Supplier Management

Get Involved. Join the Conversation.

Comments

  • MANISH S

    Hi Lisa,

    As a trail, try to delete and assign the same job roles (related to supplier master) to the users and then run synchronization process. Hope this error may resolve.

    Regards,

    Manish

  • 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,

    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

  • Dave Dengate

    Vince,

    I had to write a BI Publisher report which would bring back all Bank Accounts for a entered Sort Code. The SQL for the data model is :-

    select distinct 
      "IBY_EXT_BANK_ACCOUNTS_V"."BANK_NAME" as "BANK_NAME",
       "IBY_EXT_BANK_ACCOUNTS_V"."BANK_ACCOUNT_NUMBER" as "BANK_ACCOUNT_NUMBER",
      "IBY_EXT_BANK_ACCOUNTS_V"."BANK_ACCOUNT_NAME" as "BANK_ACCOUNT_NAME",
      "IBY_EXT_BANK_ACCOUNTS"."BANK_ACCOUNT_NUM" as "BANK_ACCOUNT_NUM"
     from "FUSION"."IBY_EXT_BANK_ACCOUNTS" "IBY_EXT_BANK_ACCOUNTS",
     "FUSION"."IBY_EXT_BANK_ACCOUNTS_V" "IBY_EXT_BANK_ACCOUNTS_V"
     where   "IBY_EXT_BANK_ACCOUNTS_V"."EXT_BANK_ACCOUNT_ID"="IBY_EXT_BANK_ACCOUNTS"."EXT_BANK_ACCOUNT_ID"
      and   "IBY_EXT_BANK_ACCOUNTS_V"."BANK_NAME" LIKE :Sort_Code

    Hope this helps
    Dave

  • Vince Knipp

    Dave,

    Did you ever find a solution to this issue?  I am having the same problem.

    Vince

     

  • 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,

    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

  • Lisa Webb

    I don't have access to the Supplier Area.  I have two users now who have seen this Aw, Snap page in Google Chrome browser while either trying to just get to the Supplier area or working in the Supplier area.  They both saw it today and have had no role changes today.  I'm trying to gather more specific details from them to help with opening an SR soon. 

  • Jim Van Tongerloo

    Hi Lisa,

    That is annoying, have you tried through the navigator (top left)?

    I've just did a quick check on my machine & supplier page on Chrome works just fine for me.

    Perhaps your user just received new roles and they were not synced yet?
    Just thinking out loud.

    ~Jim

  • Ramesh Radhakrishnan

    Thanks Sunny :-)

  • Sunny Todkari

    Voted for the idea :)

  • Ramesh Radhakrishnan

    Hi Piyush,

    Thanks for the clarification. This really helps!!

    Much appreciated.

    Thanks

    Ramesh

  • Ramesh Radhakrishnan

    Hi Piyush,

    Agreed. The suppliers will get confused when they register as they will not know what they are registering for. In you above comment you mentioned that "configure the entities as required/enabled or hidden depending upon business relationships,"

    Can you please point me where this can be configured for external supplier registration? 

    Thanks for the help!!

    Thanks

    Ramesh

  • Ramesh Radhakrishnan

    Hi Swami,

    Thanks for the explanation. I understand the business relationship status. But I was looking for the indicator between the two URL's where there is no indication if the supplier is registering for prospective or spend authorized expect in the address field there is option for Address purpose to indicate if its of Order / Remit to / RFQ-Bidding.

    So what I am asking is if the suppliers will have any kind of indication what they are registering for? Suppliers will have no clue on what they are registering.

    Thanks

    Ramesh

     

  • Ramesh Radhakrishnan

    Piyush,

    Thanks for the note.

    - Ramesh