Field Service Management (FSM) & Planning and Scheduling Optimization (PSO)

Hi Experts,We have few requirements from customer related to performance test.Appointment Booking in bulk Bulk load of activities to PSO around 15k activities per dataset. How PSO will behave after the bulk load PSO Workbench screen refresh if the Gantt has maximum data.My question:Do we have any Performance tools compatible to IFS Cloud we can use? In our last project we used JMeter for performance test of Appointment booking request. Any IFS Standard tool being used for performance testing.Could you please suggest as this is critical for UAT signoff.Any guidance will helps a lot.Regards,RRP

If you have to do several tasks for one customer, it would be nice if you only had to ask for one signature from the customer at the end, so that all service reports are signed. For example, a signature on the last service report and this is transferred to all service requests that were generated for a customer on this day. Thanks Markus Kühnl

Can someone show me where/how to define activities for MSO? 

We are using PSO 6.16.0.61 with FSM Smartclient. We deploy distribution (delivery) drivers as well as technicians to customer locations. Only technicians are being scheduled in PSO. All active technicians have assigned shifts in PSO and are in rotas. However there are times when technicians are driving delivery trucks (random days) on days when they also have their normal tech shifts in the PSO rota - as desired, they aren’t getting any service work because the truck selection they make at logon via mobile to FSM relates to a non-tech skill (techs must have the appropriate technician truck skills in order to get work assigned through PSO).The problem is that in the scenario above the team that oversees review of the PSO Scheduling Resource Gantt just sees technicians with schedulable shifts, logons and logoffs, but no assigned work when the tech is driving a delivery truck (since delivery work not assigned through PSO without appropriate truck skill).What is a good way to change the vi

Hello everyone,we have a customer using PSO Standalone (version 6.16.0.71).Orders are created in an external source system and then transferred to PSO via an interface.Requirement:Some orders are created once (e.g., for a full month), but need to be executed daily for a short duration (e.g., 10 minutes).We are currently using Dynamic Scheduling.In Cyclic Scheduling, we noticed that activities can be defined as “Repeatable”, which is exactly the type of functionality we would need in Dynamic Scheduling.However, we are facing the following limitations:Activities in Cyclic Scheduling are not flexible to adjust or modify Dynamic Scheduling does not provide an equivalent standard feature for recurring activitiesQuestion:Has anyone implemented a similar scenario?Is there a recommended approach or best practice to handle daily recurring activities in Dynamic Scheduling?Thanks in advance!

Hello, For our customer, we would like to connect multiple service organisations (around 15-20) to a dataset. Apart from the normal sizing recommendations, can this have an impact on PSO performance? Thank you very much,Iulia

We have a business rule that is running twice resulting in duplicate records in the task table. Do you know what could possibly be causing this?  and there is no biplicate brs configured please any one suggest why  duplicate records are creating ?  Execution point: After commit update. xml message xml:<perform_batch><update_task><task><task_id /><access_group>NO_CMR_STC_HQ_EMC_RECEIVE_SHIP</access_group><description>Faulty Spare Repair Return EMC Receiving shipping task</description><parent_task_id>@task_id</parent_task_id><place_id_cust>@place_id_cust</place_id_cust><plan_start_dttm>@modified_dttm</plan_start_dttm><request_id>@request_id</request_id><task_status>OPEN</task_status><task_type>FAULTY_SP_REPAIR_N_RETURN_EMC_RS</task_type><insert is_initialized="False" /></task></update_task></perform_batch> XML validation:<hierarchy_select>&

We are facing an Issue where activities coming in to PSO are getting an Override Duration of 99 Hours by Default.The field is not part of the order in IFS cloud.Can anyone help with how this field is getting set, This seems to be only there for a partivular activity type,so is this inherited from an Activity type or somewhere else. 

We are on IFS Cloud 25R1 and the Condition Generation is creating new PM work orders before the accumulated quantity meets the interval specified on the PM Action.Anybody know what might be causing this?

Hi, I’m running into some difficulties when trying to enter a No Part Material Requisition Line on a Work Task in 25R2. I get an error when trying to save the Req Line which my Technical team have looked into and advised “In IFS Cloud Core code itself, the No Part Description has been set to exclude from the form if the header has a Work Order Number” .I’d like confirmation that a user should be able to raise a No Part Material Requisition Line on a Work Task that in turn will be connected to a No Part Purchase Requisition Line as standard and OOTB. I was surprised during testing that I couldn’t do this due to an error message and even more surprised at the technical investigation findings of this.High Level Steps I’m following:From Work Task screen create a new Material Req Line  Send Type = Supplier (Supply Code will auto change to Purchase Order) Enter Quantity - 1  Enter UOM -  * Select Save - (needs to be done as the No Part Description field is not visible on the screen but is vi

Hi Experts.When I created a Request, I notice that some Tasks are transferred to PSO with the status "DO NOT Schedule" immediately after creation. However, this does not happen for all Tasks—only for some of them.  I have also verified that the "Manually Schedule" flag is not set to TRUE for these Tasks.  I still can see these tasks in PSO as Do not Schedule. As I noted this only happens for tasks having Dependncies only.Question is how we can setup is so all NEW tasks appear in PSO in as  "DO NOT Schedule" activities? I cannot find the exact toggle or an option that it will do the as above for all Tasks but not just for few? ThanksKM  

Good DayI have a client that has Request Tasks spanning a week to 3 weeks on average and while testing the “Transfer to Mobile” feature of Dispatch Console I notice: 1) the multi-visits are only created after pressing the “Transfer to Mobile” button and 2) only the first visit is sent to the technician’s mobile device. Is there a way to transfer all the multi-visits to the technician from the initial command or will the dispatcher have to enter each visit to transfer them?  

