Job Costing module.
Is it possible to set a Job as INACTIVE?

We would like to "turn off" a Job and not be able to post any further transactions to the Job (from Invoices, AP or JC).
However, we may need to re-activate the Job at a later date, which explains why we do not want to remove the Job from the list.

Hi Sam

Close the Job. You can always re-open it.

However, closing a job has accounting implications if the "Simple cost tracking job" is unchecked. It is strongly recommended (by me) that that box always be checked, unless the Revenue Recognition needs to be Completed Contract.

Steve

I close a Job, and within the JC module it is indeed closed.

But, Adagio still allows users to enter an Invoice in AP (for example) and to refer to the closed Job. We post the Invoice within AP and there are no errors reported. AP thinks everything is OK.

It is only when I retrieve the AP transactions into JC and try to post the Cost batch, that is when I receive an error message "Job ABC123 is closed."

Is there no way to ensure that once a Job is closed, that Adagio will prevent users from making entries to the closed Job in other modules as well?

Hi, Samuel,

Are they archiving the closed jobs as well?

They could Archive the Job if this will help us.

However, they do not want to Archive the Job and then delete it from the main Job screen. We could do this, and we could get the Job back from the Archive at a later date.

But we setup a number of sophisticated reports in MS-Access, using Adagio ODBC. These reports look to the master Jobs table and if we delete an inactive job, we will not be able to get the reports. The client still wants to report on & view Jobs that are closed/inactive.

I agree with Sam that having to send a Job to Archive is an awful way of handling this.

What is missing is an option in Payables Profile | Integration similar to the option in Receivables that asks "Validate closed periods" only it would say "Validate closed jobs" and be in the JobCost section. The possible answers would be (just like in Receivables) "Allow", "Warn only", "Disallow".

I'm assuming the new release of Payables will have the "Validate closed periods" option, but if it doesn't that is really a necessity.

Steve

Or, to have an Active (Y/N) checkbox.
If a Job is Inactive, you should not be able to use it in any transaction in any module.

Hi, Steve/Samuel,

If that's the case, then what I'd do is, before closing the job, add an alert to it and make sure Alerts are enabled. Something like, 'This job is closed. DO NOT post to it' and also enable the option that requires the user to enter their Adagio userID to confirm they've read it.

This is the sort of thing Alerts were created for. And, it's nice because you can decide what modules and aspects of those modules you want the Alert to present itself in.

Hi Steve,

Just a note that the validation of closed gl periods has been in Payables for some time.

Andrew: Where? In Receivables it's on the Integration tab right below the "User defined format" line.

Tech Support: I don't think that this is a good use for Alerts, although I am a big fan of Alerts for the exact reasons you mentioned. But those reasons don't apply here. There is a better case for Sam's suggestion to add an active/inactive option such as exists in other modules. Consistency across modules is always preferable. This is one of many instances where JobCost is inconsistent, and I think Softrak should synch it with the rest of the product line to the extent possible.

Steve

Same place in Payables. Since 8.1B released in 2009.



Consistency across modules is desirable as you mention.

My bad, I was looking in a Payables dataset without Ledger.

Steve

Hello Sam,

In the Invoices 93A (18.11.20) SP, you will get a Warning message if you choose a Closed Job in batch entry.

Hi,
I'm coming in on this thread late but still...

You should be able to make the job active or inactive, no different than any other type of function in any module. Active/Inactive should be a concept that is consistent across all modules.

Closing the job is like making inactive but it has too many implications on revenue recognition. And closing a job ignores a common problem related to warranty costs after the job is completed that often need to be recorded and posted.

I'll go beyond Steve's suggestion and say there should be almost no sites using Adagio Job Costing without using Simple Job Costing being enabled. The other revenue recognition methods within Job Costing create such huge admin costs (labour to reconcile accounts) and inaccurate data that I cannot understand why no one ever addresses simple costing as a solution in any Job Costing training.

If more consultants understood the implications of Simple Job Costing as a solution and why it takes all of the risk out of setting up job costing, that alone would drive lots of Adagio site sales to use Job Costing.

Archiving the job is a bad solution unless you were trying to really get rid of very old jobs. The problem with most job costing sites is that the job info needs to be kept longer than 7-8 years statutory reporting, for lots of client reporting, and so archiving is very bad in most sites.

I thought that the PO module when connected to Job Costing, dealt with the Closed Job issue at the time of allocating the PO details to the Job. And once again, why would anyone use AP instead of PO's for vendor invoice posting into Job Costing integration, except for having to do a work around for Holdbacks/Retainage on vendor invoices?

I suppose the suggested message pop up would be a better solution for notifying the user rather than closing the job.

There's lots of room for improvements in Adagio Job Costing.

Brian

Hello Sam,

This feature has been added in the Payables 93B (20.02.17) Upgrade:
A warning will now appear when selecting a closed job for JobCost-type distributions in any batch type. Entries can still be saved and posted.