Spike : Evaluate options for FED handling in Continuation In workflow

[OlgaPotiagalova]

User is given an option to file Continuation In by specifying Future Effective Date. Since some time is required for the authorization documents review by the staff before the filing is finalized, we need to define business process and add handling around FED.

The following options are being reviewed as possible approach for handling FED in the Continuation In workflow.

Please estimate each option from the technical perspective.

Option 1. Allow to enter FED with warning, handle conflicts with business process.

1. Add to the user documentation that enough time should be allowed for documents review advising users to account for this when submitting the application (to manage user’s expectations)
2. Allow users to select FED, but display a warning if the selected date is too close to the current date. The warning can inform that the date might not be feasible given the review time required. (Disclaimer?)
3. Staff accesses documents based on the priority (FED expiration), otherwise based on the order they are submitted . The dashboard displays the warning indicators helping the staff to prioritize.
4. For the cases where the effective date is crucial, user has an option to call BC Registries to expedite the review process.
5. If the future effective date is expired during the review, the notification is sent to the user advising to log in to the application and change the FED (“Update Required” notification message)
6. User re-logins to their account and selects another FED

Pros: • Conforms to current operational policies. • User completes all necessary actions in one step (if FED allowed enough time for review). It makes it easier for the user to understand without needing to remember multiple steps (in comparison to the Option 3) • The overall process might be quicker. Users don’t need to wait for documents approval before proceeding to the next step (in comparison to the Option 3) • Users are less likely abandon the process if they can complete everything at once (in comparison to the Option 3)

Cons: • Users can abuse the option of contacting the BC Registry to expedite the process which will result in increased number of phone calls • Can potentially result in frustrated clients if the FED was not feasible
• Technical challenges : new FED selection should be processed without an additional charge.

Option 2. Set date constraints. Introduce a buffer allowing time for review (1 or 2 business days)

1. Add to the user documentation that enough time should be allowed for documents review advising users to account for this when submitting the application (to manage user’s expectations)
2. Restrict users to select FED that is too close to the current date. Include a message explaining the reason for the restriction, such as the time is required for the review
3. Staff accesses documents based on the priority (FED expiration), otherwise based on the order they are submitted . The dashboard displays the warning indicators helping the staff to prioritize.
4. If the future effective date is expired during the review, the notification is sent to the user advising to log in to the application and change the FED (“Update Required” notification message)
5. User re-logins to their account and selects another FED

Pros: • User completes all necessary actions in one step (if FED allowed enough time for review). It makes it easier for the user to understand without needing to remember multiple steps (in comparison to the Option 3) • Allows enough time for most reviews (except for when additional communication is required between the staff the customers) • The overall process might be quicker. Users don’t need for a documents approval before proceeding to the next step (in comparison to the option 3) Users are less likely abandon the process if they can complete everything at once (in comparison to the Option 3)

Cons: • The buffer option is not aligned with current operational policies • In some cases the buffer still won’t allow to meet FED, which might be frustrating to the users. • Need to implement logic for the buffer and to add validation (handling business days vs days) • Restricting users appears as lack of flexibility

Option 3. Implement separate workflow for FED date selection upon document approval.

1. Add to documentation that the FED section will be done upon the document approval.
2. Selection by the client : Upon approval or FED.
3. If Upon approval option is selected – use already implemented workflow (95% of filings)
4. If FED selected (5% of filings), the user completes the application without FED and waits for the review to be completed
5. Staff accesses documents with priorities based on the FED type. The dashboard displays special icon for the such filings.
6. Once the document is approved, the notification is sent to select FED
7. Once the FED is entered, the filing is completed

Pros: • Conforms to current operational policies • Users don’t need to worry about the approval status of the documents when selecting FED • Staff can focus on the reviewing documents without the pressure of meeting FED, allowing for more thorough review process • There is no need to change the FED later

Cons: • Two workflows to support • Multiple logins required for all FED filings (5% of filings) The FED workflow is similar to the current two-step workflow • Longer overall completion time (introduced by a delay between document approval and FED selection) • Prolonged waiting periods. Users may experience longer waiting periods if they need to wait for document approval before proceeding to the next step • Engagement fatigue and frustration by having to engage with the system multiple times. (The FED feature is used mostly by lawyers who do multiple filings.) • Technical challenges : To allow modifications when the filing is already in the approved state – is it feasible? New state might be required – FED entry pending

[severinbeauvais]

Initial estimates of each option from a technical perspective. To be reviewed and updated accordingly.

