General Ledger & Intercompany

Get Involved. Join the Conversation.

Topic

    gabriel kinovisques
    Chart of Accounts best PracticesAnswered
    Topic posted November 4, 2019 by gabriel kinovisquesRed Ribbon: 250+ Points, tagged General Ledger, Sample Reports, User Interface 
    81 Views, 3 Comments
    Title:
    Chart of Accounts best Practices
    Summary:
    Chart of Accounts best Practices
    Content:

    Hello :

    I think it is not an easy question, regarding the best practice to design a Chart of Accounts however I have one specific question regarding to setup the following structure :

    1.-Company (CO) ---Primary Balancing Segment

    2.-Cost Center (CC) ----Cost Center Segment

    3.-Account (ACCT) -----Natural Account Segment

    4.-Intercompany (IC) --- Intercompany Segment

    Now I have a question regarding to setup either Division (DIV) and assign the qualiafier called Location segment or Second Balancing Segment.

    What would be the benefit to setup the Division (DIV) or not, I thonk the best benefit is for Management Reporting for P&L mainly for Financial Report Studio.

    Thanks for your comments

    Regards

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Best Comment

    Krishnan Venkatachalam

    I am guessing Division refers to external reporting segments? There is nothing wrong in setting up a division.

    With regards to mapping it to Second Balancing Segment, I would not do that unless you really want TBs at that level. having a secondary balancing segments can cause complications in the following areas:
    - Consolidation systems don't react well to it. During elimination process in say HFM or FCCS since there is no "InterDivision" dimension it cannot eliminate transactions between the secondary balancing segments
    - When balancing the tranasctions (say Dr. and Cr. is same entity but a different secondary segment) it does not use the IC AP / AR account but clearing accounts

    I personally do not prefer to use a Secondary Balancing segment, we work around it using reporting strategies. I am sure the experts here will have a different opinion.

    I personally have not seen a location segment label. Where are you seeing this option? In the Manage Structures page?

    Regards,

    Comment

     

    • Krishnan Venkatachalam

      I am guessing Division refers to external reporting segments? There is nothing wrong in setting up a division.

      With regards to mapping it to Second Balancing Segment, I would not do that unless you really want TBs at that level. having a secondary balancing segments can cause complications in the following areas:
      - Consolidation systems don't react well to it. During elimination process in say HFM or FCCS since there is no "InterDivision" dimension it cannot eliminate transactions between the secondary balancing segments
      - When balancing the tranasctions (say Dr. and Cr. is same entity but a different secondary segment) it does not use the IC AP / AR account but clearing accounts

      I personally do not prefer to use a Secondary Balancing segment, we work around it using reporting strategies. I am sure the experts here will have a different opinion.

      I personally have not seen a location segment label. Where are you seeing this option? In the Manage Structures page?

      Regards,

    • gabriel kinovisques

      Hello :

      Thanks for your comments.

      We are planning to setup a segment called Location on the Chart of Accounts, however we have the Project Module setup as well, and we were told that we do not need the location segment value on the Chart of Accounts because in Project we assign an HR Location that have a GL Cost Center.

      Best Regards

       

       

       

      • Krishnan Venkatachalam

        The payroll module I believe is what does HR Departments to GL Cost centers. If your only intent to add location was purely Payroll related, I would not add it.

        For starters, I dont have a location dimension at my organization. That does not mean its incorrect to have one.

        Regards,