Hello,
I think in general matching level is considered (PO header, PO line, PO receipt reference) and all receipts available on given level will be matched with first invoice (I am not sure if there is any specific order invoices are fetched for matching).
From this point of view, using receipt reference (same code on receipt and invoice) could be the best idea to ensure precise matching. Anyway, invoices not properly matched should be verified regularly and manually adjusted.
No adequate update has received on the main question below via the topic and therefore planning to go-ahead with further technical investigation on identifying the matching priority.
“During this matching process how the matching priority is decided. Does the PO Receipt get match with the newest Invoice (based on invoice date or Voucher date) or does that get match with the oldest invoice? or does that happens randomly?”
Question still open.
If I am right, process is fetching invoices to match without any particular order.
Still this is an open issue if the application follows a matching priority when using function ‘Match Invoices with New PO Receipts’.
My answer is valid still: If I am right, process is fetching invoices to match without any particular order. And is matching ALL receipts with FIRST invoice found.
Hi,
I believe this is an uncommon question / concern. Not saying the concern is not valid - it is a valid question. Just not something that gets investigated on a frequent basis - I’ve been with IFS for a long time, and this is the first time for the question.
Usually my clients run the process a number of times per day. The question as to what invoice is matched first never comes up as ideally we only have 1 invoice at a time for a given data set. If we choose matching at a PO header then we hope / expect that only one invoice is unmatched for a given PO receipts value not previously matched. As an example assume a PO for 1000. Assume 100 was shipped, and received. 1 invoice for 100 entered in IFS would match successfully. Same occurs if the sequence is changed to 100 shipped, 100 invoiced (no matching) then 100 received, then matching job run. All is good.
But assume similar and still supplier matching is at the PO header, but 100, shipped, then 200 shipped, then invoice received is 100, then another invoice for 200, then the 100, and 200 are received. This will cause a matching issue as IFS will try to match 300 with the 100 invoice. Even if IFS tried to match the 200 first, we would still try and match the 300 receipt with the 200 invoice. In a supplier header matching this would be problematic for both invoices. “IF” this type of scenario is common for a given supplier we would typically recommend considering receipt reference matching. This matches the 100 invoice for ref 1 with the 100 receipt (with ref 1) and the 200 invoice with ref 2 with the 200 receipt (with ref 2).
In the above, it really does not matter the order of matching. It will either work or fail.
If we have numerous deliveries and numerous invoices for the same PO and timing is an issue where goods received / invoicing does not match, it should be questioned - is this the right matching selection, or are we using the same PO number far too often? Reusing the same PO number can be problematic for AP matching, especially when matching at the header and when the timing of invoice and receipts overlap.
Another commonly used option when we have frequent deliveries of a known quantity and price (meaning we trust the receipt quantity and we trust the PO price) is to use self-billing for a given supplier. I would never recommend self-billing when bad data is likely (bad receipt qty or bad PO price).
Based on the question, I assume you have a business issue (problem) your trying to solve. We may have other options to solve the issue.
Best regards,
Thomas
Thank you Thomas for very valuable input and useful information.
