JAGGAER vs Zip

Requirement evaluated: Clear exception categories: price variance, quantity variance, missing PO, missing receipt, duplicate, vendor mismatch

For a 3-person AP team processing 1,800 mixed PO and non-PO invoices per month across two Sage Intacct entities, JAGGAER's Invoicing module classifies discrepancies into structurally distinct exception categories rather than collapsing them into a generic hold queue. The core matching engine supports configurable 2-way, 3-way, and n-way matching with per-category tolerance thresholds: for example, price tolerances are set as a percentage above or below the PO unit cost, and any invoice line that falls outside those bounds is surfaced as a price variance exception, while quantity differences generate a separate quantity variance exception. …

Limitations: Vendor mismatch as a discrete, labeled exception type is more thoroughly documented within the AppZen Autonomous AP layer (JAGGAER's own add-on, priced separately) …

Requirement evaluated: Clear exception categories: price variance, quantity variance, missing PO, missing receipt, duplicate, vendor mismatch

For your 6-location services company processing 1,800 invoices per month, Zip handles exception detection and routing through its Invoice Review Agent and Exception Automation AI within the Procure-to-Pay module. The Invoice Review Agent explicitly surfaces three named exception categories before invoices reach an approver: duplicate charges, PO tolerance breaches (price and overage variances against the PO), and contract mismatches. …

Limitations: The buyer's full six-category exception taxonomy is only about half confirmed in Zip's public documentation; quantity variance, missing receipt, and vendor mismatch as discrete named exception types with separate routing paths are not explicitly documented. …

Requirement evaluated: Learning capability: accuracy should improve over time on our specific vendor invoice formats

For a multi-location services company processing 1,800 invoices per month across recurring vendors in facilities, utilities, and subcontracting, JAGGAER addresses this requirement through two layers. The native JAGGAER Invoicing module uses OCR combined with embedded AI and machine learning: <cite index="1-5">it captures data from invoice documents across a wide range of formats and communication channels, enriched by AI and OCR technologies that convert invoice data into a standardized format.</cite> Buyers can <cite index="1-9">set confidence thresholds, review key decision factors, and continuously refine AI accuracy to reduce manual effort, accelerate processing, and boost efficiency in …

Limitations: The buyer's specific need is for the system to get progressively more accurate on individual vendor invoice formats over time; JAGGAER's documentation confirms a feedback-driven confidence refinement loop and historical pattern learning, but does not explicitly document that the model builds or refines per-vendor recog …

Requirement evaluated: Learning capability: accuracy should improve over time on our specific vendor invoice formats

For a $120M multi-location services company processing 1,800 invoices per month, Zip's AI operates across two distinct learning layers, but they address different stages of the pre-processing journey. At the coding layer, Zip's 'Agentic invoice coding' feature explicitly claims accuracy that improves over time: it deploys an AI agent that codes invoices based on context and historical patterns, with Zip stating that 'accuracy improving over time through institutional memory' is a core behavior of this agent. …

Limitations: For this buyer's 1,800-invoice-per-month mix of facilities, subcontractor, utility, and subscription invoices arriving in varied formats, the gap that matters is at the extraction layer: Zip has not published a documented mechanism showing that human corrections to extracted fields are fed back into a vendor-specific r …

Requirement evaluated: Multi-factor verification for banking change requests; we need systematic fraud prevention, not email-based trust

For a $120M services company currently relying on email chains to handle banking change requests, JAGGAER addresses this requirement through three layered native controls. First, supplier portal access is secured through JAGGAER's Supplier Identity Management module, which enforces Multi-Factor Authentication for all supplier logins: suppliers who update their own payment details must authenticate via a second factor (authenticator app or OTP) before making any changes, eliminating the email-chain trust model entirely. …

Limitations: The separation-of-duties and workflow approval controls require deliberate configuration by the buyer's JAGGAER administrator; they are not enforced by default out of the box, so implementation governance matters. …

Requirement evaluated: Multi-factor verification for banking change requests; we need systematic fraud prevention, not email-based trust

For a 3-person AP team at a $120M services company where the current control is an email chain (the exact attack surface for business email compromise), Zip addresses the banking change fraud requirement through two distinct layers. First, at the vendor portal level: Zip mandates MFA for every vendor login to the vendor app, requiring password, email verification, and phone or authenticator-app confirmation before a vendor can access or submit payment account details. Zip's documentation states directly that this prevents an adversary who has stolen a vendor's credentials from accessing payment data. …

