[Tracking] Reject Individual Expenses in NewDot

[garrettmknight]

DESIGN DOC

Proposal

WN Post

Proposal: Allow approvers to reject individual expenses in NewDot

Background: Generally, users have full control over the expenses assigned to them for processing. Submitters can create, edit, submit, or delete expenses to manage their reports effectively. Approvers typically have the ability to act on expenses by approving, editing, or rejecting them, aligning with the general expectation that individuals can manage tasks assigned to them. This level of control ensures efficiency and meets user expectations based on their use of Expensify Classic and expense reporting processes across the industry.

Problem: When submitted expenses just don’t fit within expense policy guidelines and will never be approved or paid, approvers are unable to remove them from their inbox. This prevents them from effectively and efficiently managing the tasks in their inbox, causing frustration and confusion.

Solution: Add the ability for approvers to unreport individual expenses submitted to them in NewDot. The naming of this function is TBD, but I’ll use ‘reject’ for familiarity’s sake. At a high level, let’s do the following:

• Add a ‘Reject’ button to the expense details page
• When an approver taps the button, we’ll show a confirmation page where we explain the difference between reject and hold, and allow the approver to confirm rejection with a comment or cancel.
• When the approver confirms rejection with a comment, we’ll remove the expense from the report, and the submitter will be able to access it in their Self DM.

This solution aligns NewDot with functionality approvers are accustomed to in OldDot and gives approvers full control of the expenses in their inbox.

Tasks

• [ ] Post Proposal (full Problem/Solution statement) in #expensify-open-source
• [ ] Wait at least one full business day, and until the post has a majority (2/3) of positive reactions (👍)
• [ ] Paste Proposal in the space above with a link to the Slack thread
• [ ] Email strategy@expensify.com and paste in the Proposal
• [ ] Fill out the High-level overview of the problem, Timeline, and Terminology sections of the Design Doc
• [ ] Email strategy@expensify.com (continue the same email chain as before) with the link to your Design Doc
• [ ] Host a pre-design meeting (example) in #expensify-open-source to discuss any necessary details in public before filling out the High-level of proposed solution section.
• [ ] Fill out the High-level of proposed solution section
• [ ] Email stategy@expensify.com again with links to the doc and pre-design conversation in Slack
• [ ] Add the DesignDocReview label to get the High-level of proposed solution section reviewed
• [ ] Respond to any questions or concerns and bring up blockers in Slack to get a consensus if necessary
• [ ] Confirm that the doc has the minimum necessary number of reviews before proceeding
• [ ] Host another pre-design meeting in #expensify-open-source to ask for engineering feedback on the technical solution.
• [ ] Fill out the Detailed implementation of the solution and related sections.
• [ ] Re-add the DesignDocReview label to this issue
• [ ] Respond to any questions or concerns and bring up blockers in Slack to get consensus if necessary
• [ ] Confirm that the doc has the minimum necessary number of reviews before proceeding
• [ ] Email strategy@expensify.com one last time to let them know the Design Doc is moving into the implementation phase
• [ ] Implement the changes
• [ ] Add regression tests so that QA can test your feature with every deploy (instructions)
• [ ] Send out a follow up email to strategy@expensify.com once everything has been implemented and do a Project Wrap-Up retrospective that provides:
  • Summary of what we accomplished with this project
  • What went well?
  • What could we have done better?
  • What did we learn?

[melvin-bot[bot]]

Current assignee @garrettmknight is eligible for the NewFeature assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[garrettmknight]

Started to mock out the pre-design.

[garrettmknight]

Same as above