Reducing friction in acquisitions: EDI, integrations and workflow alignment

An invoice held up because one reference field doesn’t match. An order re-entered by hand because the systems don’t connect. A discovery record that takes weeks to appear after a purchase.

These are the moments that add up across a workflow and the ones that good integration helps avoid.

When everything connects well, the process becomes almost invisible. The challenge is getting there, and keeping it that way, especially when supplier relationships are changing and systems need to adapt.

With transitions on the horizon for many libraries, now is a useful moment to look at where processes could be smoother. To help frame that conversation, we’ve worked through some of the questions that may come up around EDI, integrations and workflow alignment.

Isn’t setting up EDI a big undertaking?

EDI has a reputation for being technically demanding, and historically, that hasn’t been entirely unfounded. Setting it up often meant navigating older systems, inconsistent supplier support and largely bespoke configurations. For libraries used to manual ordering it can still feel like a significant step.

In practice today, it’s more straightforward.

Most LMS vendors have EDI capability built in, and suppliers who support it will typically have a clear set up.  The work is largely in agreeing formats, mapping data fields and running test orders.

It can take time, but isn’t usually technically complex, instead it is more about coordination between library systems teams and suppliers than specialist development.

The real shift is in how the workflow feels day to day. Once EDI is in place, orders and invoices move between systems without the manual steps in between. Teams move from checking and keying data to monitoring and trusting the process. That adjustment takes a little time but tends to free up capacity quite quickly.

Do we need to overhaul our whole workflow to see a difference?

Not at all. Some of the most effective improvements come from relatively small changes:

• • Agreeing a consistent order record format with a supplier benefits every order that follows.
  • Confirming how fund codes map across before go-live avoids corrections that build up over time.
  • Clarifying ownership at the transition point between acquisitions and finance often removes friction that only becomes visible when something goes wrong.

None of these require significant resource, but each can make a noticeable difference to day-to-day operations.

A good starting point is identifying where the current workflow creates extra work. From there, changes can be made gradually and at a pace that suits the team.

Our systems already talk to each other – isn’t that enough?

It’s a good starting point, but quality of those connections matters as much as their existence.

A common situation is that integrations were set up some time ago and have worked well enough since but haven’t been reviewed in the context of a supplier change or LMS update. What worked with one supplier’s data formats may need adjusting for another.

Two areas that often get overlooked until late are discovery and finance.

Holdings data flowing correctly into discovery is easy to assume is working until it isn’t.

On the finance side, small mismatches in invoice format or reference fields can create reconciliation work that builds up quietly over time.

None of this is cause for concern, but reviewing connections before a transition is far easier than unpicking issues afterwards.

How do we know where our workflow is losing time?

Workflow friction rarely shows up as a single issue. It tends to appear in patterns, repeated steps, workarounds and manual corrections that have quietly become part of the routine.

The processes that feel ‘normal’ because they’ve always been done that way are often the ones with the most room for improvement.

Friction most commonly appears where data move between systems: mismatched invoices, rekeyed orders and delayed discovery updates,

The most effective way to identify these points is often simply talking to the people doing the work, day to day. These issues are rarely escalated, because they’ve been absorbed into routine.

What should we be doing before June?

For libraries working through supplier transitions under SUPC Lot 4 and APUC Lot 1, the coming weeks are a practical window to get the operational side in good shape.

That means checking a few key areas before go-live.

On the systems side, confirm the LMS EDI ordering and invoicing with new suppliers, and that holdings data flows correctly into discovery.

On the people side, ensure colleagues across acquisitions, systems, finance and academic liaison are clear on what is changing and when.

This period doesn’t need to be a sprint. The goal is clarity and understanding where things stand, rather than trying to perfect everything before go-live.

Small changes, made in the right places, are often what make the biggest difference.

Kortext acquire is designed to support libraries through that process, whether that’s setting up EDI for the first time, refining an existing workflow or simply gaining clearer visibility of where friction sits.

If you’re heading into a transition and would like to talk it through, we’d love to hear from you.