Question

Keeping Costing Structure Identical for all Sites (regardless of Manuf./Purch. Part)

  • 24 May 2023
  • 1 reply
  • 76 views

Badge +2

Our company has one manufacturing site that supplies all other [seven] sites using distribution orders. So, our main site (Site1) has a mix of [Inventory Part] Part Types of Manufactured and Purchased while the other sites (Site2-Site8) have all Part Type = Purchased Raw. 

We would like the cost structure of our inventory parts to be identical throughout all sites. Currently, Site1 uses Costing Template M-110 which breaks out cost into cost buckets 100, 200, and 221. Site2-Site8 uses costing template P-110 which accumulates all of the cost in bucket 110 (because these parts are “purchased”). Is is possible to make all 8 sites have the same [M110] cost structure that break the costs out into the three different buckets? (even though Site2-Site8 does not have product structures or routings in their sites...) 

Furthermore, we update all our part costs periodically. We plan to calculate the cost in Site1 (because this is where the product structures and routings exist) but then would like it copied to Site2-Site8. And not just the cost, but the we would like all the buckets to to be copied so the cost structure look identical in all eight sites. 

Thanks all for your feedback and suggestions.


1 reply

Userlevel 6
Badge +16

Hi @dtaranto,

You can make use of multi-site costing rule in the cost basic data. This will help you to get the cost from the demand site to supply site as per the default costing type define when you run cost calculation. If any change happens in the cost of the demand site, then these changes will be reflected in the supply site cost in the next calculation.

Please be mindful the you need to have the following setting for this to work

  • Multi-Site costing rule should be defined for the supply site
  • Multi-site planning should be checked in the supply for purchase part 
  • Cost template should be 150 in supply site

Hope this helps!!

Regards,

Mithun K V

Reply