Limitations: The buyer's highest-risk scenario is a mid-relationship banking change request, whether arriving as a BEC email or initiated internally, and Zip does not document a dedicated change-event control workflow (e.g., an automatic approval chain or out-of-band callback triggered specifically when a payment field on an existi …

Requirement evaluated: Policy compliance reporting: percentage of spend through approved channels, contract compliance rate, approval policy adherence

For a $250M technology company currently managing 35% maverick spend with no procurement system, JAGGAER delivers policy compliance reporting through two converging modules: JAGGAER Spend Analytics and JAGGAER eProcurement analytics. On the spend analytics side, <cite index="2-16,2-17">JAGGAER Spend Analytics continuously analyzes procurement activities to identify potential compliance breaches before they occur, providing timely alerts and actionable recommendations to align processes with corporate policies and regulatory standards.</cite> Contract compliance rate is a named standard output: <cite index="4-12">standard reports like early payment, discount tracking, and contract compliance …

Limitations: Approval policy adherence as an explicit named percentage KPI (e.g., 'X% of approvals followed the defined policy chain') is well-implied through workflow enforcement and exception flagging but is not called out as a standalone reportable metric in documentation found; buyers should confirm during demo that this specif …

Requirement evaluated: Policy compliance reporting: percentage of spend through approved channels, contract compliance rate, approval policy adherence

This $250M technology company needs procurement compliance reporting that surfaces three specific metrics: percentage of spend through approved channels, contract compliance rate, and approval policy adherence. Zip's Spend Insights module delivers real-time dashboards where finance leaders can track spend by department, category, vendor, or GL account, and the platform logs every approval action to create a complete audit trail. The IDC study Zip cites documents a 121% increase in purchases meeting organizational requirements and a 47% increase in spend under management, which are outcomes of compliance enforcement, not pre-packaged compliance rate reports. …

Limitations: Zip's compliance reporting is mechanistically strong at the intake and workflow enforcement layer, generating the underlying data, but the buyer will likely need to export raw data or build custom reports to produce the discrete named KPI percentages (approved-channel spend rate, contract compliance rate, policy adhere …

Requirement evaluated: PO change order workflow: amendments require re-approval if they exceed original amount by more than 10% or $5,000

For a $250M tech company moving from email/Slack approvals to a governed procurement system, JAGGAER handles PO change orders as a distinct revision document type that routes through the platform's configurable workflow engine. When a PO is amended after initial approval, the revised document enters a separate 'change order' approval path: the JAGGAER help center confirms that approvers work with PO revisions in their 'My Approvals' folders, and that rejecting a revision also voids the original PO, indicating the amendment is treated as a gated re-approval event rather than a silent edit. …

Limitations: The buyer's specific compound OR condition (greater than 10% OR greater than $5,000) must be implemented by JAGGAER's services team at or after go-live, not self-configured by the buyer's admin in a settings UI; this adds a change-management dependency for future threshold adjustments. …

Requirement evaluated: PO change order workflow: amendments require re-approval if they exceed original amount by more than 10% or $5,000

For a $250M technology company coming from a fully manual email/Slack approval process, Zip's Procure-to-Pay module includes dedicated PO change order approval workflow configuration. Zip's Procure-to-Pay Admin Fundamentals course explicitly covers the objective to 'configure the approval workflows for PO change orders' as a distinct admin task, confirming this is a first-party, configurable feature rather than a simple audit log. Zip's own product documentation describes PO Management as enabling users to 'manage change orders with the right approvals' and sync PO data to the ERP. …

Limitations: The buyer's specific requirement — triggering re-approval on either a relative (>10%) or absolute (>$5,000) increase over the original PO amount — requires compound conditional logic tied to the amendment delta. …

Requirement evaluated: Maverick spend tracking: flag all invoices that arrive without a matching PO

For a technology company currently receiving 35% of spend as uninvoiced or email-approved purchases, JAGGAER's Invoicing module addresses maverick spend at the AP ingestion stage through a documented non-PO invoice exception workflow. When an invoice enters the system (via supplier portal, OCR/digital mailroom, or eInvoicing channel) without a corresponding PO reference, JAGGAER's automated matching engine identifies it as a match exception, holds the invoice, and routes it through a separate exception approval workflow rather than allowing it to proceed to payment. …

