Scheduling Order!

We can and do schedule with Vantage.
It is THE worst scheduler/capacity & method modeller I've ever had to deal with but it IS usable (& we achieve industry best customer service levels so our customers would back that up.)
To survive it, you have to minimize its ability to impact you (and keep your paradigms as simple as possible).
I would start with NOT forecasting out a year (you can honestly predict next year's conditions and needs down to a job detail level in this economy?!?) & minimizing the amount of work you are asking it to schedule to just what is necessary.
Same vein: Use Kanban processes where ever possible (reducing the scope of what you are asking it to schedule even further).
Forward schedule so assigned sched code priorities result in inuitively expected behavior.
Put a tight (BPM and/or customization enforced) activity & material transaction process (and then a solid job completion/closing process) so your schedules aren't junked up w/ hanging snippets of (systemic) incomplete OP load (that is physically completed: This will help your costing, shop management & inventory accuracy as well).
Or (as I responded before) if your company is not ready to do those things, adapt your existing excel tool to co-exist w/ Vantage until you ARE ready.
...I don't know what else to tell you. It is what it is & it is possible to minimize its weaknesses - but that will require some changes on the people process & company paradigm side (that would be smart to do anyway in all likelihood to make you more competitive).
Consider it (or throw up your hands and don't).
We knew when selecting Vantage it had an abysmal scheduler (but other things deemed as over-riding positives)... Maybe you didn't (but you stuck with it - so get creative & adapt to it).
Or don't (but then please don't ask.)
No magic bullets out there... PEOPLE executing well thought out, simple processes make companies successful - not ERP systems.
(The false lure & largely unfulfilled promises of ERP are best quickly mourned over upon that realization - their hand ful of benefits exploited, and there more numerous make-work abstacles & cost drivers minimized.)
Get on with it! Glad to offer more specific advice given more specific info.
I understand your frustration - but it can be overcome with rethinking of what you consider SOP process & rules.
Again: Glad to help if more info provided.
Rob Brown
--- Original Message ---
From:"Richard" <richard.larose@...>
Sent:Fri 8/6/10 2:38 pm
To:vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subj:[Vantage] Re: Scheduling Order !

"Are you loading out a year because actual customer requirments go out this far? OR is some/all of the 6-12 mo out loading some kind of forecasted (or Min+Safety MRP 'push') anticipated stock planning?"
=> We have forecasts and jobs go out this far.

Are you able to schedule with Vantage or not? Or do you know people they can ?

We have try many things and talk with many people (also with the master from Epicor - Stephen Gregory) and nobody show us that we can planned with Vantage...

But in fact, when I ask for scheduling at Epicor or to our local consultants nobody can tell us ONE compagny who use Vantage to schedule...

Rich

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, robertb_versa@... wrote:
>
> 1. Are you loading out a year because actual customer requirments go out this far? OR is some/all of the 6-12 mo out loading some kind of forecasted (or Min+Safety MRP 'push') anticipated stock planning?
>
> If stock needs anticipation planning, unless you need to drive vendors on materials that far out, your forecast will almost assuredly prove wrong that far out & you'll spend more time/energy constantly tweaking the planning of it (and working around the resulting not proven to be needed loads in your shop). Better to spend your energy on process improvement (equipment, tooling, kanban, skills training internally & flexible cost effective supplier agreements externally).
> If you must schedule that far out, at least consider rough cut (Vantage's if good enough or trick it into handling your own more applicable paradigm). There is virtually no value in deluding yourself that some detailed finite schedule a year out will ever be executed as currently scheduled. (Your just making an already weak scheduling system work harder & with more data elements for no realistic payoff.)
>
> 2. Big shock: Epicor sales made claims the reality of the product can't fulfill (nor likely ever will). Epicor isn't alone in this (just perhaps more willing to do ANYTHING than most to win a sale). Since a handful of big companies began gobbling up the wide array of small market system providers that existed 15-20 yrs ago (a handful of which actually had some pretty unique & effective products that handled portions of manufacturing business needs mcu better than others), all this code merging has resulted in lowest common denominator featured products (many of which aren't as good as top tier products from the 80's).
> As a result, they appeal to CEO's with buzzwords, CIO's with the alluring scent of the newest programming paradigm & db base, and younger middle managers (who have only a handful at most of experiences with multiple older systems) with shallow promises of productivity enabling modules (that rarely live up to the hype) -
> All based upon 15 yrs of market brain washing that ERP works & is a 'must have' to succeed (when the REALITY is that ERP rarely delivers & is a HUGE ongoing cost to be endured for the majority of small to mid-sized manufacturers).
> - Again: focus on quality, process improvement (which can neg
-We are on Vanatge 8 and we try to schedule with the global scheduling...

There is somebody who has results with the scheduling order? Our order (output done by the "Calculate Global Scehduling Order") has some trouble even if I play with the priority codes...

It's very difficult to set an order because there's many factors and we just turn around if we change the required dates, then the priority codes...

Best regards,

-Richard
The spread on the scheduling priority factors is pretty tight and if you
open it up too much you get unexpected results. We have ours vlow 80 -
low 90 - normal 100 - high 105 - vhigh 108 - immed 112. We find these
to work pretty good, though we are looking at futher tweaking to get
finer results based on zero level vs 3 to 4 indented level mom's based
on product code for us. We also use a BPM in conjunction with a UD
table to make mass updates to job priority codes.



Rob Bucek

Production Control Manager

PH: (715) 284-5376 ext 311

Mobile: (715)896-0590

FAX: (715)284-4084

<http://www.dsmfg.com/>

(Click the logo to view our site) <http://www.dsmfg.com/>





From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Richard
Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2010 8:03 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Scheduling Order !





-We are on Vanatge 8 and we try to schedule with the global
scheduling...

There is somebody who has results with the scheduling order? Our order
(output done by the "Calculate Global Scehduling Order") has some
trouble even if I play with the priority codes...

It's very difficult to set an order because there's many factors and we
just turn around if we change the required dates, then the priority
codes...

Best regards,

-Richard





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
What version release are you on? Safe to assume you're resources are predominantly finite?
Are you backward or predominantly forward scheduling? How often do you run Global?

--- Original Message ---
From:"Richard" <richard.larose@...>
Sent:Tue 8/3/10 9:05 am
To:vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subj:[Vantage] Scheduling Order !

-We are on Vanatge 8 and we try to schedule with the global scheduling...

There is somebody who has results with the scheduling order? Our order (output done by the "Calculate Global Scehduling Order") has some trouble even if I play with the priority codes...

