I’m looking into the Epicor Learning Center. They have standard roles and agendas. You can update agendas to suit your environment, then assign the agenda to a role. It tracks due dates, you can assign tests too. There is an option to add company specific training and tests too. Of course there is training on setting up the training - all my assignments are past due since I haven’t been able to devote the time to it yet. The employees get a dashboard with all their assignments and due dates. It’s self paced so something a new hire can do on their own rather than tying up a subject matter expert for the full training. Adding your company specific training here helps transition tribal knowledge to a consistent experience.One thing I like about it is Epicor is committed to keeping the training material up to date. If you don’t veer severely from the out of the box functionality it should alleviate a lot of the procedure/training updates as you upgrade.Jenn
If you are a member of EpiUsers, check out the post at this link: https://www.epiusers.help/t/tracking-financials-for-internal-projects/27124. The controller I worked with at the time came up with an IJ (Internal Job) concept. I’ve since brought that to 2 other companies and it works great. FYI - the author is no longer at the phone number listed but there should be enough in the post to get you up and running. I always recommend doing a trial run in a test environment - once you transact part classes and product groups in live you can’t get rid of them. Good Luck!Jenn
Interesting, we just retested this in 10.2.500 - we took 3 jobs and batched the operation that backflushed steel. Each job had different operations after the programming that was batched. Once we completed the batched job, the pseudo materials were all issued back to the 3 jobs and we were able to complete the additional operations on the original jobs. We used job batching from the multi-resource scheduling board. It could be working this way for us since we have advanced programming and scheduling…Sounds like you’ll have to go down the customization route. Good luck!Jenn
We have experienced the same issue. The reason MRP takes longer when you get that is because the number of processors have decreased. Setting the number of processors and schedulers is a bit of a science based on your setup. In our environment, we run 5 processors, 3 schedulers. The processors handle the parts at the given level and rotate the level until finished, then move on to the next level. If we lost 1 processor, that’s 20% of our bandwidth.I noticed the abandon was right before midnight. If the time is consistent then I would check to make sure something else isn’t going on with the system at that time (e.g. a VM snapshot used to cause issues with task agent back in the day). Jenn
If they are working the same operation, take a look at Job Batching. It creates a parent job for all the children. Application help will get you through testing to see if it would work for you.Jenn
I second that Charles is correct. With manual journal entries, only the accountants can really see the transactions and that might not even be to the level you want to see. You get so much more history (and checks/balances) if you do the CC bank account route.As for what you have in RNI now and need to clear out, depending on the version of Epicor you have there is a Manual GRNI Clearing function in AP invoice entry (came out in E10.2 I believe). Prior to that we got fix routines from Epicor. I’m not sure if they still do that.Jenn
When we have done this, we created “conversion” part numbers for material, labor and burden. We loaded the current job costs into these dummy part numbers and issued them complete. Then we just loaded open materials and operations. If you create parts on the fly and need full job details in Kinetic, then you would have to go the route explained by bkyle. Definitely want to make sure you convert the JobProd demand links either way you go.
You should be able to open the master job back up and do a Job Receipt to Job. I don’t know what cost method you are using, but since you are shipping from stock instead of a job you shouldn’t have to run the Sales Gross Margin Report to update invoice job cost. Couple of questions/things you might want to consider are 1) shipping from jobs - that way in situations like this you can see estimated versus actual costs at the sales order or customer level; 2) if sub jobs aren’t serial tracked, make sure final operation and auto receipt are checked on the sub jobs so they auto receive to the master.As Scott said, testing in a test environment is encouraged. You’ll want to verify all the costs flow properly and WIP clears.
I would try running the System Mgt > Rebuild Processes > Mfg/Distribution > Fix book detail and release processes. You should run them in a test system first if you are using the bookings table for reporting. It is hard to replicate some of those bookings issues. You have to do exactly what the person did originally to try to replicate, most of the times they don’t remember (e.g. did they enter in list or detail screen, did they hit save or just drop to a new line before going back and updating the price, etc.)Jenn
You can flag those parts for “Production Yield Recalc” - I believe it became available in Epicor 9, but I know for sure 10.1 and forward have the option.In addition to flagging the parts for production yield recalc, make sure you setup the production yield recalc process (we run it every hour with auto job completion and labor backflush - all depends on your environment).In your situation, the non conformance follow by the recalc process would set your production quantity to 0 and MRP would kick out a new job. If you typically can rework those parts and disposition them back to the job, then clear the production recalc flag so MRP doesn’t create new jobs that you don’t want. Jenn
I thought we eliminated the transfer definitions on the plant (site) configuration/maintenance and made sure none of the parts were flagged as transfers. I can’t remember if we got a special fix program or not though.
I don’t now how comfortable you are doing tracing, but we found transfer orders were causing MRP to fail in 10.1.600. I don’t know if that was fixed in 10.2 or at what version. We ended up not using transfer orders at all because of MRP failing, the way transfer orders handle serial numbers (have to put job to stock before you can ship), and configured parts (not at all). We went to PO/SO.Good luck!Jenn
Already have an account? Login
Enter your username or e-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
Sorry, we're still checking this file's contents to make sure it's safe to download. Please try again in a few minutes.
Sorry, our virus scanner detected that this file isn't safe to download.