Sicon Known Issues

9711 – Work in Progress variance postings when Stock > Nominal Integration is turned off

Version Reported In

Sicon Manufacturing v.221.0.64

Detailed Description

When making partial bookings on a works order, the finished items built are booked in at a cost using the estimated total cost of the WO; i.e. if booking in 9 or 10 items on a WO, and estimated total cost of WO is £100, then the 9 finished items will be booked in at £10 each.

When making the final booking, the cost of the final item(s) being booked in is calculated as: (Actual Total WO Cost – Cost already booked in) / Quantity of finished items being booked in; i.e. if in above example the actual final cost of the WO was £95 – then final finished item would be booked in at (£95 – £90) / 1 = £5.

If this calculation results in a negative value then a) the final finished items are booked in at zero cost, and b) a “Book in Difference” nominal posting is made to ensure work in progress postings of this works order net to zero; i.e. if in above example the actual final cost of the WO was £75 – then final finished item would be booked in at (£75 – £90) / 1 = -£15. Since this gives a negative, item would be booked in at £0, and a journal for £15 between WIP and a WO variances NL code would be posted:

However, this should be overridden by the global stock setting for whether Stock should integration with Nominal:

If this setting is disabled, there should no nominal postings for works orders whatsoever.

This works for all but the Booking In Differences variance posting – this postings is still being made even in Stock>Nominal integration is turned off.

Impact: Low

  • Urgency | Ability to work not affected; inconvenient.
  • Impact | Single user affected.

Workaround

Setting the below two nominal code settings in Works Order Processing settings will ensure that both side of this posting go to the same nominal account – thus postings will still happen, but will have zero net effect.

Development Priority Voting

Please let us know your development priority for this Known Issue by providing us with a star rating based on the below;

  1. Not causing any problems – not a priority.
  2. It’s annoying, but not causing too many problems – not a priority.
  3. Would be nice to be fixed, but not essential – not a high priority.
  4. It would be helpful to have this fixed – fairly high priority.
  5. Really needs to be fixed as soon as possible – high priority.
0 - Development Priority Level
5 0%
4 0%
3 0%
2 0%
1 0%
5
Please Share Your Feedback
How Can We Improve This Article?
Contents