It's very difficult to set an order because there's many factors and we just turn around if we change the required dates, then the priority codes...

Best regards,

-Richard
I don't want to hijack this topic, but Rob your sentence about mass updates to jobs caught my eye. I've been trying to think of ways to make easy mass updates to materials and/or operations on jobs. For instance there are 10 jobs created exactly the same and we need to delete and add a new material without doing it on each job individually. Does your BPM/UD table do something similar to that? Any ideas are welcome...

Thanks,
Aimee

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Rob Bucek" <rbucek@...> wrote:
>
> The spread on the scheduling priority factors is pretty tight and if you
> open it up too much you get unexpected results. We have ours vlow 80 -
> low 90 - normal 100 - high 105 - vhigh 108 - immed 112. We find these
> to work pretty good, though we are looking at futher tweaking to get
> finer results based on zero level vs 3 to 4 indented level mom's based
> on product code for us. We also use a BPM in conjunction with a UD
> table to make mass updates to job priority codes.
>
>
>
> Rob Bucek
>
> Production Control Manager
>
> PH: (715) 284-5376 ext 311
>
> Mobile: (715)896-0590
>
> FAX: (715)284-4084
>
> <http://www.dsmfg.com/>
>
> (Click the logo to view our site) <http://www.dsmfg.com/>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> Of Richard
> Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2010 8:03 AM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Vantage] Scheduling Order !
>
>
>
>
>
> -We are on Vanatge 8 and we try to schedule with the global
> scheduling...
>
> There is somebody who has results with the scheduling order? Our order
> (output done by the "Calculate Global Scehduling Order") has some
> trouble even if I play with the priority codes...
>
> It's very difficult to set an order because there's many factors and we
> just turn around if we change the required dates, then the priority
> codes...
>
> Best regards,
>
> -Richard
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
I would tackle that using service connect typically...assuming you do
not have access to SC, it is possible to do what you want through a BPM
using a BO-method call to delete and add new records. It would be a
fair chunk of 4gl coding to get it done. Your dataset could come from a
record(s) populated in a UD table for the purposes of updating your
jobs. This was a method that several of us learned how to do at that
advanced programming class. Think of it as a very simplified 4gl
version of service connect.



Rob Bucek

Production Control Manager

PH: (715) 284-5376 ext 311

Mobile: (715)896-0590

FAX: (715)284-4084

<http://www.dsmfg.com/>

(Click the logo to view our site) <http://www.dsmfg.com/>





From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of aimee.grebe
Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2010 12:54 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Scheduling Order !





I don't want to hijack this topic, but Rob your sentence about mass
updates to jobs caught my eye. I've been trying to think of ways to make
easy mass updates to materials and/or operations on jobs. For instance
there are 10 jobs created exactly the same and we need to delete and add
a new material without doing it on each job individually. Does your
BPM/UD table do something similar to that? Any ideas are welcome...

Thanks,
Aimee

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> , "Rob
Bucek" <rbucek@...> wrote:
>
> The spread on the scheduling priority factors is pretty tight and if
you
> open it up too much you get unexpected results. We have ours vlow 80 -
> low 90 - normal 100 - high 105 - vhigh 108 - immed 112. We find these
> to work pretty good, though we are looking at futher tweaking to get
> finer results based on zero level vs 3 to 4 indented level mom's based
> on product code for us. We also use a BPM in conjunction with a UD
> table to make mass updates to job priority codes.
>
>
>
> Rob Bucek
>
> Production Control Manager
>
> PH: (715) 284-5376 ext 311
>
> Mobile: (715)896-0590
>
> FAX: (715)284-4084
>
> <http://www.dsmfg.com/>
>
> (Click the logo to view our site) <http://www.dsmfg.com/>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf
> Of Richard
> Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2010 8:03 AM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Vantage] Scheduling Order !
>
>
>
>
>
> -We are on Vanatge 8 and we try to schedule with the global
> scheduling...
>
> There is somebody who has results with the scheduling order? Our order
> (output done by the "Calculate Global Scehduling Order") has some
> trouble even if I play with the priority codes...
>
> It's very difficult to set an order because there's many factors and
we
> just turn around if we change the required dates, then the priority
> codes...
>
> Best regards,
>
> -Richard
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Aimee

I have the exact same issue and would love the find a solution on that.
The users are very resent full to go over all jobs and make the same change.

Ephraim
Ephraim Feldman

-----Original Message-----
From: "aimee.grebe" <aimee.grebe@...>
Sender: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2010 17:54:20
To: <vantage@yahoogroups.com>
Reply-To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Scheduling Order !

I don't want to hijack this topic, but Rob your sentence about mass updates to jobs caught my eye. I've been trying to think of ways to make easy mass updates to materials and/or operations on jobs. For instance there are 10 jobs created exactly the same and we need to delete and add a new material without doing it on each job individually. Does your BPM/UD table do something similar to that? Any ideas are welcome...

Thanks,
Aimee

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Rob Bucek" <rbucek@...> wrote:
>
> The spread on the scheduling priority factors is pretty tight and if you
> open it up too much you get unexpected results. We have ours vlow 80 -
> low 90 - normal 100 - high 105 - vhigh 108 - immed 112. We find these
> to work pretty good, though we are looking at futher tweaking to get
> finer results based on zero level vs 3 to 4 indented level mom's based
> on product code for us. We also use a BPM in conjunction with a UD
> table to make mass updates to job priority codes.
>
>
>
> Rob Bucek
>
> Production Control Manager
>
> PH: (715) 284-5376 ext 311
>
> Mobile: (715)896-0590
>
> FAX: (715)284-4084
>
> <http://www.dsmfg.com/>
>
> (Click the logo to view our site) <http://www.dsmfg.com/>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> Of Richard
> Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2010 8:03 AM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Vantage] Scheduling Order !
>
>
>
>
>
> -We are on Vanatge 8 and we try to schedule with the global
> scheduling...
>
> There is somebody who has results with the scheduling order? Our order
> (output done by the "Calculate Global Scehduling Order") has some
> trouble even if I play with the priority codes...
>
> It's very difficult to set an order because there's many factors and we
> just turn around if we change the required dates, then the priority
> codes...
>
> Best regards,
>
> -Richard
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Ephraim,

My users are very resentful too. Due to time constraints, we are building parts before the engineering is complete so there will almost always be changes to our jobs. We are at the point where our planners won't even create the jobs to balance the supply they are ordering because they know they will have to change the jobs later. As you can imagine, this results in a huge mess.

