A single merchant report must stop counting one checkout twice without losing a real plan.
Duplicate suppression protects reconciliation effort, while preserving returned-purchase records protects merchant settlement accuracy.
Who you’d be doing this for
“I spent half my morning explaining why yesterday's total changed after the report refreshed.”
Hafiz Rahman · Payments Reconciliation Manager
Uses merchant reporting to close out daily checkout and plan activity for a multichannel retailer.
What is at stake
Duplicate completed-plan rows affect 3.8% of merchant reporting, while valid returned-purchase plans can disappear. You must weigh a permanent lineage change against the risk of publishing another unreliable cycle.
Why it isn’t already fixed
Every obvious fix costs something else. That’s the part you’d have to decide.
- merchant reporting speed vs historical lineage integrity
- duplicate suppression vs valid-plan preservation
- automated triage vs verified evidence
- source semantics vs reusable metric definitions
Why Affirm
Interest-free payment-plan reporting determines whether merchants can reconcile checkout activity with the plans shoppers actually use.
Written with these in mind
Not your kind of problem? 33 more at Affirm, or browse every organization.
This is the setup. The work is inside.
Running it puts you in the room: the full situation and its constraints, stakeholders who push back in their own words, and the decisions that are yours to make. What you produce becomes a Day One Plan — work you can show someone instead of describing.