Sage 100

What's frustrating is that for the past several years of meetings with Sage it seems like when these types of questions are raised that the primary answer is a two part response: 

1. Hands in the air / shrug
2. "Uh, um, yeah I guess that's the way we've always done it" or "We'll look into it"

Based on this should the subscription that our mutual customers pay be reworded as "Sage Intacct Development Fee"?...

There are multiple sources for email addresses / phone numbers (SO: customer, ship-to address, contact, bill-to customer...; PO: vendor, purchase address, ship-to address, contact,...).  Instead of Sage linking them all into the transaction, and allowing us to use whatever is appropriate for the user (on the different forms...) Sage picked some logic in the past and called that WAD. 

Talk to someone individually and you can make a reasonable argument, but motivating big Sage to actually do something needs more power... like the Mod Squad suggestions, and the Sage Ideas site.

What's frustrating is that for the past several years of meetings with Sage it seems like when these types of questions are raised that the primary answer is a two part response: 

1. Hands in the air / shrug
2. "Uh, um, yeah I guess that's the way we've always done it" or "We'll look into it"

Based on this should the subscription that our mutual customers pay be reworded as "Sage Intacct Development Fee"?...

I'm curious about the feasibility of enhancements on this. How much of this is feasible through scripting? How much require MD enhancements? 

Related, if there's a big customer demand for this, why hasn't an MD filled the need?

There are multiple sources for email addresses / phone numbers (SO: customer, ship-to address, contact, bill-to customer...; PO: vendor, purchase address, ship-to address, contact,...).  Instead of Sage linking them all into the transaction, and allowing us to use whatever is appropriate for the user (on the different forms...) Sage picked some logic in the past and called that WAD. 

Talk to someone individually and you can make a reasonable argument, but motivating big Sage to actually do something needs more power... like the Mod Squad suggestions, and the Sage Ideas site.

What's frustrating is that for the past several years of meetings with Sage it seems like when these types of questions are raised that the primary answer is a two part response: 

1. Hands in the air / shrug
2. "Uh, um, yeah I guess that's the way we've always done it" or "We'll look into it"

Based on this should the subscription that our mutual customers pay be reworded as "Sage Intacct Development Fee"?...

Fixing this using Custom Office is not too hard.  UDF data flow for some sources, and a script for the others (like the contact fields, for which there is no linking business object).

I'm curious about the feasibility of enhancements on this. How much of this is feasible through scripting? How much require MD enhancements? 

Related, if there's a big customer demand for this, why hasn't an MD filled the need?

There are multiple sources for email addresses / phone numbers (SO: customer, ship-to address, contact, bill-to customer...; PO: vendor, purchase address, ship-to address, contact,...).  Instead of Sage linking them all into the transaction, and allowing us to use whatever is appropriate for the user (on the different forms...) Sage picked some logic in the past and called that WAD. 

Talk to someone individually and you can make a reasonable argument, but motivating big Sage to actually do something needs more power... like the Mod Squad suggestions, and the Sage Ideas site.

What's frustrating is that for the past several years of meetings with Sage it seems like when these types of questions are raised that the primary answer is a two part response: 

1. Hands in the air / shrug
2. "Uh, um, yeah I guess that's the way we've always done it" or "We'll look into it"

Based on this should the subscription that our mutual customers pay be reworded as "Sage Intacct Development Fee"?...

Hey @Jerry Norman let's not take this revenue away from non-MDs!  I've successfully implemented a script (with no UDFs) at one of my customers for SO (haven't done for PO but it would be about the same).  It was a PITA script, but it works :) 

Fixing this using Custom Office is not too hard.  UDF data flow for some sources, and a script for the others (like the contact fields, for which there is no linking business object).

I'm curious about the feasibility of enhancements on this. How much of this is feasible through scripting? How much require MD enhancements? 

Related, if there's a big customer demand for this, why hasn't an MD filled the need?

There are multiple sources for email addresses / phone numbers (SO: customer, ship-to address, contact, bill-to customer...; PO: vendor, purchase address, ship-to address, contact,...).  Instead of Sage linking them all into the transaction, and allowing us to use whatever is appropriate for the user (on the different forms...) Sage picked some logic in the past and called that WAD. 

Talk to someone individually and you can make a reasonable argument, but motivating big Sage to actually do something needs more power... like the Mod Squad suggestions, and the Sage Ideas site.

