|
|
摘要：直发（从供应商采购直接发到客户）的业务流程，不经过自己的物流，那位老大能说几句，在SAP或ORACLE中是如何处理的？
直发（从供应商采购直接发到客户）的业务流程
直发（从供应商采购直接发到客户）的业务流程，不经过自己的物流，那位老大能说几句，在SAP或ORACLE中是如何处理的
cipher
Drop Shipment, that is a process that you can receive orders for items that you do not stock or for which you
lack sufficient inventory, and have a supplier provide the items directly to your customer.
Drop Shipment order flow in Oracle:
A.EnteraDrop-shiporder->B.Releasetopuchasing->C.Confirmationofshipmentandreceipt－>D.Invoicing
A.There is a field namely 'Source Type' to differentiate normal orders(internal source) and drop-ship orders(external source)
C.You need to do a logical receiving of drop-ship items even if they are not transactable. This creates inbound and outbound material transactions in your system for accounting purposes.
D.All the same as normal invoicing.
redgrass
it is third party business model, SAP have provide a standard solution for this model,maybe you can study it ^^
mingmei7784
ORACLE中可采用直入直出流程，先做销售合同-采购发放-导入申请-自动创建
mingmei7784
ORACLE中可采用直入直出流程，先做销售合同-采购发放-导入申请-自动创建
julianyang
First, redgrass, can you give us a detail example?
Secondary, Pls see the following to understand what the end-users are concerning with:
-------------------------------------------------
We have been presented with this situation for years and have dealt with, but not solved, the same issues.
We request notice of shipments from our vendors and receive them most of the time. In many cases this is an 'exceptional' circumstance for our vendors, and therefore they may not perform as well in this function as they normally do. We decided, however, that our customers should not have to do anything special, such as notify us of receipt, in these cases. It was better to live with the fallout of non-notification than place an added burden on our customers.
The puchase orders we create for these situations contain instructions to our receiving people to see that this material is for a particular sales order and is 'shipped' in our computer system when received at customer. These instructions do not print on the PO, so our vendors never see them. Sales orders and purchase orders are cross referenced in these circumstances. Ensuring that all relevant information is on all documents is a continuing challenge. Our receiving people notify our shipping people that Sales Order# ?????? needs to be 'shipped' . Any discrepencies between the sales order and the receipt at customer is then dealt with by the shipping people in whatever manner the shippers deem appropriate for the circumstance.
Our invoicing procedure automatically reduces our inventory, so it is imperative that this material be placed in inventory at some point. Also, our costing programs work with actual quantities received, freight charged, amounts invoiced, discounts taken, etc., as opposed to PO data. We would be manually making adjustments to numbers if we did not receive this material into inventory.
Our ERP system is home-grown and we have the ability to modify it to match our practices, rather than modify our practices to match the system. Perhaps this gives us flexibility that purchased systems do not have. ???
-----Original Message-----
From: bounce-cpim-22316@lists.apics.org [mailto:bounce-cpim-22316@lists.apics.org]On Behalf Of Heimdal, Jan
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 10:38 AM
To: Certified in Production and Inventory Management
Subject: [cpim] Procedural question
For those of you who implement/administer/support ERP systems, I have a procedural question regarding how to handle the direct shipment of a component from our supplier to our customer-i.e. we never touch the component, but we will bill our customer for it. It is no problem to specify the customer's shipping address on our PO to the supplier, but I'm wondering if there is a better way to account for customer receipt and billing.
I currently have our users receive the component on the PO and then dispatch and invoice the sales order for that component, so that it is only briefly in our system stock. A challenge occurs in two areas:
1. Performing the receipt in a timely manner. We don't really know when the customer takes receipt of the component, and we don't want our invoice to reach the customer before the component arrives from the supplier. The component may or may not be in stock at the supplier, or it may be a non-stocked custom manufacture item.
2. If the PO does get received, the component will sometimes linger in our system stock before someone notices that it should be allocated to the customer's sales order, then dispatched and invoiced. This is due to the fact that we have different personnel performing PO receipt and SO dispatch functions,. We have attempted to address this by cross-training a few users in different functional areas of the software so that they can create & receive the PO as well as allocate the component to a back-ordered sales order.
We're getting by, but there seems to be room for improvement. I guess we could request notification from the supplier once they ship the component to our customer-that would help. How are other list members handling this situation? Is there a way to by-pass receipt of the component into stock, and if so, is that desirable? Just curious.