Hi Experts  I need some help in figuring out how the License Admin in FSM6 gets the Value of In Use and Available for Named Licenses. Is there a specific logic and which tables gets this value?  Thank you in Advance.  Best Regards Widy

Hi Experts,I was wondering if there is a way to manage standard tasks revisions in NGSM solution. As of at 25R2 and 26R1 I was unable to find any as such. In previous work order solution, task templates have this capability. This is a very crucial business requirement whoever using standard tasks in their business as updating any changes on revisions in all over the system manually is a tedious task,  unless a quite complex CRIM is build.Any workarounds or plans to get this functionality into the core pls ?Thank you,Roshan  

Hi Experts,Could someone provide us the API to getting the Resource Skill from PSO directly using the RESTFulGateway/Api.The API I found in interface guide on give few information about the resource but not the Resource Skills and Resource Skill Availabilityhttps://MyHost/IFSSchedulingRESTfulGateway/api/v1/scheduling/resource?datasetId=Default&resourceId=1000&includeOutput=trueCould you please help in finding the correct APIRegards,RRP

Hello, If I make manual changes to an activity in PSO, is it possible to see who made the changes? I have found this information in the documentation and it seems like it would be possible.I have enabled the parameter ReasonRequired and now I must give a reason each time I make a change to an activity, but in the History Tab I still cannot see information about who made the changes or the reason. Should I look somewhere else or is there another parameter for that? Thank you very much,Iulia

Hi Team, We are currently using FSM Update 25 and we have noticed that the service visit history report comes in Landscape format instead of portrait can anyone confirm if this is FSM new feature. Thanks,Vikrant Singh.

Hi All, We use PSO for manual scheduling. I have an issue with manually committing an activity to a resource in PSO. I want to commit an activity as shown below. 67 to Technician. The activity duration is less than the half of the shift time.  When I dragged and drop an activity to the start of shift in the PSO gannt, the activity is in the begining of the shift. But still processing. Then after few seconds, the activity it is pushed towards after the break.  Can you provide any reason for this behavior? We are using manual process type dataset since we want to schedule activities manually. TIA.

This is a great change, see here: https://docs.ifs.com/pso/user-guide/

A. What is your idea?1) ClassificationChoose ONE: keep the applicable option and delete the rest.Opportunity for improvement2) Brief descriptionWhat happened, what is missing, or what could be better? Focus on the problem or opportunity (not the solution).Write here:The PSO Reporting data tables don’t include the reason or reason value on Activity Status updates, if this was included then reports could be produced on users who have made manual changes such as fixing an activity to a resource or updating the status of an activity.B. Context and scope1) Who is affected?Choose ONE or MORE: keep the applicable options and delete the rest.Internal users Customers Partners2) FrequencyChoose ONE: keep the applicable option and delete the rest.FrequentlyC. Value and impact1) What is the business outcome?Choose ONE or MORE: keep the applicable options and delete the rest.Improves productivity or efficiency Reduces cost or manual effort Enhances user experience Enables new capability2) Impact sc

Hi everyone,have you ever encountered a scenario where a mobile warehouse (a physical van/truck), managed in IFS as a Remote Warehouse, is temporarily moved from one site to another? How did you manage that situation?In my case, I have:one company two sites two central warehouses (one per site) multiple vans, each modeled in IFS as Remote Warehouses (mobile stock physically on trucks)Service requests are opened for specific service organizations, which procure materials from a given site. However, vans may move between sites.This creates an issue:the demand on the task is linked to Site A, but the van (i.e. the mobile/remote warehouse physically carrying the stock) is currently operating under Site B.In addition, the technician is driving the van and executes the work using the IFS mobile app, consuming materials directly from the VAN (Remote Warehouse).This raises two key questions:how should material reservation be managed in this cross-site scenario? how should execution/consumption

 Our centralized invoicing / e-invoicing is handled by 3rd party software.Some of the invoices are Rejected and we are having trouble correcting them because we are unable to “Undo Customer Order Delivery” where the supply code is “Service Order”.  We can’t complete the invoice because the CI (e-invoice) software uses an API call to approve the invoice and the invoice cannot be manually approve from within IFS.  So the invoice remains in limbo. Please see screenshot and fault message below.  The ideal solution for Crown would be to cancel the preliminary invoice tied to the e-invoice, undo the delivery and cancel the customer order so that we can go back to the service request and make the necessary corrections. Are any provisions being made to permit “Undo Customer Order Delivery” where the supply code is set to service order in future releases of IFS?  We are on version 24R2. As an unsustainable work around, we are cancelling the preliminary invoice, updating the invoice customer on

I have a list of questions, and for each question there are 2 answers:  either “Yes” or “Suspend Survey”.  If at any point the user chooses suspend survey, I want to go to sub-survey 202.  However in our current desktop version 6.35 it does not allow me to go to a sub-survey without completing all of the main survey first.Also, I tried checking ‘follow up’, but there doesn’t appear to be any way for me to configure a follow up action.

We are analyzing the behavior of the “Include Structure” option in IFS Cloud, specifically in the following pages:New Miscellaneous Resource Allocation New Resource Relocation Generate Resource Schedules and CapacityDuring validation, we observed that enabling or disabling the “Include Structure” option changes the selection results and the number of records displayed in subsequent steps. However, the exact filtering logic and scope of this option are not clearly understood.IFS confirmed that this behavior is due to hierarchical expansion when “Include Structure” is enabled; however, detailed logic and scope remain unclear in these scenarios.Clarifications Required Hierarchy Definition How is the hierarchy derived when this option is enabled? What relationships are considered (e.g., parent-child resources, teams, organizational structure)? Behavior with Single Resource Selection In pages like Generate Resource Schedules and Capacity, where typically only a single resource is selecte