I'm pretty new to SC and 4GL so this may be over my skill set but I do have a programming background so maybe I can figure it out. :)

Aimee

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, effgroups@... wrote:
>
> Aimee
>
> I have the exact same issue and would love the find a solution on that.
> The users are very resent full to go over all jobs and make the same change.
>
> Ephraim
> Ephraim Feldman
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "aimee.grebe" <aimee.grebe@...>
> Sender: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2010 17:54:20
> To: <vantage@yahoogroups.com>
> Reply-To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: Scheduling Order !
>
> I don't want to hijack this topic, but Rob your sentence about mass updates to jobs caught my eye. I've been trying to think of ways to make easy mass updates to materials and/or operations on jobs. For instance there are 10 jobs created exactly the same and we need to delete and add a new material without doing it on each job individually. Does your BPM/UD table do something similar to that? Any ideas are welcome...
>
> Thanks,
> Aimee
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Rob Bucek" <rbucek@> wrote:
> >
> > The spread on the scheduling priority factors is pretty tight and if you
> > open it up too much you get unexpected results. We have ours vlow 80 -
> > low 90 - normal 100 - high 105 - vhigh 108 - immed 112. We find these
> > to work pretty good, though we are looking at futher tweaking to get
> > finer results based on zero level vs 3 to 4 indented level mom's based
> > on product code for us. We also use a BPM in conjunction with a UD
> > table to make mass updates to job priority codes.
> >
> >
> >
> > Rob Bucek
> >
> > Production Control Manager
> >
> > PH: (715) 284-5376 ext 311
> >
> > Mobile: (715)896-0590
> >
> > FAX: (715)284-4084
> >
> > <http://www.dsmfg.com/>
> >
> > (Click the logo to view our site) <http://www.dsmfg.com/>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> > Of Richard
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2010 8:03 AM
> > To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [Vantage] Scheduling Order !
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -We are on Vanatge 8 and we try to schedule with the global
> > scheduling...
> >
> > There is somebody who has results with the scheduling order? Our order
> > (output done by the "Calculate Global Scehduling Order") has some
> > trouble even if I play with the priority codes...
> >
> > It's very difficult to set an order because there's many factors and we
> > just turn around if we change the required dates, then the priority
> > codes...
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > -Richard
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Hi Aimee

I guess I'm from the same background as you. I'm a programmer but new to VB and epicor. So I don't know how to do it. The problem we have is exact the same like yours where they don't bother anymore to change the jobs and it creates a mess where it comes to see the demand.

Ephraim
Ephraim Feldman

-----Original Message-----
From: "aimee.grebe" <aimee.grebe@...>
Sender: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2010 18:58:18
To: <vantage@yahoogroups.com>
Reply-To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Scheduling Order !

Ephraim,

My users are very resentful too. Due to time constraints, we are building parts before the engineering is complete so there will almost always be changes to our jobs. We are at the point where our planners won't even create the jobs to balance the supply they are ordering because they know they will have to change the jobs later. As you can imagine, this results in a huge mess.

I'm pretty new to SC and 4GL so this may be over my skill set but I do have a programming background so maybe I can figure it out. :)

Aimee

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, effgroups@... wrote:
>
> Aimee
>
> I have the exact same issue and would love the find a solution on that.
> The users are very resent full to go over all jobs and make the same change.
>
> Ephraim
> Ephraim Feldman
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "aimee.grebe" <aimee.grebe@...>
> Sender: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2010 17:54:20
> To: <vantage@yahoogroups.com>
> Reply-To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: Scheduling Order !
>
> I don't want to hijack this topic, but Rob your sentence about mass updates to jobs caught my eye. I've been trying to think of ways to make easy mass updates to materials and/or operations on jobs. For instance there are 10 jobs created exactly the same and we need to delete and add a new material without doing it on each job individually. Does your BPM/UD table do something similar to that? Any ideas are welcome...
>
> Thanks,
> Aimee
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Rob Bucek" <rbucek@> wrote:
> >
> > The spread on the scheduling priority factors is pretty tight and if you
> > open it up too much you get unexpected results. We have ours vlow 80 -
> > low 90 - normal 100 - high 105 - vhigh 108 - immed 112. We find these
> > to work pretty good, though we are looking at futher tweaking to get
> > finer results based on zero level vs 3 to 4 indented level mom's based
> > on product code for us. We also use a BPM in conjunction with a UD
> > table to make mass updates to job priority codes.
> >
> >
> >
> > Rob Bucek
> >
> > Production Control Manager
> >
> > PH: (715) 284-5376 ext 311
> >
> > Mobile: (715)896-0590
> >
> > FAX: (715)284-4084
> >
> > <http://www.dsmfg.com/>
> >
> > (Click the logo to view our site) <http://www.dsmfg.com/>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> > Of Richard
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2010 8:03 AM
> > To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [Vantage] Scheduling Order !
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -We are on Vanatge 8 and we try to schedule with the global
> > scheduling...
> >
> > There is somebody who has results with the scheduling order? Our order
> > (output done by the "Calculate Global Scehduling Order") has some
> > trouble even if I play with the priority codes...
> >
> > It's very difficult to set an order because there's many factors and we
> > just turn around if we change the required dates, then the priority
> > codes...
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > -Richard
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
-We are on 8.03.405A.

-I have some resources in finite / others infinite.

-Now we are backward.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, robertb_versa@... wrote:
>
> What version release are you on? Safe to assume you're resources are predominantly finite?
> Are you backward or predominantly forward scheduling? How often do you run Global?
>
> --- Original Message ---
> From:"Richard" <richard.larose@...>
> Sent:Tue 8/3/10 9:05 am
> To:vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subj:[Vantage] Scheduling Order !
>
> -We are on Vanatge 8 and we try to schedule with the global scheduling...
>
> There is somebody who has results with the scheduling order? Our order (output done by the "Calculate Global Scehduling Order") has some trouble even if I play with the priority codes...
>
> It's very difficult to set an order because there's many factors and we just turn around if we change the required dates, then the priority codes...
>
> Best regards,
>
> -Richard
>
405a (good!) Prior versions had a bug in the logic (it was using the as
scheduled Due Date versus the planner set ReqDueDate - so you could run it 20
times (w/ global follow) in a row and get 20 very different results).

Increasing Scheduling priority multipliers have a counter-intuitive effect on
backward scheduled (inherently JIT) jobs: The higher the priority, the more
likely they are to be scheduled JUST in time (and you may get lower priority
jobs sooner in a generally underutilized capacity environment). In an overloaded
finite capacity environment (backward scheduling), all jobs will tend to be late
to req'd due date - but the higher prioritized jobs should be less late.

