Supplier Management

Get Involved. Join the Conversation.

Topic

    Arpan Chakrabarti
    Supplier Bank Account update
    Topic posted August 22, 2018 by Arpan ChakrabartiGreen Ribbon: 100+ Points, tagged Customization, Fusion, How-To, Payables, Supplier Creation, Supplier Profile Management, Supplier Registration, Supplier User Account 
    205 Views, 5 Comments
    Title:
    Supplier Bank Account update
    Summary:
    Letting Supplier create or update Bank Account at Site Level
    Content:

    Good Morning!

    Have a quick question and wanted to check if anyone had similar request from clients as this is the third time I am seeing this requirement. I know in Supplier Portal, Suppliers are only allowed to update records at header level. Which is fine, but one information which is Bank account has no relevance at header but Site. The question is can this be done or an enhancement request be created so that Supplier can select a BU and assign a Bank account to that BU on an ongoing basis using Supplier Portal. Currently Supplier adds a bank account it goes to header, and then the Vendor management team has to go and take that information and assign or create at the site level which seems redundant. Please share how you have tackled this in past and if you see a value in changing this particular feature ?

    Best,

    Arpan

    Comment

     

    • Piyush Singh

      Hi Arpan,

      When you say 'but one information which is Bank account has no relevance at header but Site.', can you help us understand as to why you think so?

      Thanks,

      Piyush

      • Arpan Chakrabarti

        Hi Piyush,

        This is a use case where the client has a diversified portfolio and has multiple BU's/LE's but shares the same supplier across and does business using different sites for the same Supplier. When the Supplier is creating or updating a Bank account meant for BU A there's no way for the supplier to flag that. On top of that all the Bank accounts now gets stored at Header level, post that the vendor Management team from the Buying company now have to take that information and assign to the correct site after calling the Supplier. Seems redundant when you have a self service model meant to reduce those administrative tasks.

        Hope the above helps!

    • Piyush Singh

      Hi Arpan,

      Thank you for sharing the use case. Your concern is that when suppliers create or update bank accounts meant for a specific BU, they cannot flag specific bank account meant for that BU. Do you really expect suppliers will have different bank accounts to take payments from different BUs? Say, buying organization configures 10 Business Units, will suppliers also provide 10 bank accounts for same supplier address (resulting into 10 sites for same address)? If you think this is possible, we would want to hear more on this use case. Like percentage of such suppliers, what is the organization structure of such suppliers etc.

      We understand and acknowledge that suppliers with different addresses can have different bank accounts, as the addresses are suppliers' physical locations and very likely will have their own bank accounts for the reason that they can be situated in different geographies (cities, states etc.). But we do not expect a majority of suppliers to provide different bank accounts for different BUs.

      Hope this clarifies.

      Thanks,

      Piyush

      • Arpan Chakrabarti

        Yup I get it Piyush, that's how it has been for ages. 2 Hitech client, 1 Industrial and 1 commercial is now asking for the same thing. If you take Grainger as an example, their business model is not centralized or any other vendor who is doing business in a decentralized way and has diff address and contacts, the will have dif bank a/c meant only for that Buying division. For ex Northeast vs Mid central or US vs China.

        And lets just say the above is not a compelling use case, purely from a process standpoint the flow seems redundant. If you have to take it from header and manually put it on Site every time, defeats the self service model and its purpose.

        Best,

    • Piyush Singh

      Hi Arpan,

      In your example, Northeast vs Mid central or US vs China will have different bank accounts - yes agree. Therefore, treat these as addresses and not sites.

      "And lets just say the above is not a compelling use case, purely from a process standpoint the flow seems redundant. If you have to take it from header and manually put it on Site every time, defeats the self service model and its purpose."

      As mentioned earlier, sites are internal concept and we do not think suppliers need to access sites through Portal and therefore no need for them to add bank accounts at site level. Bank accounts at Address level is more realistic configuration for suppliers to do and this is something we have on our roadmap for future enhancement in self service flow.

      Thanks,

      Piyush