Automation · Complaint management

Automating complaint management: the immediate action is running while the root cause analysis is still open.

When a fault occurs, two clocks run at the same time: the customer wants a replacement today, the root cause needs a few days. NordFlux separates the two strands cleanly and still keeps them together in one case, from the arrival of the complaint to the completed 8D report. You stay in control of every approval.

Free initial analysis Use cases

The problem

The fault has happened. From now on the clock is ticking.

A complaint costs you twice: once for the goods and once for the follow-up work. The second item appears in no report, because every case starts as its own email thread and ends there too.

01The complaint sits in one employee's mailbox. Whoever is on holiday, their cases come to a standstill, and nobody notices because there is no shared list.
02Immediate action and root cause analysis get mixed up. As soon as the replacement delivery has gone out, the case is treated as done and the root cause is never clarified.
03When your supplier delivers defective goods, the notice period starts as soon as the goods are delivered. If the inspection only flags it two weeks later, the claim may be gone.
04The same fault comes back for the third time, and nobody notices. Without a fault catalogue and without a complaint rate per supplier, every case is an isolated one.

Use cases

What we automate specifically in your complaint process.

Five building blocks from the fault case that run by hand in almost every company. You decide where we start.

Capture and classify the complaint

Every complaint from email, portal or phone note is created as a case, with a fault code from your fault catalogue, a reference to the order and batch, and the distinction between customer complaint and supplier complaint. This distinction drives everything that follows: with a customer complaint you pay, with a supplier complaint you get your money back. The customer immediately receives an acknowledgement of receipt with a case number.

Savings 20–40 min per case

Immediate action and root cause analysis as two separate clocks

The immediate action protects the customer: a block note on the batch, notifying the replacement, narrowing down the affected deliveries. The root cause analysis continues as its own strand with its own deadline, even when the customer has long been satisfied. A case can only be closed once both strands are complete.

Effect no case is treated as done too soon

Run the 8D report instead of passing a Word template around

In the automotive and supplier industry, customers often require the 8D report under contract, and the template then travels as a file through eight mailboxes. We map D1 through D8 as a guided process: name the team, describe the problem, immediate action, root cause with 5-Why or Ishikawa, corrective action, effectiveness check, prevention, closure. Every step has an owner and a timestamp, and the finished report goes to the customer as a PDF.

Effect one single state instead of eight file versions

Credit note or replacement delivery: the decision with a rule and an approval

Whether a case leads to a credit note, a replacement delivery or a repair depends on the value of the goods, the type of fault and the customer. We store your rule and let the case decide automatically up to a value threshold; above that it goes to a person for approval. The credit note is created as a draft in the accounting system, and it is only sent after your click.

Savings 1–2 h per week

Make recurring faults and the complaint rate per supplier visible

Because every case carries a fault code and a supplier reference, you can count what nobody else counts: complaint rate per supplier, most frequent fault code per article, fault costs per month. If the same fault code appears at the same supplier for the third time, the system reports it on its own. That is the figure you take into the next supplier assessment.

Effect fault costs become a key figure

Approaches

Which tool fits is decided by your QM, not by our partner programme.

Complaint data is rarely in one place: part of it in the ERP, part in the QM tool, the rest in the mailbox. We choose from n8n, Power Platform and UiPath according to the use case, instead of selling you a favourite tool.

Flexible and self-hosted

n8n as the hub

n8n connects the mailbox, ERP, QM tool and accounting via interfaces and keeps the complaint case in sync across all systems. On request on a server in Germany, so that fault and supplier data do not leave your company.

View n8n automation

Microsoft 365

Power Automate for approvals

If your QM runs on SharePoint lists and Outlook, Power Automate is usually the shortest path. The 8D steps become approval tasks with reminders and escalation, and the licence is often already part of your Microsoft 365 package.

View Power Automate

AI support

AI agent for the complaint email

Customers complain in free text, not in form fields. An AI agent reads the email including the attachment, recognises the article, batch and fault pattern and suggests the matching code from your fault catalogue. The suggestion is confirmed by your QM, not by the model.

View AI agents

How we work

The 30-day model.

From the initial analysis to a running complaint process in 30 days, at a fixed price instead of an open timesheet.

Initial analysis

We go through your recent complaints with you and look at where the time goes: capturing, coordination or follow-up. In 60 minutes it is clear which building block saves money first.

Lock down the fault catalogue and the rules

We write down which fault codes you use, from which value of goods who decides, and which deadlines apply. This part is manual work and cannot be shortcut, because without clean codes there is no reliable rate later on.

Build it and run it in parallel

We build the process and first run it in parallel with your current approach. That way you can see on real cases whether the classification is right before anything is switched over.

Handover and operation

You receive the documentation, a briefing and a dedicated contact. You reach Simon directly, without a ticket system and without an account manager in between.

Not quite the right fit?

When it is not only the fault case that gets stuck.

Complaints are the exception. If even the normal path from order to invoice is manual work, it is worth looking at the whole journey. In the overview you can see which other processes we automate and how the 30-day model works.

View process automation

Free initial analysis

How much does a complaint really cost you?

In 60 minutes we go through your recent complaint cases and add up the effort honestly for once. Free of charge, without obligation, and if the effort is not worth it, we will tell you that too.

Book an appointment kontakt@nordflux.de

Fixed price instead of an open timesheet
Every credit note only goes out after your approval: you stay in control
On request on a German server, fault and supplier data stay in-house

Frequently asked questions

What companies often ask about complaint management.

What is an 8D report and do we even need one?

The 8D report is an eight-step protocol for handling a complaint, from forming the team through the immediate action and root cause analysis to the effectiveness check and closure. It is widely used in the automotive and supplier industry and is often required by customers under contract. If you do not supply into that supply chain, you do not formally need it, but the structure is still worthwhile: it forces you to clarify the root cause and not just reassure the customer.

What is the difference between an immediate action and a root cause analysis?

The immediate action protects the customer from the consequences of the fault, the root cause analysis prevents the next fault. A replacement delivery, a batch block and rework are immediate actions: they take effect today, but they do not eliminate the root cause. Only the analysis with 5-Why or an Ishikawa diagram shows whether a machine setting, a material change or a missing inspection is behind it. Anyone who throws both into a single case closes it as soon as the replacement has gone out, and sees the same fault again three months later.

By when do I have to give notice of a defective delivery to my supplier?

In a commercial sale between merchants, § 377 HGB requires you to inspect the goods without undue delay after delivery and to give notice of any recognisable defect without undue delay, otherwise the goods are deemed approved. For hidden defects, the deadline runs from discovery. The law deliberately does not name a fixed number of days, which in practice means: in a dispute you have to prove when you inspected and when you gave notice. It is precisely this timestamp that is created automatically when goods receipt, inspection and notice of defect run as a single case. This does not replace legal advice, but it provides the evidence.

Does the automation replace our quality assurance?

No, and that is not the goal either. The root cause analysis remains the mental work of your people, because whether a fault lies in the tooling, the material or the process is not something anyone decides remotely. The automation handles everything around it: capturing, assigning, reminding, monitoring deadlines, assembling the report, counting. That leaves your QM more time for the part that only a person can do.

What does it cost and how long does implementation take?

We work at a fixed price that is set after the free initial analysis, not against an open timesheet. The first productive building block is usually running within 30 days, most often the capturing and classification, because that is where the effort drops fastest. The fault catalogue is the item that costs most of your time: without clean codes there is no reliable complaint rate later on. For many mid-sized companies, BAFA funding for the consulting is also an option.