Option 1

1. adding documentation (on page): 1-2
2. display warning if too early: 2 if fixed minimum time; 3+ if computed (eg, business days)
3. prioritization: business process + existing ticket #22579 for tooltips: 0
4. option to call BCROS: add message to Create UI? 1
   • note that user is already paying $100 extra for FED
5. notification if FED expired: 3-5 (email) or business process: staff contacts user by phone/email
6. ability to select another FED: small change to Create UI: 2
   • updating application when in change-requested state already has $0 fee

TOTAL: 13 +/-

Option 2

1. adding documentation (on page): 1-2
2. restrict earliest FED: 2 if fixed minimum time; 3+ if computed (eg, business days)
3. prioritization: business process + existing ticket #22579 for tooltips: 0
4. notification if FED expired: 3-5 (email)
5. ability to select another FED: small change to Create UI: 2
   • updating application when in change-requested state already has $0 fee

TOTAL: 12 +/-

Option 3

1. adding documentation (on page): 1-2
2. no change: 0
3. no change: 0
4. change behavior for FED: 3-5
   • no date and time selection
   • keep FED fee
   • save filing changes
   • Legal API accept filing with FED set but no date/time (including schema?): 2-3
5. prioritization: business process + existing ticket #22579 for tooltips: 0
6. notification to set FED date/time: 3-5 (email)
7. allow entry of FE date/time
   • Create UI allow editing approved + allow FED date/time: 2
   • Legal API needs to validate FED date/time: 3
   • also some Filings UI changes to show Allowed in Todo list for this scenario only, else show in Filing History list: 3

TOTAL: 23 +/-

[severinbeauvais]

@vysakh-menon-aot , anything to update or add to the above?

[vysakh-menon-aot]

I agree with @severinbeauvais on Option 1 & 2.

Option 3 is not possible to implement in the current architecture. In addition to @severinbeauvais notes

1. System don't support multi-payment for a filing (introducing this would break other places, so more work to fix those)
2. New status might be required to handle this scenario or add more conditions in future-effective job
3. Need to update Allowable actions
4. Editing should be disabled except for date selection (api to ignore all except FED)

Total effort would be 35+

[OlgaPotiagalova]

Thank you @severinbeauvais and @vysakh-menon-aot. Do you see any other alternative options?

[severinbeauvais]

Here are my thoughts:

1. I think we cannot guarantee a review date-time (even with a buffer of a few business days), and even then, approval and incorporation may not be forthcoming (eg, if changes are required). So we cannot establish a guaranteed earliest FED.
2. I think a "high priority" review and approval could be completed in as little as 1 hour (eg, by pre-empting other reviews, direct communication, working overtime, etc).
3. I think we must never allow a FED to expire. (I could be wrong but I imagine that in most cases they aren't flexible. I don't know if "best attempt" is acceptable.)
4. I think BC Registries bears some responsibility for reviewing a FED application in time if it is far enough in the future, but the user bears some responsibility if the FED is short, or if changes are needed. Note that a long FED will eventually become a short FED.

Given this, I think:

• We cannot set a guaranteed minimum date-time constraint.
• We must allow for "high priority" reviews of applications whose FED is imminent (days or hours or minutes).

So how do we identify high priority reviews? I suggest:

1. Flagging all FED applications in the staff review table, perhaps in escalating colours.
2. Asking users to contact us if the FED is short. (They are already paying extra for FED and not all users will contact BC Registries so maybe this isn't a deal breaker.)
3. Ensuring long FEDs don't become short FEDs. This could start off as a business process. Eventually a background job could help identify/promote these.

These ideas can be added to the options above if they aren't already there.

[OlgaPotiagalova]

Considering all of the above Option 1 is the most reasonable choice.

[severinbeauvais]

Subject to Megan's approval, here is the option approved by Linda. It's basically Option 1:

• allow user to select any FED date-time
• show a message if FED is short?
  • what does "short" mean? eg, less than 1 business day from now?
  • should we just say 1 business day or compute 1 business from now based on weekends/holidays?
  • always show message or only if FED is to close to now?
• allow users to call staff to expedite review
  • only show message if FED is short?
• staff will review based on FED expiration (short asap, others next) or based on the order they are submitted
  • show alert icons with escalating colours in review table?
• if FED expires before approval, staff should contact user and request changes (user can enter new FED and resubmit)

cc: @janisrogers @NaveenHebbale