Only with forward scheduling do increased priorities pretty linearly result in
sequencing you would expect from the higher priorities.

As a rule, unless you plan your jobs far in advance of actual demand, you
shouldn't be making a job for life of constantly tweaking req'd due dates. (Once
you set the plan, try to keep it stable.)


Priorities (multipliers used in Calc global scheduling order - multiplied by
Vantage's (overly) simple version of Critical Ratio (days early/late of a job
relative to all jobs) are an easier way to apply your customer service level
fulfillment rules to your (relatively stable) initial plan as conditions change,
conflicts arise & choices have to be made.

Rob's (the 'other one' /;o ) advice not to overly skew the multipliers you
assign scheduling codes is good advice. Play with a range of just enough
multipliers to assign to sched codes (so all queued up WIP doesn't all end up
with same priority) and skew them just enough to get about the sequencing you
want to see on any given day. (No scheduler will give you perfect scheduling...
Get it close as, in the end, managing the execution is what will make or break
you.)Â Â

Also: Make sure your infinite resources are never (or very rarely) bottlenecks
if you're scheduling part-rev-methods through mixed finite and infinite resource
multiple operations.


If your environment is one where you have a high (hundreds) of short lived WIP
jobs in process, consider automating prioritization (as Rob suggested). If you
only have a few dozen 'hot' jobs (that tend to be days/weeks in processing
duration), a good planner can handle it manually with ease.

Rob Brown



________________________________
From: Richard <richard.larose@...>
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, August 4, 2010 2:59:26 PM
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Scheduling Order !

Â
-We are on 8.03.405A.

-I have some resources in finite / others infinite.

-Now we are backward.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, robertb_versa@... wrote:
>
> What version release are you on? Safe to assume you're resources are
>predominantly finite?
> Are you backward or predominantly forward scheduling? How often do you run
>Global?
>
> --- Original Message ---
> From:"Richard" <richard.larose@...>
> Sent:Tue 8/3/10 9:05 am
> To:vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subj:[Vantage] Scheduling Order !
>
> -We are on Vanatge 8 and we try to schedule with the global scheduling...
>
> There is somebody who has results with the scheduling order? Our order (output
>done by the "Calculate Global Scehduling Order") has some trouble even if I play
>with the priority codes...
>
> It's very difficult to set an order because there's many factors and we just
>turn around if we change the required dates, then the priority codes...
>
> Best regards,
>
> -Richard
>







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
-Hi Rob

You confirm what I was thinking "The higher the priority, the more
likely they are to be scheduled JUST in time..." - That's my principal problem ! Before I realised how it works, I thought that the priority codes was made to set the order of all jobs (put a job before an other) not the order when the global will write and treat the job. With this logic, the system could put a job "A" before a job "B" even if the job "B" is more important !!!

If I undertands, with this logic, I must set the important job to a lower priority code...

"In an overloaded finite capacity environment (backward scheduling), all jobs will tend to be late to req'd due date - but the higher prioritized jobs should be less late." => We are kind of this environnement and I don't have this results...

We have a lot of jobs - about 800 - and all parts are custom with differents routings and we can not do only short scheduling because our bottlenecks (finite capacity) are constrains - most operations can be done by only one or two resources - and we have job for 1 year... Now we are scheduling with an Excel Sheet and we try to schedule with Vantage but the output is very bad. Like you say, most jobs are late but in fact (in our Excel) the are on time!

I put 5 priority codes with differents factors/multipliers (big gap between them). I make differents tests to realized that the lower factor is more important. Factor 100 vs 2 => a job with a priority code / factor 2 is schedule first!

Also, I try to keep my req'd date but the priority doesn't help me to set the order like I want and I can't work on anything else to do the right schedule...manually it's very long and difficult because
we have a lot of jobs with a lot of sub ass'y an op...

Are you able to set a good order with the calculte at your plant?

-Rich



--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, Robert Brown <robertb_versa@...> wrote:
>
> 405a (good!) Prior versions had a bug in the logic (it was using the as
> scheduled Due Date versus the planner set ReqDueDate - so you could run it 20
> times (w/ global follow) in a row and get 20 very different results).
>
> Increasing Scheduling priority multipliers have a counter-intuitive effect on
> backward scheduled (inherently JIT) jobs: The higher the priority, the more
> likely they are to be scheduled JUST in time (and you may get lower priority
> jobs sooner in a generally underutilized capacity environment). In an overloaded
> finite capacity environment (backward scheduling), all jobs will tend to be late
> to req'd due date - but the higher prioritized jobs should be less late.
>
> Only with forward scheduling do increased priorities pretty linearly result in
> sequencing you would expect from the higher priorities.
>
> As a rule, unless you plan your jobs far in advance of actual demand, you
> shouldn't be making a job for life of constantly tweaking req'd due dates. (Once
> you set the plan, try to keep it stable.)
>
>
> Priorities (multipliers used in Calc global scheduling order - multiplied by
> Vantage's (overly) simple version of Critical Ratio (days early/late of a job
> relative to all jobs) are an easier way to apply your customer service level
> fulfillment rules to your (relatively stable) initial plan as conditions change,
> conflicts arise & choices have to be made.
>
> Rob's (the 'other one' /;o ) advice not to overly skew the multipliers you
> assign scheduling codes is good advice. Play with a range of just enough
> multipliers to assign to sched codes (so all queued up WIP doesn't all end up
> with same priority) and skew them just enough to get about the sequencing you
> want to see on any given day. (No scheduler will give you perfect scheduling...
> Get it close as, in the end, managing the execution is what will make or break
> you.) ÂÂ
>
> Also: Make sure your infinite resources are never (or very rarely) bottlenecks
> if you're scheduling part-rev-methods through mixed finite and infinite resource
> multiple operations.
>
>
> If your environment is one where you have a high (hundreds) of short lived WIP
> jobs in process, consider automating prioritization (as Rob suggested). If you
> only have a few dozen 'hot' jobs (that tend to be days/weeks in processing
> duration), a good planner can handle it manually with ease.
>
> Rob Brown
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Richard <richard.larose@...>
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wed, August 4, 2010 2:59:26 PM
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: Scheduling Order !
>
> ÂÂ
> -We are on 8.03.405A.
>
> -I have some resources in finite / others infinite.
>
> -Now we are backward.
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, robertb_versa@ wrote:
> >
> > What version release are you on? Safe to assume you're resources are
> >predominantly finite?
> > Are you backward or predominantly forward scheduling? How often do you run
> >Global?
> >
> > --- Original Message ---
> > From:"Richard" <richard.larose@>
> > Sent:Tue 8/3/10 9:05 am
> > To:vantage@yahoogroups.com
> > Subj:[Vantage] Scheduling Order !
> >
> > -We are on Vanatge 8 and we try to schedule with the global scheduling...
> >
> > There is somebody who has results with the scheduling order? Our order (output
> >done by the "Calculate Global Scehduling Order") has some trouble even if I play
> >with the priority codes...
> >
> > It's very difficult to set an order because there's many factors and we just
> >turn around if we change the required dates, then the priority codes...
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > -Richard
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Our legacy system had a (far) superior scheduler, and all the 8.03.4xx releases we've been on (409a curently) have a global bug where where it randomly breaks the finish-to-start specified method sequencing of at least one OP on about 20pct of our jobs - but, in general, near term schedule sequencing thru critical resources is good enough.
We FORWARD schedule though (so applied sched code priorities have the desired, inuitively expected effect).
Backward scheduling was a nice JIT theory (30 yrs ago) that I've only been in 1 environment where it was applicable (and, like you, even with it I could get better, more realistic schedules using lotus 123 models).
We process about the same scale of jobs as you, constantly changing bottlenecks as product sales mix varies - only difference seems to be duration of our jobs (days to weeks - not up to a year).
Consider Fwd scheduling.
Question: If your home-grown excel sched process works so much better, why kill yourself to get Vantage to equal it (as it likely won't)?
Maybe better to focus on using Vantage to track activity (and hopefully driving realistic enough material req't dates to drive purchasing) and then extract status nightly via a BAQ export to drive/update your excel process?
(Companies feel obligated to try and use all of the ERP functions of the software/hardware/training they've made such a LARGE investment in.... Sometimes it is better to NOT use poor pieces of ERP if you have other, better methods... You just want to execute enough within ERP so that everything has basic data to tie all the modules together. Using junk apps is just cutting off your nose to spite your face - and not value-added (that a customer is willing to absorb the cost for)).
Rob

