Re: Multiple Units of measure for one item -- BPCS-L

Jose,

Thank you for the very detailed and constructive comments, I appreciate your
advice very much.

I have done more prototyping today and found out about the X-ref table
implications. As you described, this table does not help us at all since
it's only used to display or print customer information, but all
transactions still take place in the stocking U/M. So at the end, I am back
to my initial assumption which is that we'll probably have to deal with two
versions of the same product. In my tests, I placed a resupply order from
our Canadian plant to the US plant. Using the cross-reference table, the
item ordered in KG got replaced by the one in Pounds, which is what I
wanted. I picked, confirmed and billed as expected. however, when it was
time to receive the item into stock in Canada, the line showed up in Pounds.
Grrrr...

Now for your comments: there should not be any confusion to our customers,
because they will always order in Kilos. To them it does not matter if our
manufacturing process and stocking methods use Pounds in the US. All they
see on their orders and invoices are Kilos, because BPCS can handle that
pretty well. By the way we also bill them in CAD and EUR (don't ask :-)...)
and that works fine too.

At the end of the day, I don't see a good solution in BPCS to this problem.
One way may prove to be less painful than the other. I lean towards this
organization:
1. In Canada, all manufacturing will take place in Kilos. Items will carry a
suffix ".KG".
2. In Canada, I will create a separate warehouse for "Goods received in LB"
3. When resupplying Canada from the US (internal or external orders), all
orders will be taken in Kilos and automatically translated into Pounds for
US manufacturing and shipping.
4. Raw materials and finished goods shipped from the US will be received in
Canada under the "suffix-less" original item number. Local personnel will
have to use the "RD" transaction to redesignate the item into a ".KG" after
receipt, as well as "A" to adjust the quantity by a factor of  0.45. After
this, a "T" transaction will be applied to transfer goods into warehouses
managed in Kilos. That's 4 inventory transactions to receive into stock!
5. Canadian Bills of Materials will be in Kilos. Shipments from Canada will
be in Kilos.

I am still trying to figure out how our Canadian employees will Ship Confirm
a customer order taken in the US but shipped from Canada.

Regards,

    Fred Berger
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jose Torres" <jjtorres63@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <bpcs-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 7:02 PM
Subject: Re: Multiple Units of measure for one item


> Fred,
>
> To this day, I don't believe BPCS is able to stock the same item as
defined
> by a unique item number (or SKU) in multiple units of measure.  I have
been
> in contact with BPCS since version 1.0 on the AS/400 and don't believe
this
> is doable.
>
> Please consider the following points...
> A. The item master (INV100 - file IIM) only contains one (1) stocking unit
> of measure.
> B. Conversion factors on the same INV100 for purchasing, pricing, and
> default selling units of measure reffer back to that one stocking unit of
> measure via the respective conversion factor.
> C. The planning by facility does provide for multiple planning methods,
> policies, lot sizes, etc, etc., but still reffer back to INV100 for
stocking
> unit of measure.
> D. None of the inventory balance files (container, lot, location,
warehouse
> and item) carry the stocking unit of measure.  In order to handle
inventory
> movements, BPCS goes to the item master for the stocking unit of measure
and
> that is how it knows if it is dealing with EA, LP, KG, etc, etc.
> E. The bills of material maintenance program, and associated qantities
per,
> is based on the stocking unit of measures stored on the item master.
>
> The above is what comes to mind quickly...There may be others...
>
> The way I understand item x-reference works is that you specify this on a
> customer-by-customer basis. However, if you look at the order line (ECL)
> file, for example, you will see that there is an item x-reference field
> which is different than the normal (or your internal) item number.  BPCS
> will use the x-reference item for shipping/billing documentation and
> displaying it on screens, but NOT for inventory movements.  It only looks
at
> the internal item number for any inventory transactions.
>
> Your requirements of having multiple stocking units of measure for the
same
> item may be well justified based of the business practice differences that
> exist between the US and Canada (one of which is units of measure).
> However, you could be complicating matters for your customers and everyone
> that deals with inventories on either side of the border.  Maybe; maybe
not.
>
> For example...
> 1. Are you going to have a single product catalog for customers ?
Different
> item numbers for the same "stuff" would be confusing to most people.  On
the
> other hand, if you do have a single item number on the catalog, how are
your
> people going to know what their specific item number (in LB or KG) is ?
May
> need to implement some "suffix or prefix" scheme.
>
> 2. Will customers on either side of the border be able to order the
product
> from any plant ?  Again, the fact that you have more than one identifier
> will confuse things.
>
> 3. How about customer pricing and discounts ? If you have two products,
you
> can keep things separate but when it comes time to price changes and
things
> of the nature, complications again.
>
> 4. Do consider that this is not just at the finished good level. Quantity
> pers in the bill of material are going to be different so you will have to
> have different bills for the items in the different units of measure.
>
> 5. Of couse, because you will be duplicating items; some file sizes will
> pretty much duplicate.  This will make daily, monthly and yearly processes
> run slower.  People say disk space is cheap, but I rather keep my money
> invested than having to spend it on additional capacity.
>
> 6. Of course, I could not leave out what we get asked all the time by our
> senior executives.  How much of "that stuff" we sold ? Or, how many weeks
of
> inventory do we have ???  If you have different items to track the same
> finished good, you will always have to be adding things to come up with
the
> numbers.
>
> Most of the things above are minimal or insignificant when you look at
them
> individually.  However, put them together and they add quite a bid of
> "excess burden" to the people dealing with them.
>
> I hope this helps.
>
> Regards,
> Jose J. Torres - MS, CISA
> Phelps Dodge International Corporation