For advisors and DMCs
Every revision on the record, with the reason attached
Itinerary revision tracking records each change to a proposal as a version of the same document, with the requester, the reason and the date attached, rather than as a new file. Orelea keeps revisions in one chain per trip, so an advisor can show a client exactly what moved between version three and version four without reconstructing it from an email thread.
Revision four is a different file with the same name
The standard pattern is a fresh attachment per round. Proposal_v2_FINAL.pdf, then Proposal_v2_FINAL_updated.pdf, each a complete document in which something has changed and nothing says what.
Finding the difference means opening both and reading them side by side. Most people do not, so changes get approved unread, and the first time anyone examines version four closely is when the client asks why the price moved.
A change is an event, not a document
Treating a revision as a version of one document rather than a new document changes what can be asked of it. A version knows what it replaced, so the difference between any two versions is computable rather than a reading exercise.
- What changed, expressed as a difference rather than a new file
- Who requested it, so a supplier-initiated change is distinguishable from a client-initiated one
- Why, captured at the moment it is made rather than reconstructed later
- What it did to the price, separately from everything else that also moved
The disputes this prevents
Most disagreements between an advisor and a DMC are not about the change itself. They are about which version each party believed was current, and they surface late, usually after the client has been quoted.
A single chain removes the ambiguity. There is one current version, everything before it is visible, and the question of what was approved has a recorded answer instead of two recollections.
What it does not decide
Revision tracking records changes; it does not adjudicate them. Whether a supplier is entitled to re-price after a client approval is a commercial matter between the parties and their terms.
What the record does is make the discussion factual. Both sides are looking at what actually changed and when, rather than arguing from separate versions of a PDF.
Frequently asked questions
How should itinerary revisions be tracked between an advisor and a DMC?
Keep every revision as a version of one proposal rather than a new document, and record who requested each change, why, and its effect on price. Both parties should be able to see the current version and its history without asking the other which file is the latest.
How do DMCs manage revisions requested by travel advisors?
Most handle them over email, re-issuing a full proposal each round. That works while the rounds are few and degrades quickly on complex trips. A structured workflow amends the existing proposal instead, so the DMC states what moved rather than reissuing a document and hoping the advisor spots the difference.
What should be recorded with an itinerary change?
At minimum the date, who requested it, what specifically changed, the reason, and the effect on price and on any related services. Changes affecting other suppliers or the cancellation position should say so explicitly, since those consequences are the ones most often discovered late.
Does version tracking slow the revision process down?
It adds a small amount of structure at the point of change and removes a larger amount of reconstruction afterwards. The time normally lost to revisions is not in making them, it is in working out later what a version contained and whether the client ever saw it.