Comments
In fact, there are 4 ideas for the same "Statistical account budget":https://experience.dynamics.com/ideas/idea/?ideaid=3834388f-5904-f011-a4de-6045bdb53877https://experience.dynamics.com/ideas/idea/?ideaid=2be3fb4d-ee03-ef11-a73c-000d3a0dc541https://experience.dynamics.com/ideas/idea/?ideaid=acc0bbed-c9fe-ee11-a73c-6045bdb93e93And this one is the last that has been created. Please, search for your idea before create a new one:https://experience.dynamics.com/ideas/search-ideas/?q=budget%20statistical&forum=e288ef32-82ed-e611-8101-5065f38b21f1
I believe this idea can be considered a duplicate of this https://experience.dynamics.com/ideas/idea/?ideaid=3834388f-5904-f011-a4de-6045bdb53877 (sorry, I cannot enter it as a link, the system says "We have encounter some malicious input. Please remove that and try again"); I voted for both, but I would prefer that both be considered as one, grouping all the votes together.
Clarification: When a planner manually inserts a work order between two existing bookings on the schedule board, the system should automatically move the subsequent bookings forward in time to prevent overlap, while still respecting travel time calculations and working hours.This behavior is common in route-based service planning tools (e.g., Ortec Service Planning) and would significantly reduce manual adjustment effort for planners working with inspection or recurring field activities.The current schedule board protects existing bookings and does not resequence activities, which makes manual insertion of jobs inefficient in route-based planning scenarios.