ISTech Support Forum

ISTech Support Forum
http://www.istechforum.com/YaBB.pl
Evo-ERP and DBA Classic >> Manufacturing >> SM-J not even close to GL WIP
http://www.istechforum.com/YaBB.pl?num=1206468624

Message started by Dawn on 03/25/08 at 11:10:24

Title: SM-J not even close to GL WIP
Post by Dawn on 03/25/08 at 11:10:24

I ran JC-M for transaction date range for March and ran my GL WIP account balance and the numbers are not even close. I have never been exact but I've never been off by this much. 11k. Could WIP not be calculating correctly? We just finished a big job that was very labor and material intensive.

Any suggestions on why this would happen?

I also checked my IN-F Inventory Value by class and compared it to my GL accounts for finished goods and raw materials and they are only off by $100. So I don't think it is the WIP materials that are off.

Title: Re: SM-J not even close to GL WIP
Post by cathyh on 03/25/08 at 12:31:18

Have you checked to make sure everything has been posted to the GL? (GL-O)

Title: Re: SM-J not even close to GL WIP
Post by Dawn on 03/25/08 at 13:04:38

Yes I posted before running them.

Title: Re: SM-J not even close to GL WIP
Post by cathyh on 03/26/08 at 08:43:52

I find that the best settings running JC-M is to either use "as of a prior date" and let DBA set the rest of the fields, or run a report with no dates and choose "R" Type only. The problem with using a transaction date range is that it limits the report to labor and issues within that date range, while the GL may have costs issued before/after that date range (if you have work orders that were started before/after and have not been finished).

Another issue I have trouble with sometimes is a part number needing an "I" status (indirect) has an "R" status...

Title: Re: SM-J not even close to GL WIP
Post by Dawn on 04/08/08 at 12:12:47

I think I found part of the problem back in Feb WIP was adjusted to JC-M Transaction dates 2-1 thry 2-29 for R and C. Some the C's had balances and which I believe to be because they were not closed until March and the adjustment to "balance" has made it even farther off.

When I run "as of a prior date" of 3/31/08 with "Actual Finish Date" 4/1/08 (only because it won't let me bypass it) it balances. I tested it by running the GL WIP account for all the open WO and totaled the dr/cr and exported it to excel and the $ Net WIP along with WIP Variance matches.

So it basically JC-M should always be run with "as of a proir date" (month end) and all "transaction dates" left blank for part RF and "actual finish date" is the first day of the next month.

Title: Re: SM-J not even close to GL WIP
Post by cathyh on 04/09/08 at 10:01:46

Yes if you are trying to get a balance as of a prior date, and I just enter the date and let EVO fill in the rest- this could also include "C" status and a date range starting with the day after "Prior date".

Sometimes on a given day when I am "just checking", by matching to the current GL WIP balance I just run with no dates and pick only R status work orders.
One reason I do this to make sure that all "I" type work orders are entered correctly. WE have several stock work order types that we run as "I" types, but sometimes the person entering them forgets to make them "I". Since the part numbers go to different accounts for WIP, my balances do not match.