result in the URL and share it with your team.
Map this workflow to your operation
Tell Codeblix how work moves today. We will confirm the practical scope before proposing an implementation.
Discuss your workflow