--- Original Message ---
From:"Richard" <richard.larose@...>
Sent:Thu 8/5/10 11:41 am
To:vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subj:[Vantage] Re: Scheduling Order !

-Hi Rob

You confirm what I was thinking "The higher the priority, the more
likely they are to be scheduled JUST in time..." - That's my principal problem ! Before I realised how it works, I thought that the priority codes was made to set the order of all jobs (put a job before an other) not the order when the global will write and treat the job. With this logic, the system could put a job "A" before a job "B" even if the job "B" is more important !!!

If I undertands, with this logic, I must set the important job to a lower priority code...

"In an overloaded finite capacity environment (backward scheduling), all jobs will tend to be late to req'd due date - but the higher prioritized jobs should be less late." => We are kind of this environnement and I don't have this results...

We have a lot of jobs - about 800 - and all parts are custom with differents routings and we can not do only short scheduling because our bottlenecks (finite capacity) are constrains - most operations can be done by only one or two resources - and we have job for 1 year... Now we are scheduling with an Excel Sheet and we try to schedule with Vantage but the output is very bad. Like you say, most jobs are late but in fact (in our Excel) the are on time!

I put 5 priority codes with differents factors/multipliers (big gap between them). I make differents tests to realized that the lower factor is more important. Factor 100 vs 2 => a job with a priority code / factor 2 is schedule first!

Also, I try to keep my req'd date but the priority doesn't help me to set the order like I want and I can't work on anything else to do the right schedule...manually it's very long and difficult because
we have a lot of jobs with a lot of sub ass'y an op...

Are you able to set a good order with the calculte at your plant?

-Rich



--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, Robert Brown <robertb_versa@...> wrote:
>
> 405a (good!) Prior versions had a bug in the logic (it was using the as
> scheduled Due Date versus the planner set ReqDueDate - so you could run it 20
> times (w/ global follow) in a row and get 20 very different results).
>
> Increasing Scheduling priority multipliers have a counter-intuitive effect on
> backward scheduled (inherently JIT) jobs: The higher the priority, the more
> likely they are to be scheduled JUST in time (and you may get lower priority
> jobs sooner in a generally underutilized capacity environment). In an overloaded
> finite capacity environment (backward scheduling), all jobs will tend to be late
> to req'd due date - but the higher prioritized jobs should be less late.
>
> Only with forward scheduling do increased priorities pretty linearly result in
> sequencing you would expect from the higher priorities.
>
> As a rule, unless you plan your jobs far in advance of actual demand, you
> shouldn't be making a job for life of constantly tweaking req'd due dates. (Once
> you set the plan, try to keep it stable.)
>
>
> Priorities (multipliers used in Calc global scheduling o
1. Only difference seems to be duration of our jobs (days to weeks - not up to a year)

=> Our jobs duration are variable. We have jobs need week and other 2/3/6 months. But our schedule is loaded for one year.

2. Question: If your home-grown excel sched process works so much better, why kill yourself to get Vantage to equal it (as it likely won't)? Maybe better to focus on using Vantage to track activity?

=> People from Epicor sold Vantage to us and said that we will be able to simulate and get better in planning with Vantage...and the direction have buy it first for that!

3. Maybe better to focus on using Vantage to track activity (and hopefully driving realistic enough material req't dates to drive purchasing) and then extract status nightly via a BAQ export to drive/update your excel process?

=> I like this idea. Can you give me more explications (of your idea) how to proceed and what kind of datas you will use to extract.

