Okay.....We are really trying to understand the following. We've worked with our dealer who's suggested that we may have to change our GL to match the IC Valuation, but I'm not sure this is the right step....

UP until 8/31 we were doing great. IC Val matched GL. However, on 9/4 our sales manager moved items around in categories, and deleted categories. On 9/5 we ran DIC just before backing up and system indicated an error. Categories were re-added, and DIC completed without errors.

On 9/17 the inventory manager made several adjustments to the QOH and Cost of over 90 items to bring their value down to $0. On 9/20 the sales manager deleted the items from the system. (Just Great!)

On 10/13, after posting all September batches in GL, I ran the Items Val report as of 9/30/2008 and compared it to GL. IC Val was off by over $58,000 for September.

Was it because the items adjustments were posted and items deleted in the same period? My valuation for the month of October is also out by almost $48,000. This I'm not understanding as the items would have had a $0 value for this period even if they were still in the system.

Why does Adagio allow a user to delete transactions in this manner? I really would like to be able to control this, but as company had designated the Sales manager with the Management access I feel as if my hands are tied.

Correction: 'allow a user to delete ITEMS'

Hi SPISLGAL,

When printing the Item Valuation report with a date earlier than today, the report relies on transactions being in the history file. Essentially in your case, if you printed the report as of Sept 30, 2008, the report would take the current valuation and subtract out all historical transactions with a date later than Sept 30 to arrive at the total. If any of the historical transactions are missing, this could result with an incorrect back-dated valuation.

If you preview the IC Transaction History report for a particular date range (say Sept 1-30/2008, or Oct 1-31/2008), you can select the 'GL Summary' option to see the GL activity for all transactions during that month. Compare this against the Net Changes in the GL for that period and see if you find differences.

Perhaps also print a Source Journal report in Ledger for that period and all IC-related source codes to see if this matches the IC History amounts.

Deleting items could have ramifications but I can't say for sure, as it depends on the state of the data and what else has happened.

Adagio does allow deleting items that don't have any quantities or costs, but it is typically inadvisable to do so when the item could exist in IC History or other application data that integrates to IC, such as OrderEntry, Invoices or SalesAnalysis. In has been suggested elsewhere on this forum that a better way is to use the Adagio IC Toolkit (a separate program from Dakota Software) to merge all items together (that would be deleted) into a single item record. This would have the benefit of not deleting anything and also cleaning up the item list.

Do you (or anyone else reading this thread) have any suggestions as to what the correct behaviour of the Delete Items function should have, and what other preventions are in place? Should there be a search in all other integrated databases like OE, SA, IN and other to ensure it doesn't exist, no matter slow that would be? Other thoughts, such as removing the Delete button?

Hi Support,

I don't think users should be able to delete items if there are historical transactions at minimum in the current fiscal/calendar year.

I also think a warning should be added if anyone is about to delete items to warn of potential and dire consequences if they do so without the account manager's approval (just kidding).

But seriously, there should be a warning that lets users know that deleting items may affect historical valuation, or prior valuation reports or something to that effect.

Hi SPISLGAL

In this case, changing your GL to match your IC Valuation is not the right step, at least not until you do one more key step.

That key step is to reconcile the IC Valuation report to the GL as of today, making sure everything is retrieved and posted to your GL. If the report reconciles, then the GL is fine and doesn't need to be adjusted. At that point, you would have to resign yourself to the fact that you will never get IC Valuation reports that are accurate prior to the date of the deleted historical transactions.

As for Softrak's request for suggestions about the function of the Delete Items button, what I would like to see is something similar to what happens in JobCost when you delete a job. The deleted item should move to an Archived Item file. There would be no effect on IC historical transactions. These deleted items could be undeleted, but not purged from Archive unless there are no historical transactions and the item doesn't exist on any historical order or invoice in OE or Invoices.

I could go on, but I'll wait to hear Softrak's reaction to this suggestion as stated.

Steve

Hi Steve,

Just brainstorming here - in an unofficial way - but your idea has merit, though it would force all other applications to require reading two separate files for items, which could slow things down for item reports and searches.

I wonder if mimicking GL/AR would be better - to allow making items inactive (and hide them in grids and finders). This is how inactive GL accounts works. And then have a function to delete inactive items, similar to AR delete inactive customers. This function could do all the checking for transaction history. Delete button still has to be there within Edit Items.

Hi Softrak

I would like your idea better than mine, if you could hide the items from grids and finders in related modules (such as OrderEntry, Invoices and PO), and if inactive items could be skipped when doing DIC. Because for some of my clients the number of inactive items would way outnumber active items.

Also, when deleting inactive items, it would have to allow for selectivity, maybe showing a grid of eligible items for selection.

I know this is just brainstorming, but you have to start somewhere.

Steve

Inactive Items will be supported in Inventory V9.0 for sure, in the same way that inactive GL accounts are supported now in Ledger and inactive customers shortly in AR 9.0A

I was just wondering when we might see this upgrade for IC. Inactive items that do not show up in reorder reports and such would make life MUCH MUCH easier here.
Thanks

I've noted your suggestion to be able to suppress inactive items on reports, particularly the Reorder report.

There is no timeline for the 'Inventory 90A' upgrade.