Sage 100

Had a meeting today with a long time Sage 100 customer who is primarily using the Sales Order and Inventory. They've created a lot of UDFs to work around unit of measure type issues just because it was easier for them and they didn't want to create multiple skus (despite my recommendation that they do so). They've never tracked inventory quantities or costs (though they use the module for pricing) -- in the 20 years they've used Sage. I find this is not all that unusual as a lot of customers don't track their inventory very closely (absent some type of issue such as IRS or bank requirement). Due to some problems around tax time with inventory $$ -- suddenly tracking inventory quantity and value is a top priority. The outside accountants are all gung-ho to throw them into a full costing -- work centers, overhead, WIP -- workflow. I don't think the people are up for a full blown (or even partial) manufacturing system - which would mean WO, MRP and perhaps even Job Ops. They just don't have a single person to manage it (aka CFO or Inventory Manager) - which I find is pretty important especially in situations where each department in the company acts very independently. They brought their CPAs in and the meeting was somewhat less than pleasant with a lot of theoretical ""just have the software do it"" and ""can't MAS90 do this"" which sounds great in the conference room but once you mix in people and 20+ years worth of workarounds and reluctancd to change probably won't be so great.... My compromise suggestion was to start slow and just use BOM to roll up components into a finished good (which they have quite a bit of but the parts are not elaborate). I know that this won't give true cost (it ignores overhead, labor, etc) but for unsophisticated uses such as this company I think it's a decent first step. Am I crazy? Should I push them to go deeper and jump into WO, MRP, BOM even though the staff have little or no experience/desire and I expect some (a lot) of push back? I've had customers use BOM as a quick and dirty MFG system and even unsophisticated companies seem to get the hang of it. The thought of introducing work order travelers throughout production (it's a decent sized shop floor) right off the bat makes me apprehensive because the company has traditionally pushed back on anything that required extra work.

It's so easy for CPA's to say, ""Just have the software do it."" Don't they realize that the people have to MAKE the software do it?? I'd say BOM would be a good introduction. They could even add miscellaneous charges for labor and overhead if they wanted at some point. Then, once they've figured out how inventory is SUPPOSED to work, you can add WO, etc. Unless they've got someone dedicated to this process, I'd say start with baby steps.

YOU ARE RIGHT ON. Let them use some Misc Items for Labor and OH if it's that important. Work Order can be labor intensive and you really need someone who has already worked with a WO system to be involved internally.

My suggestion -- within the first 5 minutes -- was that the problem was people oriented and without someone full time (aka CFO/Inventory Admin) that the procedures probably would not work. This was one of the odder meetings I've had with an EXISTING customer in some time and unfortunately the CPA firm is well entrenched so there's a high likelihood that I'll be in the line of fire irrespective. I just love meetings where 20 YEARS of ill-advised procedures are expected to be wiped out by my conference room explanation of ""how MAS90 works and can it do Inventory?""... I kid you not. The inventory manager (acting) had a 100% ""deer in the headlights"" gaze when the CPA started talking about costing and WIP and the entries. I find that this type of MFG does work (and is much better) when you have capable employees with a MFG background (which I don't have here and quite a few are family or related). I did suggest misc charges for labor and overhead even though I do understand that embedding those fixed costs into the BOM likely won't scale well because at some point someone has to modify them. Hello weekend.

I think you're right @WayneSchulz about it being a people problem. It's funny how as a CPA acting as my client's Sage consultant I have the same kind of meetings with clients and their CPAs. It so common for the CPA to think the software can just do it. Without the right people on staff it never works.

Of course you are right Wayne. Crawl, then walk, then run. A big truck is of no use if they can't reach the pedals.

Any chance you can have a heart to heart with CPA without the client present? It is possible they are simply setting you up to take the hit, but assuming not, you have a better chance of success if you and the CPA are on same path and working together. Otherwise, it may not be a question of if this will fail, but when.

Too many consultants, managers and users expect the sortware to be ""magic,"" like it can out-think the data entry clerk. My partner often points out that the user should always be smarter than the software. It's funny how many blank stares he gets after saying that.

I am surprised the CPA's didn't just say QuickBooks could do everything they needed and throw you off the bus completely! Does this CPA firm have ANY other experience with MAS? Does this company have a budget to absorb the hits?

I can only echo previous sentiments and suggestions: use misc codes to handle labor and overhead. Go slow and test with the most active parents. No need for WIP entries, but if really needed complete to a ""WIP"" warehouse and then transfer to active whse when done...etc.

As someone who pushes JobOps, I totally agree with staying away from WO or JobOps in this case. BOM is really a great module, and as with many others, we have a large group of clients using just BOM, and it gives them what they need.

And to echo everyone's KISS comments, I have a client that needed/wanted the WO module four years ago. As yet, they haven't implemented it. They are still fixing internal issues that I stressed they needed before they were ready for WO. All these issues are people or process related. MAS will not resolve a single one of these issue. But until they are resolved, WO will remain on the sidelines. Actually, I am amazed they are still in business. But they are slowly making progress and they may be ready sometime next year.

I can't tell you how many times we've spent literally months rationalizing inventory before we could start implementing JobOps.

That is the crucial component of any manufacturing implementation which includes materials, understanding the items to be created and the items that are required for the creation and how to handle them both physically and systemically. Everyone wonders why I insist on being involved with the Inventory side before delving into the manufacturing modules...duh.

Two comments (1). There is at least one bill of materials report that can be easily adapted as a 'traveler' (2)""I know for a fact that the psychic interface is beyond your budget.

And 7 months later I have this to share: If the customer puts their IT person in charge of a very large project to organize their inventory - run very very fast no matter what the fee is.

I use miscellaneous items, item type ""charge"" for estimating labor, overhead and burden on bills. Work Order probably shouldn't be implemented unless the client has a cost accountant will to take responsibility over maintaining it. BOM however is quite straightforward for most users and generally does a good job for process manufacturing and kitting. No it's not MRP. No its doesn't handle outside processors, scheduling, or shop floor picking or travelers. However you need to walk before you can run and implementing BOM is a good first step.

Doug this was my exact advice. I also advised that most companies won't be successful without having an experienced inventory manager. So they put their IT person in charge and keep asking ""why I don't know BOM"" ... I expect to resign today rather than be here another 4 months and 50 meetings about why it's not working. I find when the customer is not taking your advice and you're getting flamed daily that it's time to scoot.

Wayne... I read in he Journal of Accountancy a long time that 10% of your clients cause 90% of your headaches. Terminate your relationship with the 10% and make your life easier. We should all review our client lists once a year and evaluate whether there are any 90% ers we need to terminate. From your description, I don't think I would be willing to wait for the end of year review on this client.