Regards,

Rich


--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, robertb_versa@... wrote:
>
> Our legacy system had a (far) superior scheduler, and all the 8.03.4xx releases we've been on (409a curently) have a global bug where where it randomly breaks the finish-to-start specified method sequencing of at least one OP on about 20pct of our jobs - but, in general, near term schedule sequencing thru critical resources is good enough.
> We FORWARD schedule though (so applied sched code priorities have the desired, inuitively expected effect).
> Backward scheduling was a nice JIT theory (30 yrs ago) that I've only been in 1 environment where it was applicable (and, like you, even with it I could get better, more realistic schedules using lotus 123 models).
> We process about the same scale of jobs as you, constantly changing bottlenecks as product sales mix varies - only difference seems to be duration of our jobs (days to weeks - not up to a year).
> Consider Fwd scheduling.
> Question: If your home-grown excel sched process works so much better, why kill yourself to get Vantage to equal it (as it likely won't)?
> Maybe better to focus on using Vantage to track activity (and hopefully driving realistic enough material req't dates to drive purchasing) and then extract status nightly via a BAQ export to drive/update your excel process?
> (Companies feel obligated to try and use all of the ERP functions of the software/hardware/training they've made such a LARGE investment in.... Sometimes it is better to NOT use poor pieces of ERP if you have other, better methods... You just want to execute enough within ERP so that everything has basic data to tie all the modules together. Using junk apps is just cutting off your nose to spite your face - and not value-added (that a customer is willing to absorb the cost for)).
> Rob
>
> --- Original Message ---
> From:"Richard" <richard.larose@...>
> Sent:Thu 8/5/10 11:41 am
> To:vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subj:[Vantage] Re: Scheduling Order !
>
> -Hi Rob
>
> You confirm what I was thinking "The higher the priority, the more
> likely they are to be scheduled JUST in time..." - That's my principal problem ! Before I realised how it works, I thought that the priority codes was made to set the order of all jobs (put a job before an other) not the order when the global will write and treat the job. With this logic, the system could put a job "A" before a job "B" even if the job "B" is more important !!!
>
> If I undertands, with this logic, I must set the important job to a lower priority code...
>
> "In an overloaded finite capacity environment (backward scheduling), all jobs will tend to be late to req'd due date - but the higher prioritized jobs should be less late." => We are kind of this environnement and I don't have this results...
>
> We have a lot of jobs - about 800 - and all parts are custom with differents routings and we can not do only short scheduling because our bottlenecks (finite capacity) are constrains - most operations can be done by only one or two resources - and we have job for 1 year... Now we are scheduling with an Excel Sheet and we try to schedule with Vantage but the output is very bad. Like you say, most jobs are late but in fact (in our Excel) the are on time!
>
> I put 5 priority codes with differents factors/multipliers (big gap between them). I make differents tests to realized that the lower factor is more important. Factor 100 vs 2 => a job with a priority code / factor 2 is schedule first!
>
> Also, I try to keep my req'd date but the priority doesn't help me to set the order like I want and I can't work on anything else to do the right schedule...manually it's very long and difficult because
> we have a lot of jobs with a lot of sub ass'y an op...
>
> Are you able to set a good order with the calculte at your plant?
>
> -Rich
>
>
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, Robert Brown <robertb_versa@> wrote:
> >
> > 405a (good!) Prior versions had a bug in the logic (it was using the as
> > scheduled Due Date versus the planner set ReqDueDate - so you could run it 20
> > times (w/ global follow) in a row and get 20 very different results).
> >
> > Increasing Scheduling priority multipliers have a counter-intuitive effect on
> > backward scheduled (inherently JIT) jobs: The higher the priority, the more
> > likely they are to be scheduled JUST in time (and you may get lower priority
> > jobs sooner in a generally underutilized capacity environment). In an overloaded
> > finite capacity environment (backward scheduling), all jobs will tend to be late
> > to req'd due date - but the higher prioritized jobs should be less late.
> >
> > Only with forward scheduling do increased priorities pretty linearly result in
> > sequencing you would expect from the higher priorities.
> >
> > As a rule, unless you plan your jobs far in advance of actual demand, you
> > shouldn't be making a job for life of constantly tweaking req'd due dates. (Once
> > you set the plan, try to keep it stable.)
> >
> >
> > Priorities (multipliers used in Calc global scheduling o
>
1. Are you loading out a year because actual customer requirments go out this far? OR is some/all of the 6-12 mo out loading some kind of forecasted (or Min+Safety MRP 'push') anticipated stock planning?

If stock needs anticipation planning, unless you need to drive vendors on materials that far out, your forecast will almost assuredly prove wrong that far out & you'll spend more time/energy constantly tweaking the planning of it (and working around the resulting not proven to be needed loads in your shop). Better to spend your energy on process improvement (equipment, tooling, kanban, skills training internally & flexible cost effective supplier agreements externally).
If you must schedule that far out, at least consider rough cut (Vantage's if good enough or trick it into handling your own more applicable paradigm). There is virtually no value in deluding yourself that some detailed finite schedule a year out will ever be executed as currently scheduled. (Your just making an already weak scheduling system work harder & with more data elements for no realistic payoff.)

2. Big shock: Epicor sales made claims the reality of the product can't fulfill (nor likely ever will). Epicor isn't alone in this (just perhaps more willing to do ANYTHING than most to win a sale). Since a handful of big companies began gobbling up the wide array of small market system providers that existed 15-20 yrs ago (a handful of which actually had some pretty unique & effective products that handled portions of manufacturing business needs mcu better than others), all this code merging has resulted in lowest common denominator featured products (many of which aren't as good as top tier products from the 80's).
As a result, they appeal to CEO's with buzzwords, CIO's with the alluring scent of the newest programming paradigm & db base, and younger middle managers (who have only a handful at most of experiences with multiple older systems) with shallow promises of productivity enabling modules (that rarely live up to the hype) -
All based upon 15 yrs of market brain washing that ERP works & is a 'must have' to succeed (when the REALITY is that ERP rarely delivers & is a HUGE ongoing cost to be endured for the majority of small to mid-sized manufacturers).
- Again: focus on quality, process improvement (which can negate the dependance on ERP when done right), employee skills & performance, product/market development & continuous cost reduction efforts & that time/cost investment will pay your company back 10-100 fold what any ERP money pit will. I'm not saying technology can't help (when applied in areas of true value: which are usually not as glamorous as kitchen sink ERP) - but 'help' is the key word... It isn't a magic wand & will only help more if your people, processes & strategies are improved.
Most $5M or less companies don't need ERP for planning/execution... I dare say most single site $25M companies could handle their financials on Quick Books Pro... (You get my drift.)

3. Start with your example: Your excel scheduling is better than Vantage's results - SO:

a. Set up you resource/capacity model & part production methods as bare bones simple as possible (mimicing as directly as possible the model & paradigms in your spread sheet). You want to be able to easily update your spreadsheet from Vantage (and update Vantage from your spreadsheet) & make it as easy as possible to do activity reporting (in a way that encourages accuracy & 'honest' reporting). You also want developed costs to be as realistic as possible & to drive purchasing effectively.

B. Be prepared to figure out the 'least worst' ways to achieve an acceptable balance of these things by spending the time to understand Vantages applications, data schemas & paradigms. Some you'll find are OK (or better than OK: example: You should do your inventory activities, sales entry and accounting on Vantage - but maybe NOT your scheduling, Quality & (perhaps) even purchasing & long term supplier mngt &/or swaths of your planning (perhaps you can go kanban faster than you dare imagined for example)).