What's frustrating is that for the past several years of meetings with Sage it seems like when these types of questions are raised that the primary answer is a two part response: 

1. Hands in the air / shrug
2. "Uh, um, yeah I guess that's the way we've always done it" or "We'll look into it"

Based on this should the subscription that our mutual customers pay be reworded as "Sage Intacct Development Fee"?...

Jane - I am thinking exactly like you. 

EVERY 90 Minder should have this customization (home-grown or purchased) in their sales/consulting kit. It is "secret sauce." It is IP. It is what can differentiate them from just "break/fix for printing crap" to "I know how to make your system sing and untangle your ops."

Some limitations in Sage 100 are only fixable through MDs or Sage -- but most are not. We should all be proactive in this.   

Hey @Jerry Norman let's not take this revenue away from non-MDs!  I've successfully implemented a script (with no UDFs) at one of my customers for SO (haven't done for PO but it would be about the same).  It was a PITA script, but it works :) 

Fixing this using Custom Office is not too hard.  UDF data flow for some sources, and a script for the others (like the contact fields, for which there is no linking business object).

I'm curious about the feasibility of enhancements on this. How much of this is feasible through scripting? How much require MD enhancements? 

Related, if there's a big customer demand for this, why hasn't an MD filled the need?

There are multiple sources for email addresses / phone numbers (SO: customer, ship-to address, contact, bill-to customer...; PO: vendor, purchase address, ship-to address, contact,...).  Instead of Sage linking them all into the transaction, and allowing us to use whatever is appropriate for the user (on the different forms...) Sage picked some logic in the past and called that WAD. 

Talk to someone individually and you can make a reasonable argument, but motivating big Sage to actually do something needs more power... like the Mod Squad suggestions, and the Sage Ideas site.

What's frustrating is that for the past several years of meetings with Sage it seems like when these types of questions are raised that the primary answer is a two part response: 

1. Hands in the air / shrug
2. "Uh, um, yeah I guess that's the way we've always done it" or "We'll look into it"

Based on this should the subscription that our mutual customers pay be reworded as "Sage Intacct Development Fee"?...

Jane - I am thinking exactly like you. 

EVERY 90 Minder should have this customization (home-grown or purchased) in their sales/consulting kit. It is "secret sauce." It is IP. It is what can differentiate them from just "break/fix for printing crap" to "I know how to make your system sing and untangle your ops."

Some limitations in Sage 100 are only fixable through MDs or Sage -- but most are not. We should all be proactive in this.   

Hey @Jerry Norman let's not take this revenue away from non-MDs!  I've successfully implemented a script (with no UDFs) at one of my customers for SO (haven't done for PO but it would be about the same).  It was a PITA script, but it works :) 

Fixing this using Custom Office is not too hard.  UDF data flow for some sources, and a script for the others (like the contact fields, for which there is no linking business object).

I'm curious about the feasibility of enhancements on this. How much of this is feasible through scripting? How much require MD enhancements? 

Related, if there's a big customer demand for this, why hasn't an MD filled the need?

There are multiple sources for email addresses / phone numbers (SO: customer, ship-to address, contact, bill-to customer...; PO: vendor, purchase address, ship-to address, contact,...).  Instead of Sage linking them all into the transaction, and allowing us to use whatever is appropriate for the user (on the different forms...) Sage picked some logic in the past and called that WAD. 

Talk to someone individually and you can make a reasonable argument, but motivating big Sage to actually do something needs more power... like the Mod Squad suggestions, and the Sage Ideas site.

What's frustrating is that for the past several years of meetings with Sage it seems like when these types of questions are raised that the primary answer is a two part response: 

1. Hands in the air / shrug
2. "Uh, um, yeah I guess that's the way we've always done it" or "We'll look into it"

Based on this should the subscription that our mutual customers pay be reworded as "Sage Intacct Development Fee"?...

Can I put on my customer hat for a minute? From the standpoint of a customer I think they might be curious what their annual 6% fee increase is funding if not these types of product "enhancements". 

For updates the end users already only receive "quick wins" which if we were candid is code for "Sage isn't paying a product manager so let's have 90 Minds be the defacto PM with regards to product direction ... provided the fix doesn't cost too much time or money".

And I agree with you that scripting is something we should double down on as a skillset. 

Jane - I am thinking exactly like you. 

EVERY 90 Minder should have this customization (home-grown or purchased) in their sales/consulting kit. It is "secret sauce." It is IP. It is what can differentiate them from just "break/fix for printing crap" to "I know how to make your system sing and untangle your ops."