Limitations: Flagging only applies to invoices that enter the JAGGAER system: suppliers who continue to submit invoices directly via email or to NetSuite, bypassing JAGGAER's supplier portal or digital mailroom, will not be caught in the exception queue until the buyer fully migrates invoice ingestion into JAGGAER. …

Requirement evaluated: Maverick spend tracking: flag all invoices that arrive without a matching PO

For a $250M technology company with 35% maverick spend arriving as unmatched invoices in NetSuite, Zip addresses this requirement primarily through upstream intake enforcement rather than a dedicated invoice exception queue. Zip's Procure-to-Pay module documents automated invoice-to-PO matching ('match invoices to purchase orders based on PO number, vendor, and item details'), and its Spend Insights module tracks 'purchase requests, POs, and invoices in Zip to analyze spend by department, category, vendor, or GL account,' providing visibility into spend that lacks upstream requisitions. …

Limitations: Zip's documented mechanism for non-PO invoice flagging is primarily preventive (intake gate forces a PO before spend) rather than reactive (catch-and-flag an invoice that arrives without a PO reference). …

Requirement evaluated: Automatic match-and-pass for invoices within tolerance, reducing AP workload to exceptions-only review

For a $250M technology company moving from email-and-Slack approvals to systematic AP automation, JAGGAER's Invoicing module (part of the JAGGAER One platform) delivers the full three-way matching and auto-pass workflow this buyer needs. Invoices arrive via portal, EDI, cXML, OCR, or PEPPOL and are standardized into structured fields; the system then compares each invoice against its PO and goods receipt using 2-way, 3-way, or n-way matching with configurable price and quantity tolerance bands set by the organization. …

Limitations: Tolerance band configuration and invoicing workflow setup are performed during implementation by JAGGAER's team rather than being fully self-service for the buyer's admin; changes to matching rules typically require coordination with JAGGAER support or a project manager, which may slow iteration as the buyer's process …

Requirement evaluated: Automatic match-and-pass for invoices within tolerance, reducing AP workload to exceptions-only review

For a $250M technology company currently managing AP through email and Slack approvals with no matching automation, Zip's Procure-to-Pay module delivers the exceptions-only review model the buyer needs through a multi-stage AI matching architecture. Zip's process begins upstream: because the platform already holds the original purchase request, approved PO, contract terms, and budget position by the time an invoice arrives, its AI has full context to perform three-way matching accurately. …

Limitations: Public documentation confirms that PO tolerance breach detection is built into the Invoice Review Agent, but Zip's help center does not publish granular configuration details (e.g., whether tolerance thresholds can be set separately by percentage vs. dollar amount at the line level vs. …

Requirement evaluated: SSO via Okta (our identity provider)

For a 450-person technology company using Okta as its identity provider, JAGGAER ONE supports federation by acting as the SAML 2.0 or OIDC service provider: your Okta tenant issues authentication tokens that JAGGAER accepts, so employees log in through Okta without maintaining separate JAGGAER credentials. <cite index="3-3">JAGGAER's Identity Management page states that customers can "integrate your own Identity Provider via standardized authentication protocols (SAML or OpenID Connect) for seamless single-sign-on to the JAGGAER solution."</cite> Okta is a SAML 2.0 and OIDC-compliant IdP, so it fits this mechanism directly. …

Limitations: <cite index="9-3,9-4,9-6">JAGGAER's documented supplier-side implementation supports SAML 2.0 or OIDC 1.0 with SP-initiated SSO only, and notes that users must already exist in both the external IdP and JAGGAER systems before login.</cite> The OIN listing is specifically scoped to the "Jaggaer Supplier Support" portal …

Requirement evaluated: SSO via Okta (our identity provider)

For a 450-person company standardizing on Okta, Zip has a verified, published integration in the Okta Integration Network (OIN). <cite index="11-7">"From single sign-on to enhanced user provisioning, Okta's Zip integration upgrades the security and convenience of powering procurement through Zip."</cite> Zip acts as the SAML service provider; your administrators point Okta at Zip's SAML endpoints, and Okta issues assertions that authenticate users without requiring separate Zip credentials. …

