[go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd
Upload
35 views2 pages

Internal Meeting Transcript

The meeting on 6/21/2022 focused on discussing user access provisioning testing results for Company X's Sage Intacct system. Key points included addressing exceptions from testing, obtaining additional IT support for clarification, and reviewing specific user access cases. The team agreed to follow up with the client for further information and to resolve minor comments in the testing results.

Uploaded by

PrinceKirankumar Kirru
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
35 views2 pages

Internal Meeting Transcript

The meeting on 6/21/2022 focused on discussing user access provisioning testing results for Company X's Sage Intacct system. Key points included addressing exceptions from testing, obtaining additional IT support for clarification, and reviewing specific user access cases. The team agreed to follow up with the client for further information and to resolve minor comments in the testing results.

Uploaded by

PrinceKirankumar Kirru
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Date: 6/21/2022

Topic: Company X - Sage Intacct - User Access Provisioning Testing Results


Attendee:
– Michael, PwC DAT Senior Associate
– [Insert your name], PwC DAT Associate
– Silas, PwC DAT Manager

Transcript:

Michael: Hey team, thanks for joining the meeting today. We are having this meeting to discuss
the next steps regarding addressing the exceptions noted from [Insert your name]’s testing
results. [Insert your name], Could you please provide some high-level background of your
testing procedures and results?

[Insert your name]: (Your responses)

Silas: Thanks for providing the details. It’s nice to finally meet you in person. Welcome on board!
Based on the cases, I think we shall obtain additional support from our client to further discover
the details of exceptions. Let’s review them one by one.

First, for the sample “First Name44 Last Name 44,” have we obtained the individual ticket from
their IT system? It will help us understand if there are any additional requests being considered
during the user access provisioning process.

Also, what is the difference between the role assigned in Intacct and the job function role listed
in the IT system request? By knowing which role has the more privileged functions, we could
identify if the access being provisioned in Intacct is appropriate or not. Sometimes the system
admin grants the target users less access to provide more security.

Finally, do we know if the user has been shifted to a new job function since joining the
company? If so, is there an additional IT ticket we could obtain to verify the changes? Job
changes inside the same company also leads to user access variance in certain cases, which
means the initial IT ticket we obtained was not the correct one.

[Insert your name]: (Your responses)

Michael: Thanks Silas for your insight, and [Insert your name], let’s note all these probing
questions and make sure to ask them to our client in a follow-up email for further clarification.

For the other exception sample “First Name77 Last Name 77,” would you please pull up your
testing table, so we can see it together for the details obtained so far?
[Insert your name]: (Your responses)

Michael: Thanks [Insert your name]. It looks like the user did get the approval from the
appropriate personnel, but three days later than the user access provisioning date in the target
system.

It would be nice to have the individual IT ticket as well for this case to see if there is any reason
the user access is needed to be added to Intacct before approval is provided.

Another support that is super helpful will be the exception user’s access log between the
approval date and system access provision date. This support could help us determine if there
is any risk exposed during the non-approved period.

Silas: I agree. Those are solid points, Michael. Have you reviewed the rest of the testing yet? Is
there anything else we shall capture through this meeting?

Michael: Thanks, Silas. Happy to help. Yes. I have received the rest of the testing, and it looks
good to me. There are minor changes to be made, but [Insert your name] and I will work
together to get the remaining comments resolved. [Insert your name], would you mind putting
the probing questions into a formal email addressing our client at your earliest convenience?
You can cc me on it.

[Insert your name]: (Your responses)

Michael: Thank you all for spending time to address the topic. It is super helpful. Let’s circle
back after hearing back from Sam.

You might also like