Please state responses in generic terms-i.e. not specific to a particular software package. Thanks.
Jan Heimdal
TMI Systems Design Corp.
50 South Third Avenue W.
Dickinson, ND 58601
Phone: 701-456-6716
Fax: 701-456-6700
http://www.tmisystems.com
redgrass
太长了,而且又是英文,呵呵,所以懒得看妳的文字。
SAP提供了third-party的一整套的完整的Solution,当然,我们可以根据自己的需要在创建符合自身的解决方法(大致):
在IMG设置上,可以设置新的Sales order type,新的schedule line item(注意对PP run MRP的影响,在此可以设置让其自动产生PR等系统动作),新的PO type,新的PO Item category,新的accounting assignment category,然后把这些东西串联起来,当然还少不了在FI中设置新的General modification,并给它新的商品类的会计科目(或是中介科目-我们的做法-月底手工清到AR-other或是符合实际需要的会计科目去).
细节问题需要注意的是:
我们对客户的Billing数量是根据对客户SO的数量开,还是根据供货商实际的送货数量开,是在对供货商IV之前Billing,或是在IV之后才能Billing,都可以在IMG->中的Billing document去设置.IV也是.
一般要求对客户的AR和对供货商的AP应该在同一个会计期间一起作(我们的做法).这就要要求采购的人跟销售的人在沟通上要做得很好.
以上在SD和MM中的设置需要小心,否则将会出现帐目不能过到CO的情况,呵呵~~
julianyang
redgrass, 多交流！多交流！
那一大串英文来源于APICS的CPIM论坛，我今天早上刚收到这一则讨论drop shippment的邮件，里面特别谈到有2点：
1. we don't want our invoice to reach the customer before the component arrives from the supplier.
2. If the PO does get received, the component will sometimes linger in our system stock before someone notices that it should be allocated to the customer's sales order, then dispatched and invoiced.
Do u have any idea?
cipher
我前述的Oracle流程里可以很好的解决这两个问题
1. we don't want our invoice to reach the customer before the component arrives from the supplier.
仅当接到供应商的到货通知后，方在系统中作逻辑接收。而在未作逻辑接收时，无法对销售订单开票。
2.If the PO does get received, the component will sometimes linger in our system stock before someone notices that it should be allocated to the customer's sales order, then dispatched and invoiced.
逻辑接收后，系统自动作发出动作，其间为零时间差，同时系统要求在逻辑仓库做这类物料的接收，也不会对MRP运算造成影响。
logi
同意cipher的說法/做法。
redgrass
我前述的Oracle流程里可以很好的解决这两个问题
1. we don't want our invoice to reach the customer before the component arrives from the supplier.
仅当接到供应商的到货通知后，方在系统中作逻辑接收。而在未作逻辑接收时，无法对销售订单开票。
2.If the PO does get received, the component will sometimes linger in our system stock before someone notices that it should be allocated to the customer's sales order, then dispatched and invoiced.
逻辑接收后，系统自动作发出动作，其间为零时间差，同时系统要求在逻辑仓库做这类物料的接收，也不会对MRP运算造成影响。
[/quote]
对1 这是Billing 开立时点确认的问题: Third party 游戏规则要跟客户先谈好啊,Billing的动作可以在(1)建立SO后立即作,(2)供货商发货后通知我们(楼上的兄弟说的,但我们可以不作逻辑接收),(3)我们对供货商IV后,(4)客户收货后EDI给我们信息后 这四种情况开,根据输赢策略,3,4我们太吃亏,呵呵,而1对方不肯,中肯一点的是2啦,实际上Third party之交易方式多为EX Works,也符合此情况.
对2 楼上的兄弟说的观点在SAP的体现就是我们系统中作虚假的GR后立即触发对客户的PGI,这两个动作没有时间差:只是,需要问一句,有必要在系统做假进假出吗? ^^ [em17]
cipher
楼上，假进假出的目的仅仅是为了会计核算，因为在做采购订单时，做了Dr 应计应付 Cr 采购接收（或在徒采购）
销售发货时做了 Dr 销售成本 Cr 库存商品。 而在假进假出时做 Dr 采购接收 Cr 库存商品 来平帐。
redgrass
我的意思是沒有必要在系統中做假進假出~ ^^
|
|