Some limitations in Sage 100 are only fixable through MDs or Sage -- but most are not. We should all be proactive in this.   

Hey @Jerry Norman let's not take this revenue away from non-MDs!  I've successfully implemented a script (with no UDFs) at one of my customers for SO (haven't done for PO but it would be about the same).  It was a PITA script, but it works :) 

Fixing this using Custom Office is not too hard.  UDF data flow for some sources, and a script for the others (like the contact fields, for which there is no linking business object).

I'm curious about the feasibility of enhancements on this. How much of this is feasible through scripting? How much require MD enhancements? 

Related, if there's a big customer demand for this, why hasn't an MD filled the need?

There are multiple sources for email addresses / phone numbers (SO: customer, ship-to address, contact, bill-to customer...; PO: vendor, purchase address, ship-to address, contact,...).  Instead of Sage linking them all into the transaction, and allowing us to use whatever is appropriate for the user (on the different forms...) Sage picked some logic in the past and called that WAD. 

Talk to someone individually and you can make a reasonable argument, but motivating big Sage to actually do something needs more power... like the Mod Squad suggestions, and the Sage Ideas site.

What's frustrating is that for the past several years of meetings with Sage it seems like when these types of questions are raised that the primary answer is a two part response: 

1. Hands in the air / shrug
2. "Uh, um, yeah I guess that's the way we've always done it" or "We'll look into it"

Based on this should the subscription that our mutual customers pay be reworded as "Sage Intacct Development Fee"?...

I think we should all look at something like this as a "business challenge" instead of a "Sage challenge."

Sage is making Sage 100 enhancements in a way it thinks is best for its overall goal in maintaining the largest possible Sage 100 customer pool for eventually migrating to Intacct. We can shout loudly they are wrong, but it doesn't help us now.

"How can I make my Sage 100 customers as successful as possible?" This should always be our first thought: providing added value to customers. This is NOT maintenance, it is actively offering to help them do more.

90 Minds is an excellent resource group from which we each pull enhancement as needed. We don't all individually have to create these enhancements. We can commission/buy them from members with the expertise. Whether we then offer them as extra cost to our customers or include them in our annual agreements as a a tool to encourage renewals is up to us. 

We have agency in these challenges. We should be actively exercising it.

Can I put on my customer hat for a minute? From the standpoint of a customer I think they might be curious what their annual 6% fee increase is funding if not these types of product "enhancements". 

For updates the end users already only receive "quick wins" which if we were candid is code for "Sage isn't paying a product manager so let's have 90 Minds be the defacto PM with regards to product direction ... provided the fix doesn't cost too much time or money".

And I agree with you that scripting is something we should double down on as a skillset. 

Jane - I am thinking exactly like you. 

EVERY 90 Minder should have this customization (home-grown or purchased) in their sales/consulting kit. It is "secret sauce." It is IP. It is what can differentiate them from just "break/fix for printing crap" to "I know how to make your system sing and untangle your ops."

Some limitations in Sage 100 are only fixable through MDs or Sage -- but most are not. We should all be proactive in this.   

Hey @Jerry Norman let's not take this revenue away from non-MDs!  I've successfully implemented a script (with no UDFs) at one of my customers for SO (haven't done for PO but it would be about the same).  It was a PITA script, but it works :) 

Fixing this using Custom Office is not too hard.  UDF data flow for some sources, and a script for the others (like the contact fields, for which there is no linking business object).

I'm curious about the feasibility of enhancements on this. How much of this is feasible through scripting? How much require MD enhancements? 

Related, if there's a big customer demand for this, why hasn't an MD filled the need?

There are multiple sources for email addresses / phone numbers (SO: customer, ship-to address, contact, bill-to customer...; PO: vendor, purchase address, ship-to address, contact,...).  Instead of Sage linking them all into the transaction, and allowing us to use whatever is appropriate for the user (on the different forms...) Sage picked some logic in the past and called that WAD. 

Talk to someone individually and you can make a reasonable argument, but motivating big Sage to actually do something needs more power... like the Mod Squad suggestions, and the Sage Ideas site.

What's frustrating is that for the past several years of meetings with Sage it seems like when these types of questions are raised that the primary answer is a two part response: 

1. Hands in the air / shrug
2. "Uh, um, yeah I guess that's the way we've always done it" or "We'll look into it"

Based on this should the subscription that our mutual customers pay be reworded as "Sage Intacct Development Fee"?...

