How are we supposed to maintain the Demand forecast if many users need to maintain demand lines based on different dimensions, such as Allocation key, Item number, Customer group, Customer account, Country/region etc.?
In AX 2012 R3 it is possibly to manipulate the Demand forecast in Excel using pivot tables and other Excel tools and purplish the changes back to AX.
This is not an option in Dynamics 365, it is possibly to export the forecast to Excel, but the manipulation tools and the possibility to purplish the changes back to Dynamics 365 no longer exists.
This Whitepaper shows from page 13 to 27, the possibility to manipulate the Demand forecast in AX 2012 R3:
How is it intended to be done in Dynamics 365?
Some installations have sensitive data stored in the database and have a requirement to report all users that have seen this data. E.g. if items are within a medical category the connection between customer and purchased items on a sales order could be considered 'sensitive'. We would love a feature to allow the system to log who and when this sensitive data have been viewed.
In Approve and Calculate, you have the option to choose to view "view 1 person, one week". This gives you a weekly overview of the hours from the employees in your approval/calculation group per week. This is the most efficient way to approve/calculate hours for employees.
After the 31st of December, the date filter in D365FO changes to start on week one in the new year by design. This means you cannot use this view to approve/calculate hours for last weeks in the previous calendar year. This leads to having to use the view "view entire group, 1 day" and filter on single days in the last weeks of the year, one by one day.
For companies with many employees, this is a very poor way to work, causing approvers of hours to work ineffectively. You should be able to filter on "year", so you can use the "view 1 person, one week" filter to approve/calculate hours for employees effeciently for the last weeks in the calendar year.
In request for quotation bid, it is possible to specify Lead time in order to have the delivery date calculated on the purchase line, instead of specifying a specific delivery date. Lead time in days is also included in the Compare request for quotation replies form. This is very useful in order to compare delivery terms from different vendors generally, instead of using a specific delivery date which is not always possible.
In addition to the Lead time field, there are in the same field group a field called Working days (checkbox). By design from Microsoft, this field is only supposed to be used in context with creating trade agreements from the RFQ reply.
As per now, the Lead time field will calculate the delivery time on the purchase line, unless a specific delivery date is specified on the RFQ bid line. No calendar is taken into consideration, and number of days are only counted as number of days regadless of working times.
It would be great if it could be included an option to specify Lead time (in days) as working days, both when setting the delivery time on the purchase order line, and in the Compare RFQ replies form.
Currently, payment plans are not working automatically in vendor invoice journals. It would be great when payment schedules stored in the vendor master automatically will be used when posting an vendor invoice journal.
One Voucher & Vendor Invoices split on several projects (or FA) must be considered as a scenario where "one Voucher" is allowed"One Voucher" is described with several scenarios that will be covered when "one voucher" is becoming obsolete - ex customer or vendor payments. But the accounting of how a Vendor Invoice where there are more than one project to be used, is not mentioned. This should/must be taken into consideration
Companies using Project Management & Accounting must be able to split the invoiceamount into several projects. One can not expect the Vendor to split invoices pr. project that are supposed to "share" the invoiceamount. They have not necessarily the knowledge of how their customer will do the accounting.
This is also a relevant scenario on Fixed Assets. Ex an invoice regarding 100 computers, where each and one of them are supposed to be separate assets.
The ability to split vendor invoices must kept for several sub-ledgers
AX print solution only through the Dynamics Document Routing Agent service that runs only on behalf of the technical user.
Сurrently in the D365 FO, printing of documents is performed through a service that is running under a technical account.
All users are printing documents under a single account technical user.
We need to fix the DRA in such a way as to personalize the print, so we need to identity an each employee when printing documents from D365.
The following error occurs when trying to view system directed work:
"Work Type Cycle counting is not supported."
My system directed mobile device menu item works fine if I only have a work class of cycle counting; however, when I add purchase orders, sales orders, etc. (to enable all types of work to be directed to the mobile device user), it fails when it gets to the cycle counting work. It appears that as work is being fed to the worker on the mobile device, if the first pieces of work are not cycle counting, the system lets you skip the work. Then when the system gets to the cycle count work that needs to be fed to the worker, this is when the error message appears.
For example, lets say the order being fed is as follows:
1. sales pick
2. purchase order putaway
3. cycle count
I can skip 1 and the system displays 2. When I try to skip 2, the system displays the error message (as it's trying to load 3).
No error message appears in the following scenarios, however:
1. If you actually do those first pieces of non-cycle count work (instead of skip).
2. If the cycle counting work is fed to the worker first, before any other type of work.
Table fields now have a GDPR property to indicate sensitivity of the data. A new feature in SSMS enables data masking. It would be great if the two features could be combined to either become part of the automated data refresh process from production to non production, or a separate LCS feature to give customers the option.
Currently when creating records through OData the ID will be autonumbered when the ID is left empty for all entities except customers. It would be great if the ID would autonumber for customers when importing through OData like all the other entities.