Evert Bos Technical Fellow

When creating an RFQ from a planned Purchase order, the user has no opportunity to enter site and warehouse.
When creating a manual RFQ these fields are there. With an RFQ created from a planned PO, one cannot access site and warehouse on the RFQ header. Result is that the generated PO has blank site and warehouse in the PO header. Idea is super simple: to avoid personalization of site and warehouse on the RFQ header (which is now the only way to survive this scenario) have the site and warehouse on the RFQ header be there. If I create a manual PO and I forget to put in site/warehouse on the create screen, I can do that later on the PO header. The same way it should be for the RFQ header. 

We need warning messages when the firming of a planned Purchase order did not use an existing Purchase Agreement so the resulting PO is not linked, against our expectations. - When two agreements exist for the same vendor in the same time period, this is a problem , the system always takes the first one, but you never hear an error message that two agreements for same vendor are competing. This should be just as strict as we have for date validity of BOM and Routing. - When the agreement exists but is exhausted, firming does not send any error or warning , it simply creates a stand alone PO in silence - When an agreement is date expired, there is no warning message either. Most PO's, the vast majority, are created through firming. Then we need a way to link an agreement to a PO after the fact. This is now impossible. You have to delete the PO and recreate it. This seems very crude. Given how easy things go wrong during firming, one really needs this after the fact linking.

It is very useful to be able to firm a planned PO to an existing one. But when I open that field "purchase order"on the planned order (supply tab), it should filter on the vendor of my planned PO. Right now it opens the entire PO list and one can easily make a mistake and buy something from another vendor then one intended. No warning message exists when you would make such a mistake. The functionality needs refinement 1- only display the PO's of the vendor that is mentioned on the planned order. 2 - when the planned order has no vendor, we would not firm it but suppose the user misses that. then we have no choice to show the entire PO list That is maybe sufficient . Small idea but big step forward for user friendiness

When firming a planned PO to a purchase agreement line, the system has no error messages if for some reason the purchase agreement line is not suitable to be linked to the PO. The system creates a stand alone PO without the user realizing it. The system should warn "Agreement line open quantity too low. ".

When firming a planned PO to a PUrchase agreement line, it would be very important that the buyer knows how much is still open quantity on the Agreement line. It should be visible in a fact box.

When firming to a PUrch agreement using planned PO's, it is not allowed to have two Agreements for the same vendor with the same item but the system never says so If you do have that situation, the second Agreement with the higher ID will forever be ignored. The same is true when you have two lines for the same item on the agreement. The system should warn the user when the same item appears in the same validity period either in the same agreement or in another agreement for the same vendor. The warning is exactly what you would see in the BOM.. when two BOM versions are defined in the same time period. This will prevent disappointed users who spent hours creating Purch agreements, organizing some as multiple agreements for the same vendor for certain business reasons, and they never get any error.

There are very few warning messages related to purchase agreements which leads to big problems.The warehouse. The warehouse on the Agreement is optional. Suppose a company wants to use it. Then by their own fault they expect a PUrchase order for a different warehouse to pick up this agreement. It will not do so but there is no error. The system should send red warning "Purchase agreement line exists for different warehouse".

Another example where the agreements fail in silence and there should be a message. I firm a planned PO expecting an Agreement to be linked, THe agreement happens to have open quantity but has expired. The system sends no error and simply ignores the agreement. A message is needed "Purchase Agreement line expired"

Purchase agreement lines have effective date. If I happen to firm a planned PO expecting it to be linked to an Agreement, and the agreement is not effective yet, the system should send a message "Purchase agreement line not effective yet".