I agree with most of that, and would certainly prefer Sage 100 developer efforts go towards substantive feature improvements / bug fixes, vs addressing minor annoyances that we can fix with UDF / UDS.  Some clients do get tired with paying for a customization to add functionality they believe "should" be part of the product.  Revenue potential for us?  Absolutely.  Scripting / customization is one of the key benefits of Sage 100.  The system can be tuned in great detail, for unique business requirements.  The feature-rich nature of a mature product is also a big plus.

However, answering the question: "when I chose the PO contact, why does the contact's email / phone # not get copied into the PO?"... is not a happy conversation.  Sure, we can fix it... but it does seem like a rather intuitive data flow that has always been missing, and I don't blame a client for being less than pleased.

*shrugs*

I think we should all look at something like this as a "business challenge" instead of a "Sage challenge."

Sage is making Sage 100 enhancements in a way it thinks is best for its overall goal in maintaining the largest possible Sage 100 customer pool for eventually migrating to Intacct. We can shout loudly they are wrong, but it doesn't help us now.

"How can I make my Sage 100 customers as successful as possible?" This should always be our first thought: providing added value to customers. This is NOT maintenance, it is actively offering to help them do more.

90 Minds is an excellent resource group from which we each pull enhancement as needed. We don't all individually have to create these enhancements. We can commission/buy them from members with the expertise. Whether we then offer them as extra cost to our customers or include them in our annual agreements as a a tool to encourage renewals is up to us. 

We have agency in these challenges. We should be actively exercising it.

Can I put on my customer hat for a minute? From the standpoint of a customer I think they might be curious what their annual 6% fee increase is funding if not these types of product "enhancements". 

For updates the end users already only receive "quick wins" which if we were candid is code for "Sage isn't paying a product manager so let's have 90 Minds be the defacto PM with regards to product direction ... provided the fix doesn't cost too much time or money".

And I agree with you that scripting is something we should double down on as a skillset. 

Jane - I am thinking exactly like you. 

EVERY 90 Minder should have this customization (home-grown or purchased) in their sales/consulting kit. It is "secret sauce." It is IP. It is what can differentiate them from just "break/fix for printing crap" to "I know how to make your system sing and untangle your ops."

Some limitations in Sage 100 are only fixable through MDs or Sage -- but most are not. We should all be proactive in this.   

Hey @Jerry Norman let's not take this revenue away from non-MDs!  I've successfully implemented a script (with no UDFs) at one of my customers for SO (haven't done for PO but it would be about the same).  It was a PITA script, but it works :) 

Fixing this using Custom Office is not too hard.  UDF data flow for some sources, and a script for the others (like the contact fields, for which there is no linking business object).

I'm curious about the feasibility of enhancements on this. How much of this is feasible through scripting? How much require MD enhancements? 

Related, if there's a big customer demand for this, why hasn't an MD filled the need?

There are multiple sources for email addresses / phone numbers (SO: customer, ship-to address, contact, bill-to customer...; PO: vendor, purchase address, ship-to address, contact,...).  Instead of Sage linking them all into the transaction, and allowing us to use whatever is appropriate for the user (on the different forms...) Sage picked some logic in the past and called that WAD. 

Talk to someone individually and you can make a reasonable argument, but motivating big Sage to actually do something needs more power... like the Mod Squad suggestions, and the Sage Ideas site.

What's frustrating is that for the past several years of meetings with Sage it seems like when these types of questions are raised that the primary answer is a two part response: 

1. Hands in the air / shrug
2. "Uh, um, yeah I guess that's the way we've always done it" or "We'll look into it"

Based on this should the subscription that our mutual customers pay be reworded as "Sage Intacct Development Fee"?...

Uncomfortable, yes. I don't disagree with any of this. 

I am suggesting approaches to use such limitations to deepen the customer's confidence in us AND Sage 100. Reframing or getting ahead of such things. 

Assuming the questioning customer is not a new one to Sage, why is this person now complaining about it? What changed? Do they have other usage questions/frustrations that maybe they just haven't brought up? Does this suggest a more formal exploration in unmet needs that have been ignored or newly developed?

These sorts of frustrations can often be used as openers to more satisfying problem solving conversations.

And, if we have a number of current customers who use POs now, perhaps do some spot checking about why they aren't raising the question? Proactively advertise that you have a solution for this (you do, it's just 30 days away) could be used as effective relationship-deepening marketing.

If we can fix it, we should be actively working with them to resolve it. Leave the pricing out of it for now.

