Case Study · Digital teaching example

RPA Quality Record Entry

A robotic process automation workflow enters approved source data into eQMS and must control identity, exceptions, duplicates, changes, and reconciliation.

Author
Sandip Thorat
Published
12 September 2026
Last reviewed
12 September 2026
Version
1.0
Content type
Practitioner guidance
Primary references
See related regulations, guidance, and approved procedures

Standard case study record

Scope and decision fields

Read these fields before the detailed worked case. All organizations, identifiers, test outcomes, and decisions are fictional teaching material.

GxP Assessment
Incorrect transcription, missing source, duplicate creation, unauthorized action, or hidden exception can weaken the controlled Quality record.
Change or Issue
Robotic process automation (RPA) reads an approved mailbox attachment and creates a draft Quality event in eQMS.
Functions Affected
  • Source-file selection
  • Field extraction and mapping
  • Draft record creation
  • Attachment and source linkage
  • Exception handling and reconciliation
Potential Impact
A Quality event can be incomplete, delayed, duplicated, or associated with the wrong source.
Deviations / Known Issues
A fictional timeout creates two drafts because the robot cannot confirm the first transaction.

Situation

Robotic process automation (RPA) reads an approved mailbox attachment and creates a draft Quality event in eQMS.

Intended Use

Transcribe defined fields and attach the source document. A qualified user reviews and submits the draft; the robot cannot approve or close the event.

Decision Summary

Decision elementCase record
GxP assessmentIncorrect transcription, missing source, duplicate creation, unauthorized action, or hidden exception can weaken the controlled Quality record.
Potential impactA Quality event can be incomplete, delayed, duplicated, or associated with the wrong source.
Known issueA fictional timeout creates two drafts because the robot cannot confirm the first transaction.
Validation conclusionProduction use is restricted until an idempotency key and accountable exception queue are implemented and retested.

GxP Assessment

Incorrect transcription, missing source, duplicate creation, unauthorized action, or hidden exception can weaken the controlled Quality record.

Affected GxP Functions

  • Source-file selection
  • Field extraction and mapping
  • Draft record creation
  • Attachment and source linkage
  • Exception handling and reconciliation

Failure Scenarios

  • Wrong attachment is selected
  • Date or identifier is misread
  • Retry creates a duplicate
  • Robot uses excessive privilege
  • Failure is logged but not resolved

Potential Impact

A Quality event can be incomplete, delayed, duplicated, or associated with the wrong source.

Existing Controls

  • Approved mailbox
  • Read-only source
  • Dedicated service account
  • Human draft review
  • Daily transaction reconciliation

Existing Evidence

  • Qualified RPA platform
  • Approved mapping specification
  • Prior eQMS validation
  • Controlled deployment pipeline

Evidence Gaps

  • Poor-quality attachment handling
  • Timeout and retry
  • Credential rotation
  • eQMS screen change

Testing Approach

  • Script exact field, format, attachment, and role behavior
  • Challenge unreadable, duplicate, missing, and malformed sources
  • Test timeout, retry, partial creation, and safe stop
  • Verify draft review, source link, audit history, and reconciliation

Deviations or Known Issues

A fictional timeout creates two drafts because the robot cannot confirm the first transaction.

Validation Conclusion

Production use is restricted until an idempotency key and accountable exception queue are implemented and retested.

Reassessment Criteria

  • Source format change
  • RPA or eQMS interface change
  • Credential or permission change
  • Process or mapping change
  • Duplicate or missed-event incident