There are costing and job impacts as to which one you choose. The
general idea is for "pull as assembly" is the sub-assembly is made on
the same job as the parent assembly. For "pull as material", it's
assumed that you have the sub-assembly made on a separate job and
sitting on the shelf ready to use.
For costing if it's not pull as assembly, it will pull as material in
the job. This will put 100% of the cost (Labor/Burden/Material/Sub
Cont/Material Burden) into the Material Cost WIP account rather than
full breakdown into separate accounts. I.e. you lose visibility of
the labor in your sub-assemblies at the parent level. Depending on
your process, this may or may not be a problem.
general idea is for "pull as assembly" is the sub-assembly is made on
the same job as the parent assembly. For "pull as material", it's
assumed that you have the sub-assembly made on a separate job and
sitting on the shelf ready to use.
For costing if it's not pull as assembly, it will pull as material in
the job. This will put 100% of the cost (Labor/Burden/Material/Sub
Cont/Material Burden) into the Material Cost WIP account rather than
full breakdown into separate accounts. I.e. you lose visibility of
the labor in your sub-assemblies at the parent level. Depending on
your process, this may or may not be a problem.
--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, Steven Gotschall <sgotschall@...> wrote:
>
> I have a question along the same lines. If I just check view as
assembly and NOT pull as assembly, does it affect anything other then
what is displayed in reports? Is there any downside to doing this?
>
>