Dirk Kemps Cegeka NV Business Application Consultant D365FO / D365

At current, from maintenance request, we can generate a work order job on a new work order.

From maintenance schedules, this can be done for one or more lines, combining the jobs on one new WO.

It would be great if we could indicate for these generations that the jobs should be added (with the proper validations of course) to an already existing work order.

This would cover the business case to easily bundle work when a work order was already generated and prepared, but an extra request pops up.

At current, resource requirements can be added to

• Maintenance job type
• Trade

It would be great if the framework could be extended to other levels to accomodate for better tuning; suggestions:

• Asset type (working on this type of asset requires a specific profile)
• Individual asset
• Job type variant
• Functional location (site requires certification)
• Added/Job type defaulted tools (working with a specific tool requires a specific profile)

At current, creating an asset loan on asset / maintenance request requires an asset of the same asset type (a truck for a truck in downtime and/or maintenance).

However, in some cases in reality the asset available for loan can be used, but is not from the same asset type (a car or van to drive (home) for a truck in downtime and/or maintenance).

Being able to extend this would help a lot.

Extra: in set up, we can set the same asset status for lending and returning: this should be blocked, as the process then fails completely (being able to lend assets already on loan, there is no difference).

Allow for the possibility of agreed coverage; high level:

• add covered assets to an agreement, apart from recurrence
• add conditions of coverage (free service, hours and/or materials covered based on incident types)
• add fee x covered assets

When integrating with asset management in F&O, a number of maintenance asset fields are added to the customer asset detail.

However, even when servicing real customer assets, a great deal of these fields can be important, especially when the business model is related to maintenance outsourcing or a deep service partnership.

And some fields are no-brainers (for example manufacturer-brand type/model-serial number).

So please integrate these fields and functionalities into the base model.

A lot of the logic in Asset Management is generic and is modelled with set up tables:

• Asset/Maintenance request/work order - type/state
• Job type (variant) - Trade
• Checklists and checklist items
• ...

This means most of the content-important information is not in labels, but in these setup codes/descriptions.

This is quite difficult in multi-lingual countries (Switzerland, Belgium, Canada, China, ...) and apart from that in maintenance where users in the same legal entity can have a different mother tongue (guest workers for example - see Hispanic workers in US, Central European workers in Europe, Asian workers in the Middle East). These technical profiles are not always deep multi lingual, so setting everybody to English or the legal entity language can make working in the application difficult to impossible.

As there exists a basic translation framework in D365FO, can it be extended to these AM setup tables (similar to items), so we can facilitate the multilingial use without a bi customization effort at every customer?

At current, setting the status of individual work order jobs is not possible.

Adding this ability, on the job and/or the schedule (where there is a status field) would allow for:

• individual job status management by technician (which can differ by job) and consultation by supervisor
• creating a basis for a later improvement to respect the "sequencing" of the jobs (EndStart, ...)

At current, there is a possibility, by Item Group, to automatically add Posted Item Journal lines to the Asset Item BOM.

This however does not work for Item Requirements, Purchase Orders, ...

Can the functionality be redirected to check for posted item transactions instead?

Buying an item can lead to (pending) asset.

It would be a great improvement if, by mapping, a number of data could be inherited from the purchase order line item:

• Asset type / Brand / Brand type
• Serial number
• attribute values (not same data structure but same functional level)
• warranty

At current we lack the possibility to use AM work order in WHS (and mobile) or to easily see WHS information from the work order.

This means there is no process-logical means of communication between WHS and AM staff in preparing maintenance related reservations.