Item: Webexpenses
Rating: 6
Author: Verified User

Overall Satisfaction with Webexpenses

Use Cases and Deployment Scope

We use Webexpenses for claim reimbursement in a variety of categories.

It generally works fairly well, though the UX flow and linking of receipts to claims can be a little confusing. It'd be nice to have the ability to customize which fields are visible and to have the receipts section for a claim open by default (rather than collapsed by default). This would let you see that your receipts were uploaded successfully without additional actions.
Also, the way that "Description" becomes the title of the claim isn't obvious prior to submission. This has led to some overly-verbose claim titles.

Pros and Cons

Pros

It's quick
Multiple receipts can be handled per claim
Escalation chain is obvious - it shows you where your claim will go for approval

Cons

UX flow can be clunky - some buttons are at the far top or bottom corners
Fields aren't customizable, at least by base users
Lacks dark mode support

Usability

All of the fields that you will need are present. However, they can be hard to find and potentially hard to understand. Having the attached receipts section closed/collapsed by default is a poor design choice.

Key Insights

Do you think Webexpenses delivers good value for the price?

Not sure

Are you happy with Webexpenses's feature set?

Yes

Did Webexpenses live up to sales and marketing promises?

I wasn't involved with the selection/purchase process

Did implementation of Webexpenses go as expected?

I wasn't involved with the implementation phase

Would you buy Webexpenses again?

Yes

Likelihood to Recommend

It seems well-suited to submitting a large number of receipts for a single claim. It is ill-suited to submitting a single claim with a single receipt once in a while, because the interface is dense in some areas, sparse in others, and hard to learn.

Webexpenses Feature Ratings

Comments

Please log in to join the conversation

Webexpenses Helps Me Get Paid