Wrike - OpenText Core Case Integration and Automation

Common Integration Use Cases Between Wrike and OpenText Core Case

Wrike and OpenText Core Case complement each other well when organizations need to manage both structured case handling and cross-functional work execution. OpenText Core Case is strong for managing case records, evidence, decisions, and compliance-driven workflows, while Wrike is well suited for coordinating tasks, timelines, approvals, and collaboration across teams. Together, they can connect case management with operational delivery.

1. Escalate complex customer or service cases into coordinated work plans

When a case in OpenText Core Case requires action from multiple teams, an integration can automatically create a Wrike project or task set for investigation, remediation, or follow-up work.

• Flow: OpenText Core Case to Wrike
• Example: A high-priority customer complaint is logged in OpenText Core Case. Once it is classified as requiring cross-functional resolution, Wrike creates tasks for support, legal, product, and operations teams.
• Business value: Faster resolution, clearer ownership, and reduced risk of missed handoffs.

2. Sync case milestones and task status back to the case record

Wrike task progress can be pushed back into OpenText Core Case so case managers have a complete view of resolution status without chasing updates across teams.

• Flow: Wrike to OpenText Core Case
• Example: As remediation tasks move through review, approval, and completion in Wrike, the case record is updated with milestone status and completion dates.
• Business value: Better case visibility, stronger auditability, and less manual status reporting.

3. Manage compliance investigations with evidence collection and action tracking

OpenText Core Case can hold the official investigation record, while Wrike manages the operational tasks needed to gather evidence, review documents, and complete corrective actions.

• Flow: Bi-directional
• Example: A compliance case is opened in OpenText Core Case. Wrike tasks are assigned to collect policy documents, interview notes, and system logs. Once completed, the evidence is attached or referenced back in the case.
• Business value: Improved consistency in investigations, stronger governance, and easier audit preparation.

4. Coordinate claims or dispute resolution across departments

For claims, disputes, or exception handling, OpenText Core Case can serve as the system of record while Wrike coordinates the work required from finance, operations, legal, and customer service.

• Flow: OpenText Core Case to Wrike, with updates returned to OpenText Core Case
• Example: A disputed invoice case triggers Wrike tasks for document review, customer communication, and approval of settlement terms. Final decisions are recorded in OpenText Core Case.
• Business value: Shorter resolution cycles, fewer internal delays, and better accountability across departments.

5. Trigger project-style response plans for recurring case types

Organizations can standardize responses to recurring case categories by launching predefined Wrike templates from OpenText Core Case.

• Flow: OpenText Core Case to Wrike
• Example: A product quality complaint or service outage case automatically launches a Wrike template with tasks for root cause analysis, customer communication, corrective action, and management review.
• Business value: More consistent handling, faster response times, and reduced reliance on manual coordination.

6. Support customer support operations with case-to-work handoffs

Support teams can use OpenText Core Case to manage the customer-facing case while Wrike handles internal work that requires collaboration beyond the support desk.

• Flow: OpenText Core Case to Wrike
• Example: A support agent opens a case for a software defect. Wrike creates tasks for engineering triage, QA validation, and release planning, while the support case remains the customer communication hub.
• Business value: Better alignment between support and delivery teams, improved customer communication, and fewer dropped issues.

7. Track approvals and sign-offs for regulated case outcomes

Wrike can manage approval workflows for internal review steps, while OpenText Core Case stores the final approved outcome and supporting documentation.

• Flow: Bi-directional
• Example: A claims settlement or compliance exception requires legal and managerial approval in Wrike. Once approved, the final decision, approver details, and supporting files are written back to OpenText Core Case.
• Business value: Clear approval traceability, reduced compliance risk, and a complete decision history.

These integrations are most valuable when OpenText Core Case is used as the authoritative case record and Wrike is used to execute the work needed to resolve the case. This separation helps organizations improve control, speed, and visibility across complex operational workflows.