Limitations: Zip's security documentation does not explicitly describe a company-wide SSO enforcement mode (a setting that blocks local password login and forces all users through Okta); buyers should confirm with Zip's sales team whether mandatory SSO enforcement is available and at which plan tier, since its absence would allow u …

Requirement evaluated: Complete audit trail meeting SOX-adjacent control requirements for our IPO preparation

For a $250M technology company preparing for IPO, JAGGAER One delivers audit trail capability through two interlinked mechanisms. First, the eProcurement and Procure-to-Pay modules enforce a step-by-step approval workflow where every requisition, PO, contract, and invoice passes through configurable, system-enforced approval steps; each step captures the approver's identity, timestamp, and decision before the document can advance to the next stage. …

Limitations: Workflow configuration changes (including adjustments needed to respond to auditor findings) require JAGGAER professional services involvement rather than self-service reconfiguration by the buyer's admins, which can slow audit remediation cycles during IPO review periods. …

Requirement evaluated: Complete audit trail meeting SOX-adjacent control requirements for our IPO preparation

For a $250M technology company preparing for IPO, Zip's audit trail mechanism starts at the intake stage rather than at PO creation, which directly closes the gap this buyer currently has: approvals via Slack and email leave no structured, system-enforced record. Every purchase request submitted through Zip's intake portal triggers a logged chain of events across the full intake-to-pay lifecycle. …

Limitations: Web search did not surface documentation confirming the audit log is technically immutable at the storage layer (tamper-proof even by admins), nor specific data retention periods; a pre-IPO buyer undergoing SOX 404(a) …

Requirement evaluated: Support for Sage Intacct dimensions: Location, Department, Class, Project, Customer, and custom dimensions

For a $120M multi-location services company running two Sage Intacct entities with six dimensions in active use, the critical question is whether JAGGAER's ERP connector carries those dimensions into the invoice coding and approval workflow before posting. JAGGAER's invoicing page confirms that pre-built integrations exist for 'SAP, Oracle, Workday, NetSuite, Infor, PeopleSoft, JD Edwards, Sage and 30+ more,' and that approved invoices post to the ERP without manual data entry. …

Limitations: No JAGGAER documentation found that specifies whether Sage Intacct's full dimension set (Location, Department, Class, Project, Customer, and custom/user-defined dimensions) …

Requirement evaluated: Custom field mapping between the AP platform and Intacct

For a $120M multi-location services company running two Intacct entities, Zip's Sage Intacct integration operates primarily as a procurement intake and vendor management layer rather than a deep AP bill coding connector. The Sage Intacct Marketplace listing for Zip documents a daily pull sync that brings Entities, Locations, Segments, and the existing vendor list from Intacct into Zip — giving the platform the structural Intacct objects it needs to route procurement requests and create new vendor records. …

Limitations: The specific requirement — mapping custom or user-defined Intacct fields (such as UDDs on AP Bills, contract codes, or supplemental vendor tags) between the two platforms — has no documented mechanism in any Zip-authored source; the integration as publicly described stops at standard Entities, Locations, Segments, and …

Requirement evaluated: Approval bottleneck analysis: which approvers are slowest, which invoice types take longest

For a 3-person AP team currently flying blind on email-chain approvals across 1,800 invoices per month, JAGGAER offers two overlapping mechanisms that address approval bottleneck visibility, but neither delivers the full per-approver, per-invoice-type breakdown the buyer describes. First, the JAGGAER Invoicing module documents 'complete visibility into bottlenecks' alongside exception routing, meaning AP staff can see where invoices are stalled in the approval queue in real time. …

Limitations: The buyer's requirement specifically asks for ranked approver slowness and invoice-type cycle time as structured, reportable dimensions; JAGGAER's documented bottleneck visibility operates primarily at the exception and backlog level through JAI queries and workflow exception routing, not as a named, pre-built approver …

Requirement evaluated: Approval bottleneck analysis: which approvers are slowest, which invoice types take longest

For a $120M services company currently routing approvals through email chains with zero visibility into who is holding things up, Zip's Spend Insights module directly addresses this gap. The module tracks each request as it moves through Zip's multi-step approval workflow, logging time spent at every stage and by every approver. Zip's capability page states that the platform 'analyzes your cycle times to identify opportunities for optimizing workflows and moving requesters and approvers through the process faster,' and the Enterprise dashboard surface offers 'real-time visibility into spend volume, approver productivity, and savings.' SLA compliance is a named use case: Zip explicitly positi …