C. Once armed with this understanding & plan (which you should be prepared to evolve as you go & gain experience & knwledge), set up nightly data extractions (SQL queries, BAQ exports) to use as sources to update your excel scheduling sheet with each job's latest progress/status. Similarly, once you tweaked your schedule plans, poke the results back into Vantage (DTS data updates, SC workflows... Whatever you can do) so users can see the plans and act on them within Vantage. You're not scheduling in Vantage and it should be sufficient & safe to update job head start & due dates as well as jobopr & jobopdtl status and start due dates from your spreadsheet data.
You're reporting labor & inventory actions in Vantag so they will update the jobs between Vantage to excel data updates, excel schedule tweaks & excel to Vantage data updates.

You will likely find over time that you will figure out how to model your business well enough (entirely in Vantage) and may then be able to abandon excel.

Until you do, why rush it
? It is difficult & often impossible to get rid of less than ideally conceived (initial false starts) business model data once it is established & referenced in activity records. (That often discourages companies from making changes as modern systems are so integrated, you become trapped by your initial decisions & set up assumptions.)

The vendors love this as it can be an incentive to undertake major upgrades (like 6.1 to 8.0, 8.0 to .4xx, .4xx to v9) - as it is an opportunity to change your model (since historical activity data detail isn't typically brought over to the new version platform db).

I guess the basic question you have to ask yourself(s) is when to cut your losses w/ your chosen ERP products 'features' & when to invest on tightly enough integrating old (better?) solutions to buy time for the software to (maybe) improve - and get back to focussing on your business success & growth.

My two (or more? /:o ) cents.

Rob Brown
--- Original Message ---
From:"Richard" <richard.larose@...>
Sent:Thu 8/5/10 1:58 pm
To:vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subj:[Vantage] Re: Scheduling Order !

1. Only difference seems to be duration of our jobs (days to weeks - not up to a year)

=> Our jobs duration are variable. We have jobs need week and other 2/3/6 months. But our schedule is loaded for one year.

2. Question: If your home-grown excel sched process works so much better, why kill yourself to get Vantage to equal it (as it likely won't)? Maybe better to focus on using Vantage to track activity?

=> People from Epicor sold Vantage to us and said that we will be able to simulate and get better in planning with Vantage...and the direction have buy it first for that!

3. Maybe better to focus on using Vantage to track activity (and hopefully driving realistic enough material req't dates to drive purchasing) and then extract status nightly via a BAQ export to drive/update your excel process?

=> I like this idea. Can you give me more explications (of your idea) how to proceed and what kind of datas you will use to extract.

Regards,

Rich


--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, robertb_versa@... wrote:
>
> Our legacy system had a (far) superior scheduler, and all the 8.03.4xx releases we've been on (409a curently) have a global bug where where it randomly breaks the finish-to-start specified method sequencing of at least one OP on about 20pct of our jobs - but, in general, near term schedule sequencing thru critical resources is good enough.
> We FORWARD schedule though (so applied sched code priorities have the desired, inuitively expected effect).
> Backward scheduling was a nice JIT theory (30 yrs ago) that I've only been in 1 environment where it was applicable (and, like you, even with it I could get better, more realistic schedules using lotus 123 models).
> We process about the same scale of jobs as you, constantly changing bottlenecks as product sales mix varies - only difference seems to be duration of our jobs (days to weeks - not up to a year).
> Consider Fwd scheduling.
> Question: If your home-grown excel sched process works so much better, why kill yourself to get Vantage to equal it (as it likely won't)?
> Maybe better to focus on using Vantage to track activity (and hopefully driving realistic enough material req't dates to drive purchasing) and then extract status nightly via a BAQ export to drive/update your excel process?
> (Companies feel obligated to try and use all of the ERP functions of the software/hardware/training they've made such a LARGE investment in.... Sometimes it is better to NOT use poor pieces of ERP if you have other, better methods... You just want to execute enough within ERP so that everything has basic data to tie all the modules together. Using junk apps is just cutting off your nose to spite your face - and not value-added (that a customer is willing to absorb the cost for)).
> Rob
>
> --- Original Message ---
> From:"Richard" <richard.larose@...>
> Sent:Thu 8/5/10 11:41 am
> To:vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subj:[Vantage] Re: Scheduling Order !
>
> -Hi Rob
>
> You confirm what I was thinking "The higher the priority, the more
> like
"Are you loading out a year because actual customer requirments go out this far? OR is some/all of the 6-12 mo out loading some kind of forecasted (or Min+Safety MRP 'push') anticipated stock planning?"
=> We have forecasts and jobs go out this far.

Are you able to schedule with Vantage or not? Or do you know people they can ?

We have try many things and talk with many people (also with the master from Epicor - Stephen Gregory) and nobody show us that we can planned with Vantage...

But in fact, when I ask for scheduling at Epicor or to our local consultants nobody can tell us ONE compagny who use Vantage to schedule...

