We’ve configured a multi-level approval process using decision tables in Creatio 7.18, but we’re experiencing inconsistent branching behavior when multiple approval conditions overlap. The decision table has 8 rules evaluating amount thresholds, department codes, and request types to determine the appropriate approval path.
The problem occurs when a request meets criteria for multiple rules simultaneously - for example, a $15K IT department request matches both Rule 3 (IT requests >$10K) and Rule 5 (any request >$12K). Instead of following the expected rule order priority, the process seems to randomly select between matching rules, causing some requests to skip required approval stages.
We’ve verified that rule order is configured correctly in the decision table designer (higher priority rules at the top), and overlapping condition handling is set to ‘First Match’. However, the approval workflow integrity is compromised as critical high-value requests sometimes bypass senior management approval. Has anyone encountered similar issues with decision table rule evaluation in approval processes?
Have you verified the actual execution order in the process log? Sometimes the issue isn’t with the decision table itself but with how the parent process passes parameters. If variables aren’t properly initialized before reaching the decision point, the evaluation can produce unexpected results. Also check if any of your rules have null value conditions - those can interfere with the matching logic.
Also check your decision table’s ‘Hit Policy’ configuration - in 7.18 this is separate from the First Match setting and controls multi-hit scenarios. Set it to ‘Unique’ or ‘Priority’ rather than ‘Any’ to ensure only one rule fires per evaluation.
I’ve seen this behavior before in 7.18. The ‘First Match’ setting should work, but there’s a known issue when conditions use both exact matches and range comparisons in the same decision table. Check if your rules mix equality operators (department = ‘IT’) with comparison operators (amount > 10000) - this can cause evaluation order problems.
Good point about the process log. I checked and found that parameters are passing correctly, but I noticed something interesting - when multiple rules match, the log shows evaluation happening in parallel rather than sequentially. Could this be related to how the decision table engine processes rules in 7.18?