Limitations: Some users reviewing Zip's reporting suite note that the standard dashboards cover core cycle-time and approver-productivity metrics well, but teams requiring highly complex, multidimensional procurement analytics (beyond bottleneck identification) may need to export data to an external BI tool for deeper slicing. …

Requirement evaluated: Virtual card program with rebate revenue; we want to shift 30%+ of spend to virtual card

Your team currently runs bi-weekly check runs and monthly ACH batches with no virtual card revenue; JAGGAER Pay is the payment module within JAGGAER ONE that directly targets this shift. When an invoice clears approval, JAGGAER Pay uses data analytics and AI to automatically route the payment to a rebate-generating method: first a single-use virtual card, then Premium ACH, then check, based on each supplier's acceptance profile. JAGGAER states it 'turns routine payments into revenue by using data analytics and AI to automatically shift spend to rebate-generating methods like virtual cards and premium ACH,' with supplier enablement fully managed on the buyer's behalf to drive adoption. …

Limitations: Published rebate rates and specific spend-shift percentages achievable for a $120M services company are not disclosed publicly; actual rebate economics depend on supplier mix, card acceptance rates among your subcontractors and utilities vendors, and the terms negotiated at contract time with JAGGAER Pay. …

Requirement evaluated: Early payment discount detection: auto-flag invoices with discount terms (2/10 net 30) and alert AP when deadline approaches

For your AP team processing 1,800 invoices per month across 6 locations, early payment discount detection requires three connected steps: extracting discount notation (such as '2/10 net 30') from invoice text, calculating the deadline date, and alerting AP before the window expires. Zip's AI invoice processing does capture payment terms as a data field during document extraction, per Zip's own blog content on AI invoice processing. …

Limitations: No help center article, product page, or technical documentation found for Zip confirms a discount-deadline calculation and AP notification feature; the gap between capturing a 'payment terms' text field and auto-flagging an expiring 2/10 window with a deadline-driven alert is material for a buyer whose team is current …

Requirement evaluated: Automatic escalation: if approver has not acted within 48 hours, escalate to their manager with notification

For a $120M multi-location services company moving off manual email-chain approvals, JAGGAER's configurable approval workflow engine handles this requirement within its Invoicing and eProcurement modules. JAGGAER explicitly documents that escalation for stalled approvals is supported alongside delegation, parallel routing, and sequential routing: when an approver has not acted within a defined period, the system automatically escalates and notifies the appropriate next-level approver. …

Limitations: No publicly documented specification for a minimum-configurable timeout interval (e.g., whether 48 hours is a supported threshold or whether the platform enforces a coarser granularity such as 1-day or 2-day increments) was found; the buyer should confirm 48-hour precision during a demo or contract negotiation. …

Requirement evaluated: Approval delegation with automatic expiration (e.g., delegate to backup for 5 business days while on PTO)

Your three-person AP team at a $120M multi-location services company needs approvers to be able to set a named backup, define a start and end date for a PTO window, and have approval authority revert automatically when that window closes — without any manual cleanup. Zip's workflow engine is documented as supporting dynamic approver selection using queues and user hierarchies, and the platform is designed to route requests to the right cross-functional teams across complex approval paths. …

Limitations: No citable source — from the fact sheet's primary or supporting tiers, Zip's own documentation site, or its workflow capability pages — confirms that Zip offers auto-expiring delegation with a named backup approver and hard date-range control as opposed to manual reassignment or permanent role transfer. …

Requirement evaluated: Centralized supplier database with self-service onboarding portal: vendors enter their own info, upload W-9, insurance, banking

For a $250M technology company moving away from email-based purchasing and managing 800+ active vendors, JAGGAER's Supplier Management module provides exactly the centralized supplier database and self-service onboarding portal the buyer requires. Vendors receive an invitation and self-register through a dedicated supplier portal: they enter company information, provide tax details, and upload compliance documents without buyer-side manual data entry. …

Limitations: The supplier portal is free to suppliers, but the full Supplier Management and onboarding workflow capabilities sit within JAGGAER's broader source-to-pay platform, so the buyer will need to confirm which specific tier or module covers their required onboarding configuration depth (e.g., custom questionnaires, insuranc …

