Customer’s finance team had noticed an issue on the GL Balance Analysis screen where the Attribute Selection fields are empty for Consolidated companies. The Attribute is a valid selection in the Business Reporter tool so we know there is an established relationship between the GL Balance set to the Reporting Entity. Please advice if it is a configuration issue from the customer’s end so that we can make the change in our system.
Please find screen captures of the issue below.
“Budget” will populate in Business Reporter without data.
Appreciate any clues to fix this.
Best Regards, Thanushi
Page 1 / 1
Did you try a LOV in that attribute. This is used to select the attribute used for the balance analysis.
See the example - In this I can use one attribute for example the OLD ACCOUNT where the IFS account can be shown next to the attribute values for the old accounts.
. Then you do your search and select the zoom in level.
The attributes defined for this use is found in the following screen.
Then the attribute values, then the value connection where you would connect new account to old account per this example.
Best regards,
Thomas
Hi @Thanushi Jayaweera
When it comes to GL Balance Analysis window, it assists users to query balances as per Attribute selection. An attribute is another way of grouping values and attribute values can be assigned to specific code part value from 'Code part Attributes' window. It could be further segregated from the Attribute value window ( RMB on code part attribute > Attribute value )
Therefore, User first has to select Attribute value and then press search/F3, and search a value to initiate Zoom-in to select information as required.
Please note, you will get records for balances only if the selected attribute is connected to any of the vouchers only.
Hi @Thomas Peterson and @Xavier Fernando ,
Thank you very much for information provided. However, the customer’s reported issue is on how to pull the attributes into the master company.
Not sure if this is known or not, so I'm including this just in case it may not be known. The consolidation process and the code part attributes are different functions. The consolidation process consolidates the code part values, and does not consolidate the attribute values. The attributes are a representation / grouping process of the code part values. The attributes / attribute values are not consolidated (they do not flow up the consolidation structure).
To see attributes / attribute values you would need to load the attributes into the master company (copy and paste for example).
The code part attributes (screen noted) are basic data items. They need to be copied / entered into the master company.
You can do this via the copy to company function or better yet via the data synchronization function.
Then you also need the attribute connections done. This also can be part of the data synchronization function.
The Code part attributes are additional data elements for grouping the code part values. These are not part of a group consolidation process, in other words we don’t consolidate the code part attribute values nor do they follow from company a to company B during a consolidation. You consolidate, and then if desired present the attributes and connected values from the master company. just like you would do at the subsidiary level. The master company can potentially have a different set of attributes and attribute values. These would not / may not be the same values at the subs.
For example assume a attribute for the ‘local account number and description. For example GL account 1000 cash. a local account could be 1900 cash. At a master company level we have no reason for a local account attribute so that local account attribute would not be set up at the master company. The attributes / attribute values do not flow with a consolidation.
Hope this helps.
Best regards,
Thomas
Hi Thomas,
I think your response is helpful. We would like to find out the following:
What information source are you using in the Master company to view Actual data and Attribute Values?
Our consolidated data (Master Company) view is: CONSOL_BALANCES_SECURED
Our local data view is: ACCOUNTING_BALANCE_AUTH
The question is, is there an organic process to connect Attribute Values to the view, CONSOL_BALANCES_SECURED?
If not, what is the actual process?
Thank you in advance.
Kun Peng
Hi,
It looks like we are moving away from the perceived topic where the issue reported was GL balance analysis and accounting code part attributes.
If we move away from GL balance analysis and look to the group consolidation (master company consolidated balances) this is very different. Group consolidation analysis does not share the same GL balance analysis functionality. I see no similar code part attribute functionality in group consolidation balance analysis for apps 10.
If this question / request for assistance is really for group consolidation - it may be helpful if a new request was created as you may get a different set of people looking into the inquiry.
The “local” data found in GL Balance Analysis can use the accounting code part attributes, as described, in the previous comments.
For CONSOL_BALANCES_SECURED I don’t see the same functionality with in the group consolidation balance analysis type screens. Business reporter may offer the ability to use attributes for group con reporting - I know it works for GL Balances. To be honest, I have not tested business reporter for group con balances using attributes. I no longer have Business reporter installed and can’t do any quick tests.
Best regards,
Thomas
Hi,
you are exactly right, the original question had nothing to do with GL Balance Analysis. My question is, is there functionality in IFS Apps to pull Attribute data into the Master Company like Balance Set. T
here is existing functionality in IFS to pull in the Balance Set information to the Master Company via Reporting Entities.
Is there any functionality to pull in the Attribute and Attribute Values to the Master Company?
Hi
@Thanushi Jayaweera
I’m thinking it may be best to set this as solved so people do not keep attempting to work on / make suggestions for this - as it’s not the real question. I see 95+ people have read through this posting. We have a new posting for the actual problem needing to be solved.
Best regards,
Thomas
Hi @Thomas Peterson ,
Thanks a lot for the information provided on this. I have provided this question on behalf of @VSCKPENG .
Could you kindly let us know if you have more information on the above query as well to provide a complete answer?
