Dynamics 365 Supply Chain Management

Report : "Calculation details for cost and price" - Multilevel details are missing

Product and version: Finance and Operations

PROBLEM

Report : "Calculation details for cost and price" - Multilevel details are missing

To be able to generate multilevel cost

.

Purchase requisition prepared by the worker has been approved by the correct manager in line with the correct hierarchy.

In the form "Purchase requisitions for all my reports" a manager should view only the PurchReq of his direct report.

On the contrary, we encountered an error since another manager can see the PurchReq of a worker who is not a worker of his team.

Digging deep, the current employee was once assigned to that manager in the past back in 2022

We have found a similar issue reported before in bug#967030

The workaround is to delete and adjust the data in the PURCHREQREQUISITIONERFILTER here we have 2 Main Columns ORIGINATOR (Manager), REQUISITIONER (Employee Reporting to Manager)

However, we are looking for a fix from Microsoft to adjust this as the mentioned above is only a workaround

Currently, when a sales order contains line items with mixed statuses, such as "Open order" and "Delivered" and the item price is updated, running the price recalculation job based on the "Open order" status still causes the system to recalculate prices for all lines within the order. This behavior is inefficient and may result in unintended price updates for already delivered lines.

The price recalculation logic should be improved to strictly apply the recalculation only to sales order lines that match the specified status filter.

The system currently does not allow the creation of a Discount Trade agreement based on Line Discount Group unless the desired Line Discount Group is already assigned to at least one customer.

The Price Engine, also, does not consider the Line Discount Group specified on the Sales Order, and instead defaults to the one assigned to the customer master record, limiting flexibility for exceptional cases (e.g. large sales, agreement for the specific order, etc), generating inconsistency with the D365 logic.

The system should:

• allow the creation of Discount Trade Agreement even if the Line Discount Group is not assigned to a customer
• restore consistency with the standard logic and consider the Line Discount Group at Sales Order level

For distribution and manufacturing companies that have inventory located in multiple physical warehouses, the ship to address of the customer order may dictate the ship from site/warehouse if the same product is stocked across multiple locations. For example if the same item is stocked in a warehouse in Mississippi and in Oregon, if a sales order is entered with a delivery address in Washington the stock in Oregon should be used to fulfill the requirement. A single customer could have multiple ship to addresses across the country so defaulting the site and warehouse at the customer level is not ideal. In current D365 the only way to accomplish this is to have a different customer for each delivery address.

Ideally the site and warehouse would default based upon the delivery address and not the customer.

The production order to release form (from Production Floor Management workspace) is based on material availability calculated according to master planning logic, working on dynamic master plan.

This is not working in contexts where production reservations are managed, and this is mandatory when WMS is implemented, where reservations for components are generated at production order Release.

Having reservations, this does not fit with the availability check procedure, because they are ignored. We can have cases where two production orders share some components and for some reasons the second one (in order of requirement dates) is considered fully feasible and, therefore, released. The shared component for the first order will be considered again available, regardless the reservation occurred.

This seems more a logical bug than an improvement idea.

In the BOM of an engineering change order (ECO): 

• I get an error message when I add a new circular reference, i.e. when I create a BOM line to add another version of the same item number. 
• However, I manage to modify an existing circular reference (created from the BOM of the engineering version), i.e. to modify the version of this same item number on the BOM line. 

In my opinion, this should be solved because it should be possible to create a second engineering version via ECO whose BOM contains the first engineering version of this same product (since in this case there will not yet be a circular reference to modify).

Reserved quantity in sales order line incorrect by using different sales unit

If an item is recorded in a different sales unit in a sales order and an automatic reservation is triggered, the value in the "Reserved Quantity" field will be calculated incorrectly - rounding differences obviously occur here.

b. This error occurs when the total quantity is reserved against several different item lots.

Reserved quantity in sales line incorrect with different sales unit:

Create an item with base UoM = pcs and alternate UoM = box. 1 box = 15 pcs.

Post three item journal lines for 38 pcs, 20 pcs, 2 pcs.

Create a sales order for 4 boxes.

Reserve

ERROR: Reserved Quantity = 3.99999

The current calculation is as follows:

38 pcs/15 = 2.53333 boxes (rounded to 5 digits)

20 pcs/15 = 1.33333 boxes

2 pcs/15 = 0.13333 boxes

That makes 60 pcs and 2.53333 + 1.33333 + 0.13333 = 3.99999 boxes.

Today it is not possible to see/change the asset when creating related work order.

A workaround is to create work order, delete line and add new line.

Is it possible to show/edit asset in the form when you're creating new related work order -> Less work

Currently, you can only add financial dimensions to the lines on the inventory movement journal. However, the inventory movement workflow editor only allows you to specify conditions based on the financial dimensions specified on the header.