Requirement evaluated: Supplier performance scorecards: on-time delivery rate, quality issues, invoice accuracy, responsiveness

For a $250M technology company looking to track on-time delivery, quality issues, invoice accuracy, and responsiveness across its 800+ vendor base, Zip operates primarily at the sourcing and vendor management layer rather than as a continuous post-award scorecard engine. At the sourcing stage, Zip's platform lets procurement teams score and compare supplier RFx responses using structured criteria, weighted sections, and automated normalization, and identifies preferred suppliers while tracking realized savings and sourcing performance in a single dashboard (ziphq.com/products/sourcing). …

Limitations: Zip's own documentation acknowledges it is not a standalone supplier relationship management tool designed to replace specialized SRM or TPRM platforms, and its vendor management page describes data storage and export rather than calculated operational KPI scorecards. …

Requirement evaluated: Automatic routing to the right approver based on category, amount, department, and location

For a $250M tech company currently routing nothing automatically (approvals happen via Slack and email), JAGGAER's eProcurement module fires its configurable approval workflow engine at the purchase requisition stage -- before a PO is ever created -- which directly cuts off the maverick spend path the buyer's CFO identified. <cite index="1-1">Approval workflows in JAGGAER route purchase requisitions and orders to the right approvers based on rules you define: spend amount, department, supplier, commodity category, or any combination.</cite> All four of the buyer's required routing dimensions are explicitly covered: <cite index="12-16">approval routing by value, commodity, BU, and cost center …

Limitations: Separate-per-BU workflow routing requires JAGGAER to enable the Multiple Business Unit feature during implementation -- it is not self-serve out of the box -- so the buyer should confirm this is scoped into their implementation engagement for all five locations. …

Requirement evaluated: Automatic routing to the right approver based on category, amount, department, and location

For a $250M technology company currently routing all purchasing through ad-hoc email and Slack approvals, Zip's core product is purpose-built to solve exactly this problem. At the intake stage, employees submit a request through a single intake portal that collects structured metadata: what is being purchased, from which vendor, at what cost, and which budget or department it affects. Zip's no-code workflow engine then evaluates that metadata against configurable routing rules and automatically assigns the correct approvers. …

Limitations: Zip's own published documentation explicitly names spend amount, department, category, and vendor as routing dimensions; location as a standalone first-class routing variable is not explicitly documented in Zip's available help content, so buyers with complex location-specific routing rules (e.g., separate approvers fo …

Requirement evaluated: Punchout catalog integration with Amazon Business and CDW

Your team currently has no guardrails stopping employees from buying outside approved channels, which drives the 35% maverick spend figure your CFO identified. JAGGAER's eProcurement module addresses this directly through cXML-based punchout catalog integration, which is its primary and documented standard for supplier catalog connectivity. When a buyer clicks a punchout link inside JAGGAER, the platform sends a cXML PunchOutSetupRequest to the supplier; the supplier authenticates the session and opens its live storefront; the buyer shops natively (seeing real-time pricing, inventory, and any contract-negotiated rates); and the completed cart is returned to JAGGAER via a cXML PunchOutOrderMe …

Limitations: While Amazon Business has a named, co-branded integration page with JAGGAER, CDW punchout connectivity was not confirmed via a dedicated JAGGAER-CDW co-branded document; CDW's punchout enablement relies on the same cXML standard that JAGGAER fully supports, but the buyer should confirm CDW's current enrollment status i …

Requirement evaluated: Punchout catalog integration with Amazon Business and CDW

Your scenario calls for employees at a $250M technology company to browse Amazon Business and CDW live storefronts from within the procurement tool, build carts, and have those carts returned as requisition line items subject to Zip's approval workflows — the standard cXML punchout roundtrip. Zip's documented catalog capability is a 'cross-catalog purchasing feature' that offers 'a centralized shopping experience, allowing employees to search and purchase items across multiple supplier catalogs through a single, user-friendly interface' (Zip Forward 2024 launch blog). Separately, Zip's intake-to-procure module routes requests to preferred suppliers using AI-powered supplier search. …

Limitations: Zip's published newsletter explicitly positions classic punchout ('opaque punch-out guides') as an outdated and burdensome paradigm that Zip moves beyond with AI-guided buying — this raises a material question about whether Zip supports live cXML punchout sessions to Amazon Business and CDW at all, or whether its catal …