Rich

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, robertb_versa@... wrote:
>
> 1. Are you loading out a year because actual customer requirments go out this far? OR is some/all of the 6-12 mo out loading some kind of forecasted (or Min+Safety MRP 'push') anticipated stock planning?
>
> If stock needs anticipation planning, unless you need to drive vendors on materials that far out, your forecast will almost assuredly prove wrong that far out & you'll spend more time/energy constantly tweaking the planning of it (and working around the resulting not proven to be needed loads in your shop). Better to spend your energy on process improvement (equipment, tooling, kanban, skills training internally & flexible cost effective supplier agreements externally).
> If you must schedule that far out, at least consider rough cut (Vantage's if good enough or trick it into handling your own more applicable paradigm). There is virtually no value in deluding yourself that some detailed finite schedule a year out will ever be executed as currently scheduled. (Your just making an already weak scheduling system work harder & with more data elements for no realistic payoff.)
>
> 2. Big shock: Epicor sales made claims the reality of the product can't fulfill (nor likely ever will). Epicor isn't alone in this (just perhaps more willing to do ANYTHING than most to win a sale). Since a handful of big companies began gobbling up the wide array of small market system providers that existed 15-20 yrs ago (a handful of which actually had some pretty unique & effective products that handled portions of manufacturing business needs mcu better than others), all this code merging has resulted in lowest common denominator featured products (many of which aren't as good as top tier products from the 80's).
> As a result, they appeal to CEO's with buzzwords, CIO's with the alluring scent of the newest programming paradigm & db base, and younger middle managers (who have only a handful at most of experiences with multiple older systems) with shallow promises of productivity enabling modules (that rarely live up to the hype) -
> All based upon 15 yrs of market brain washing that ERP works & is a 'must have' to succeed (when the REALITY is that ERP rarely delivers & is a HUGE ongoing cost to be endured for the majority of small to mid-sized manufacturers).
> - Again: focus on quality, process improvement (which can negate the dependance on ERP when done right), employee skills & performance, product/market development & continuous cost reduction efforts & that time/cost investment will pay your company back 10-100 fold what any ERP money pit will. I'm not saying technology can't help (when applied in areas of true value: which are usually not as glamorous as kitchen sink ERP) - but 'help' is the key word... It isn't a magic wand & will only help more if your people, processes & strategies are improved.
> Most $5M or less companies don't need ERP for planning/execution... I dare say most single site $25M companies could handle their financials on Quick Books Pro... (You get my drift.)
>
> 3. Start with your example: Your excel scheduling is better than Vantage's results - SO:
>
> a. Set up you resource/capacity model & part production methods as bare bones simple as possible (mimicing as directly as possible the model & paradigms in your spread sheet). You want to be able to easily update your spreadsheet from Vantage (and update Vantage from your spreadsheet) & make it as easy as possible to do activity reporting (in a way that encourages accuracy & 'honest' reporting). You also want developed costs to be as realistic as possible & to drive purchasing effectively.
>
> B. Be prepared to figure out the 'least worst' ways to achieve an acceptable balance of these things by spending the time to understand Vantages applications, data schemas & paradigms. Some you'll find are OK (or better than OK: example: You should do your inventory activities, sales entry and accounting on Vantage - but maybe NOT your scheduling, Quality & (perhaps) even purchasing & long term supplier mngt &/or swaths of your planning (perhaps you can go kanban faster than you dare imagined for example)).
>
> C. Once armed with this understanding & plan (which you should be prepared to evolve as you go & gain experience & knwledge), set up nightly data extractions (SQL queries, BAQ exports) to use as sources to update your excel scheduling sheet with each job's latest progress/status. Similarly, once you tweaked your schedule plans, poke the results back into Vantage (DTS data updates, SC workflows... Whatever you can do) so users can see the plans and act on them within Vantage. You're not scheduling in Vantage and it should be sufficient & safe to update job head start & due dates as well as jobopr & jobopdtl status and start due dates from your spreadsheet data.
> You're reporting labor & inventory actions in Vantag so they will update the jobs between Vantage to excel data updates, excel schedule tweaks & excel to Vantage data updates.
>
> You will likely find over time that you will figure out how to model your business well enough (entirely in Vantage) and may then be able to abandon excel.
>
> Until you do, why rush it
> ? It is difficult & often impossible to get rid of less than ideally conceived (initial false starts) business model data once it is established & referenced in activity records. (That often discourages companies from making changes as modern systems are so integrated, you become trapped by your initial decisions & set up assumptions.)
>
> The vendors love this as it can be an incentive to undertake major upgrades (like 6.1 to 8.0, 8.0 to .4xx, .4xx to v9) - as it is an opportunity to change your model (since historical activity data detail isn't typically brought over to the new version platform db).
>
> I guess the basic question you have to ask yourself(s) is when to cut your losses w/ your chosen ERP products 'features' & when to invest on tightly enough integrating old (better?) solutions to buy time for the software to (maybe) improve - and get back to focussing on your business success & growth.
>
> My two (or more? /:o ) cents.
>
> Rob Brown
> --- Original Message ---
> From:"Richard" <richard.larose@...>
> Sent:Thu 8/5/10 1:58 pm
> To:vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subj:[Vantage] Re: Scheduling Order !
>
> 1. Only difference seems to be duration of our jobs (days to weeks - not up to a year)
>
> => Our jobs duration are variable. We have jobs need week and other 2/3/6 months. But our schedule is loaded for one year.
>
> 2. Question: If your home-grown excel sched process works so much better, why kill yourself to get Vantage to equal it (as it likely won't)? Maybe better to focus on using Vantage to track activity?
>
> => People from Epicor sold Vantage to us and said that we will be able to simulate and get better in planning with Vantage...and the direction have buy it first for that!
>
> 3. Maybe better to focus on using Vantage to track activity (and hopefully driving realistic enough material req't dates to drive purchasing) and then extract status nightly via a BAQ export to drive/update your excel process?
>
> => I like this idea. Can you give me more explications (of your idea) how to proceed and what kind of datas you will use to extract.
>
> Regards,
>
> Rich
>
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, robertb_versa@ wrote:
> >
> > Our legacy system had a (far) superior scheduler, and all the 8.03.4xx releases we've been on (409a curently) have a global bug where where it randomly breaks the finish-to-start specified method sequencing of at least one OP on about 20pct of our jobs - but, in general, near term schedule sequencing thru critical resources is good enough.
> > We FORWARD schedule though (so applied sched code priorities have the desired, inuitively expected effect).
> > Backward scheduling was a nice JIT theory (30 yrs ago) that I've only been in 1 environment where it was applicable (and, like you, even with it I could get better, more realistic schedules using lotus 123 models).
> > We process about the same scale of jobs as you, constantly changing bottlenecks as product sales mix varies - only difference seems to be duration of our jobs (days to weeks - not up to a year).
> > Consider Fwd scheduling.
> > Question: If your home-grown excel sched process works so much better, why kill yourself to get Vantage to equal it (as it likely won't)?
> > Maybe better to focus on using Vantage to track activity (and hopefully driving realistic enough material req't dates to drive purchasing) and then extract status nightly via a BAQ export to drive/update your excel process?
> > (Companies feel obligated to try and use all of the ERP functions of the software/hardware/training they've made such a LARGE investment in.... Sometimes it is better to NOT use poor pieces of ERP if you have other, better methods... You just want to execute enough within ERP so that everything has basic data to tie all the modules together. Using junk apps is just cutting off your nose to spite your face - and not value-added (that a customer is willing to absorb the cost for)).
> > Rob
> >
> > --- Original Message ---
> > From:"Richard" <richard.larose@>
> > Sent:Thu 8/5/10 11:41 am
> > To:vantage@yahoogroups.com
> > Subj:[Vantage] Re: Scheduling Order !
> >
> > -Hi Rob
> >
> > You confirm what I was thinking "The higher the priority, the more
> > like
>