Laura Cojan SUPPORT ENG

There is a scenario which would need to be considered to have it changed. Hierarchy is not taken into consideration during the calculation/approval and transfer step. In Time and Attendance, the calculation Is performed by a team leader or supervisor. A calculation group can be set up in order to be sure that the team leader/supervisor can view information about the workers in his/her team. However, the approval step is performed by a different person, the payroll administrator, for whom an approval group can be as well created. If the payroll administrator has approved, after thorough analysis the registrations, it is not desired that the team leader/ supervisor, would be able to override the approval, by undoing the calculation. By doing so, the team/leader, supervisor would go over the authority of the next manager in the hierarchy. Whenever a change would need to be made in the registration, before undoing the calculation, the change would need to be prior agreed with the next level manager. Currently this is not possible, as the system, allows the users to undo calculation.

The following scenario has been raised and should be considered subject to change: • Create a purchase order for item Y into warehouse X. • Receive the purchase order. • Crete a transfer order for item Y from warehouse X to warehouse Z. Both warehouses are warehouse-management-processes enabled. • In the transfer order header, select delivery terms that have the ‘Add transportation charges to orders’ parameter turned on. • Navigate to the load planning workbench and create a new load for the transfer order. • Click on ‘Rating and routing’ and open the rate route workbench. • Click on ‘Rate shop’ and make sure that at least one rate is returned without exceptions. • Select a rate and click ‘Assign’. • Reserve the inventory, release the load to the warehouse and perform all the transfer issue work. • Confirm the outbound shipment. • Although the following miscellaneous charges are set up, the transportation charges are not applied back to the transfer order line. The charges should be visible in the transfer order lines as these are visible in the purchase order lines. Currenlty the functionality is not as richly built in transfer order scenarios and many customer's would very much benefit from expanding this area.

After the production environment has been refreshed back to the UAT environment, an error message is triggered, stating "Record for id GUID not found", when trying to make us of document templates. Further reference to https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dynamics365/unified-operations/dev-itpro/office-integration/office-integration-troubleshooting?toc=/fin-and-ops/toc.json#troubleshooting-issues It is desired, that a less cumbersome solution is found, in order for the system to keep a reference and not be obliged to identify the templates which are needed and load the copies of these templates into the target environments.

Users may mistakenly add an ‘Accounting date’ for a period in a calendar year which does not exist. If this is the case, the purchase order will be blocked until the period in the first available year is opened for the Purchasing module. A check should be considered, to disallow users, to add an ‘Accounting date’ for a non-existing or close period.

For business processes using attachments on, both, Purchase order headers and Invoices, the current way the system is handling attachment is inconvenient, as in the frequent situation where, several invoices are posted against a purchase order and each invoice is having an attachment, having an/several attachments added to the purchase order header also, will cause confusion and difficulty in managing the information correctly, as in the Invoice journal (VendInvoiceJournal) form all attachments (from both Purchase order header and Invoice) are being displayed. Purchase order header attachments should not be visible from the Invoice journal (VendInvoiceJournal) form. This form should only display attachments added to the Invoice.

There are many business processes which do not require or cannot use direct delivery to perform the daily activities, this is why the below referenced scenario is highly impacting the business processes. When cancelling the deliver remainder on the original sales order, the chain is not synchronized as expected. Intercompany sales order and purchase order will still be open order. (this behavior has been investigated also via Issue 451633) An option should be considered to accommodate such a business process as well.

There are situations where customers, having particular business processes, are in need of posting deferred revenues on sales delivery for service items. With the current model, the system, is not allowing enabling the ‘Post to Deferred Revenue Account on Sales Delivery’ parameter on the Item model group, unless, the item is stocked. The feedback received is that the “Post to Deferred Revenue Account on Sales Delivery" should not be linked to “Stocked product" however it should depend on the moment when the ownership of the goods/services is transferred: in customer business scenario, the ownership of the services is transferred when posting a sales delivery. Many customers would benefit if a change in this area would be considered, which would then allow users to post the deferred revenues during the packing slip posting, in case non-stocked items are used.

We have the following scenario: When creating purchase requisitions, one can only create purchase requisition for yourself (as Requester) or for people that are attached via Procurement and sourcing > Setup > Policies > Purchase requisition permissions. This means that this functionality cannot be “disabled”, and so leading to the fact that purchase requisitions can be created by person A for anyone else in the organization. A preparer is responsible for a department for creating the purchase requisitions in D365F&O for the employees of the department as requester. He can only select the requesters if the setup of Purchase requisition permissions is completed. Each time a new employee enters the department his employee has to be linked as requester to the preparer before this new employee can be selected on the purchase requisitions. Because of the changes of employees in a department this takes a lot of time to maintain. The desire is to have the behavior to be standard and as such be able to define the “purchase requisition permissions” activation yes/no. In this way the limitation is disabled and the users with security permissions to create purchase requisition can select every employee of the company as a requester on the purchase requisition line.

There are customer business processes where there is a need to accommodate the following scenario: When copying a sales line which has a warehouse management enabled warehouse and a location added to the line, upon making use of the Copy sales order function, the system, will copy the Location as well, which will then disable the warehouse management processes. It is desired if either: 1. If the warehouse on the sales order line is WHS enabled, system should skip copying the location. or 2. To introduce a new parameter, in the Copy sales order form, to allow users deciding whether the location should be copied or not.

There are customer business processes, where receiving more than what was shipped in a transfer order is needed. I.e. In a feed mill scenario in which wight is being transferred from one warehouse to another. Before starting the process, the vehicle will be weighted and upon reaching the destination it will be weighted again. In this particular situation, the weight will never be the same due to factors i.e. like the trunk scales precision, weather conditions etc., which is influencing the increase or decreases the weight. At the present moment, the system will not allow posting a transfer order which is being over delivered. The system should consider similar scenarios as well, as many customers would be benefiting form this easier handling process.