There are four types of projects in Kinetic: Production, Project, Maintenance, and service and all use the same tables (JobHead, etc.) and all collect costs.
The way I understand Project Jobs is that there is a single Project Job attached to the main project. Then each Phase has an associated phase job. When we associated a sales order line, purchase order line, production job, labor entry, etc. with a Phase, the associated costs of those items are rolled into the associated phase jobs and up the work-breakdown-structure. You can also report labor directly to a Project job by adding an operation to the phase. I think of it as a layering over the other work. In separate tables, Kinetic keeps track of the revenue/cost recognized to date. This is why you donât have to close the jobs to recognize the costs. The trick is making sure you do the Build Project Analysis before running the recognition process. With a lot of open projects, it can be a PITA. I believe you should close production jobs when they are done collecting costs to flush out WIP. But, if youâre not making a part, thereâs no need for a production part. Just add labor to the phase jobs. We did that for our training and installation work.
Thatâs what I was trying yo recall Mark, does closing a job and then capturing WIP cause different journal entries than keeping it open and I think the answer is yes, yes closing the job and then capturing WIP causes different transactions than keeping it open, right?
Closing a production job flushes all costs and marks the WIPCleared to true. If the job is re-opened, you collect cost, and then close the job again. This time all the costs charged to the variance account and not cost of goods sold.
Revenue recognition removes cost from project jobs on a periodic basis. There is no need to close the job to recognize costs. I honestly donât know what happens if you do.
Closing the project closes the project job and will prevent any other associated jobs to be close, which is a PITA we are working through here.
In our jobs Man Var happens after the last quantity is moved to finished goods or shipped. Closing is not a factor in Man Var. We thought it was for a decade, but I have been in pursuit of reducing man var for fours years now and even a minute later on issuing material to an open job with 100% issued to finished goods is a variance.
So interestingly it ran 900+ projects and then it threw the same exact error we saw in production before.
Underliying provider failed to open
Somehow the act of opening / closing and posting jobs is causing something in the Db to just throw its hands up. So frustrating, if I run it again it works again⌠until it doesnât
So thatâs kind of what my original question back to you was, and I can understand⌠youâre trying to solve a pressing issue right now so me asking you a question to your question is not something you have time to answer right now. In fact, Iâd do the same if I were you, but now that we are back to this pointâŚ
I asked you a question about what you do when you get to this point, when you have a legitimate business process, youâve done absolutely everything possible to âstay within the boxâ, and I give TONS of props to you and your organization for pushing it this far and dealing with the limitations of the program, but knowing that this is an ongoing part of your business, a vital part of your business, do you start engaging with Epicor and having them build out some sort of enhancement or do you typically undertake it with SDK? Or what do you do when you get to these points with the system? Surely you have had these moments before, right?
If its a bug I use a phone a friend @Olga (or someone like that) and try to push but that only goes so far.
If its just a functionality we need that doesnât exist or doesnât work like we want we either write it it ourselves with the SDK, or we engage CSG.
CSG wrote an 1 million dollar customization for us for Commissions a few years ago, 25 tables and custom business objects including GL Wedges etc.
Thanks a ton for taking the time to answer that Jose, truly.
And hopefully nobody takes that out of context and thinks, âQuick, we need to customize!â cause I know you put it through the motions before moving to that solution⌠as the thread above shows.
Weâve tried a billion ways to get this to work without closing then jobs to no avail. I think is Projects are special or something. @Mark_Wonsil mentioned we need to run project analysis first perhaps? (Thatâs another monster process that wont even get out of bed with our volume we have a few million open projects)
You can run them one at a time though, and @Mark_Wonsil might be right. I would start with a single project and try running these processes to see if it does what you want. If it works, you can dig yourself out of the pile you are under and then set them up to run on a weekly basis.
