Skip to main content

Hello,

 

We have an example as below and not sure the most appropriate solution.

  • Site A usually manufactures an item.
  • On occasion due to capacity it is purchased from site B
  • Site B is different company / site in IFS
  • Site A will send all materials for the job to Site B

Idea 1

The business is already familiar with using distribution orders. However, as the item is manufactured on site A most of the time, shop order requisitions are created. These can be converted to purchase requisitions, but not to a distribution order as far as I can tell? The only way to generate the distribution orders is to manually create or switch the part to ‘purchased’ as default?

 

Idea 2

A new concept to the business would be to use inter-site orders using the ‘send’ functionality. This would allow them to leave the part as manufactured and switch to purchase requisition, from which they can then send. We then get the PO/CO although we have to manage the sending when any changes occur. 

 

I’m unsure which is the most appropriate of the above. DO’s will be more simplistic, but inter-site will allow more independent control for the two sites (e.g. site B plan is not affected until they approve incoming order).

 

Regardless of their preferred method above, the next problem is the components for the part. As mentioned above, site A will always send to site B. To complicate matters further they often need to send more than is actually required (reels of material). Once MRP is run on Site B, they ultimately get a shop order req for the parent part, which is then converted to shop order . The SO structure contains all components and I was hoping to the reverse process an order from site B to site A for these. However, site B already has inventory for some components. How do I ensure a purchase order is created for all of the components on the shop order? Is this possible without the need to manually raise line-by-line? (their structures can have 20-30 items)

 

The fact materials are often over-shipped has got me thinking whether a combination of transport task, and availability controlled locations might be an appropriate solution. This would allow movement of the ‘actual’ stock sent and inventory to remain correct on both sites, but perhaps we can control the inventory at site B of the components and keep segregated / manually reserve and issue to the shop orders driven from site A.

 

Another thought is to create the structure on site B as a 1 line only, for example ‘components for part X’. This would avoid the inventory of site B components interfering with the demands from purchase orders from site A. We would always get a purchase order for  ‘components for part X’ when receiving the order. At site A end I thought this could maybe be a package part as they would not want to build a kit to send using shop order. The negatives are that the shop order on site B then loses the individual breakdown of components. We also have no real method for over-shipping.

 

Has anyone encountered a similar scenario? Any suggestions to simplify the process and/or find a method that provides accurate inventory at both end and full traceability to shipping/receipt?

 

Hi @LiamA , I hope I understood your situation clearly. 

Using the Send Orders, can you check the possibility of flow like below with the help of Supplier Material.

> At site A, you create the PO and add Components as Supplier Material or Component Customer order

> Above PO is an internal PO where the supplier is the internal suppler of site B.

> Now you release the PO and delivery the Components and Send Order to supply site

> An internal CO will be created at site B and in that CO you select the Supply Code as Shop Order. 

> Then a Shop Order will be created which users can process at B

Hi @LiamA , I hope I understood your situation clearly. 

Using the Send Orders, can you check the possibility of flow like below with the help of Supplier Material.

> At site A, you create the PO and add Components as Supplier Material or Component Customer order

> Above PO is an internal PO where the supplier is the internal suppler of site B.

> Now you release the PO and delivery the Components and Send Order to supply site

> An internal CO will be created at site B and in that CO you select the Supply Code as Shop Order. 

> Then a Shop Order will be created which users can process at B

Hi Vimukthi,

 

Thanks for the quick response. Supplier material is a current solution within the business. However, the problem in using this method is that site B needs to receive the components and this should be the material for their shop order. I do not think supplier material can create a PO for site B to receive the goods?

In that case, you can use a Component CO (instead Supplier Material) and manually peg the CO with a PO, cant you?

And regarding your idea 1, when the PR is created, you could use the internal supplier of site B which then an intersite flow will be created without changing the part type. This wont be a DO anymore, but making it integrate with your idea 2.

In that case, you can use a Component CO (instead Supplier Material) and manually peg the CO with a PO, cant you?

And regarding your idea 1, when the PR is created, you could use the internal supplier of site B which then an intersite flow will be created without changing the part type. This wont be a DO anymore, but making it integrate with your idea 2.

 

We can perhaps use pegging to peg the purchase order to the components on the shop order at site B. This would prevent site A components from consuming to site B demands). However, the purchase order will have to be manually entered unless there is some setting to automate the process. I was hoping we could automate some aspects of the order creation for component parts, but if we leave to MRP it will suggest to use the existing stock at site B.

Hi @LiamA,

While you are sending the raw material and receive the product from site B, may be you can define an outside workcenter on site A for site B. and on site B you can define the goods as customer owned, so the stock records will not mix up.

Just an idea, hope helps.

Terms & ConditionsCookie settings