What comes in
- Existing vendor export or ERP records
- Approved supplier change request
- Field ownership and duplicate-review rules
LaunchAI compares vendor records with approved source information, prepares corrections and leaves a trail of what changed and why.
The job in one minute
Vendor master data management keeps supplier identifiers, addresses, terms and other purchasing records consistent. LaunchAI can compare approved source information with ERP records and prepare corrections. A master-data workflow needs field-level ownership: an address correction and a payment instruction change do not carry the same authority.
A reviewed discrepancy list and traceable, permitted vendor updates.
The buyer and the responsible team keep commercial, qualification and financial authority. The agent does the permitted work and brings exceptions to their owner.
At the buyer’s desk
The trading name is in the quote. The legal name is in the ERP. Two sites have different terms, and an old contact is still getting the order. Similar names do not tell your buyer which records should be changed or kept separate.
The same supplier can appear under a trading name, legal name and site-specific record. Blindly merging them can disrupt open orders or payments. The job is to identify potential duplicates, show the supporting evidence and apply only the changes authorized for the relevant entity and field.
How the agent does it
LaunchAI follows the purchasing task through your existing applications. Each step has a source to read, a rule to apply or an outcome to check.
Resolve the vendor ID, legal entity and operating site. Preserve parent and subsidiary relationships.
Check names, contacts, addresses, payment terms and purchasing status against approved evidence.
Separate formatting differences from changes that affect orders or payment. Flag potential duplicates without automatically merging them.
Use the responsible team’s approval and record before-and-after values, source and timestamp.
The detail that changes the job
Two vendor records share a similar name but serve different manufacturing sites and use different purchase agreements.
Move the divider to see how the starting information becomes a checked outcome. The complete fields are in the table below.
| Field | Starting information | Checked outcome |
|---|---|---|
| Identity | Similar trading names | Separate site records retained |
| Issue | Old contact on one record | Contact correction proposed |
| Evidence | Email thread | Approved request linked to field change |
Worked example, not a customer result. Values and documents illustrate what to test.
Exact rules. Context. A person where needed.
The agent needs to recognize the point where the next action depends on missing information or another person’s authority.
Define the allowed fields and actions in your software. A draft, an external commitment and an approved payment are different steps.
Show the working
Agree on the baseline and the finish before the pilot. Count review and exception work as well as completed transactions.
Master-data discrepancies resolved
Approved updates with source evidence
New duplicate records created
The practical questions
Start with recommendations and review. Similar names alone do not establish that legal entities or purchasing sites should be merged.
Onboarding prepares a new supplier for use. Master-data management also maintains existing suppliers and controls changes throughout the relationship.
Your applications. Your purchasing rules.
We’ll scope the input, the saved output and the exception that needs your team.