I agree with most of that, and would certainly prefer Sage 100 developer efforts go towards substantive feature improvements / bug fixes, vs addressing minor annoyances that we can fix with UDF / UDS.  Some clients do get tired with paying for a customization to add functionality they believe "should" be part of the product.  Revenue potential for us?  Absolutely.  Scripting / customization is one of the key benefits of Sage 100.  The system can be tuned in great detail, for unique business requirements.  The feature-rich nature of a mature product is also a big plus.

However, answering the question: "when I chose the PO contact, why does the contact's email / phone # not get copied into the PO?"... is not a happy conversation.  Sure, we can fix it... but it does seem like a rather intuitive data flow that has always been missing, and I don't blame a client for being less than pleased.

*shrugs*

I think we should all look at something like this as a "business challenge" instead of a "Sage challenge."

Sage is making Sage 100 enhancements in a way it thinks is best for its overall goal in maintaining the largest possible Sage 100 customer pool for eventually migrating to Intacct. We can shout loudly they are wrong, but it doesn't help us now.

"How can I make my Sage 100 customers as successful as possible?" This should always be our first thought: providing added value to customers. This is NOT maintenance, it is actively offering to help them do more.

90 Minds is an excellent resource group from which we each pull enhancement as needed. We don't all individually have to create these enhancements. We can commission/buy them from members with the expertise. Whether we then offer them as extra cost to our customers or include them in our annual agreements as a a tool to encourage renewals is up to us. 

We have agency in these challenges. We should be actively exercising it.

Can I put on my customer hat for a minute? From the standpoint of a customer I think they might be curious what their annual 6% fee increase is funding if not these types of product "enhancements". 

For updates the end users already only receive "quick wins" which if we were candid is code for "Sage isn't paying a product manager so let's have 90 Minds be the defacto PM with regards to product direction ... provided the fix doesn't cost too much time or money".

And I agree with you that scripting is something we should double down on as a skillset. 

Jane - I am thinking exactly like you. 

EVERY 90 Minder should have this customization (home-grown or purchased) in their sales/consulting kit. It is "secret sauce." It is IP. It is what can differentiate them from just "break/fix for printing crap" to "I know how to make your system sing and untangle your ops."

Some limitations in Sage 100 are only fixable through MDs or Sage -- but most are not. We should all be proactive in this.   

Hey @Jerry Norman let's not take this revenue away from non-MDs!  I've successfully implemented a script (with no UDFs) at one of my customers for SO (haven't done for PO but it would be about the same).  It was a PITA script, but it works :) 

Fixing this using Custom Office is not too hard.  UDF data flow for some sources, and a script for the others (like the contact fields, for which there is no linking business object).

I'm curious about the feasibility of enhancements on this. How much of this is feasible through scripting? How much require MD enhancements? 

Related, if there's a big customer demand for this, why hasn't an MD filled the need?

There are multiple sources for email addresses / phone numbers (SO: customer, ship-to address, contact, bill-to customer...; PO: vendor, purchase address, ship-to address, contact,...).  Instead of Sage linking them all into the transaction, and allowing us to use whatever is appropriate for the user (on the different forms...) Sage picked some logic in the past and called that WAD. 

Talk to someone individually and you can make a reasonable argument, but motivating big Sage to actually do something needs more power... like the Mod Squad suggestions, and the Sage Ideas site.

What's frustrating is that for the past several years of meetings with Sage it seems like when these types of questions are raised that the primary answer is a two part response: 

1. Hands in the air / shrug
2. "Uh, um, yeah I guess that's the way we've always done it" or "We'll look into it"

Based on this should the subscription that our mutual customers pay be reworded as "Sage Intacct Development Fee"?...

Can I put on my customer hat for a minute? From the standpoint of a customer I think they might be curious what their annual 6% fee increase is funding if not these types of product "enhancements". 

For updates the end users already only receive "quick wins" which if we were candid is code for "Sage isn't paying a product manager so let's have 90 Minds be the defacto PM with regards to product direction ... provided the fix doesn't cost too much time or money".

And I agree with you that scripting is something we should double down on as a skillset. 

Jane - I am thinking exactly like you. 

EVERY 90 Minder should have this customization (home-grown or purchased) in their sales/consulting kit. It is "secret sauce." It is IP. It is what can differentiate them from just "break/fix for printing crap" to "I know how to make your system sing and untangle your ops."

Some limitations in Sage 100 are only fixable through MDs or Sage -- but most are not. We should all be proactive in this.   

Hey @Jerry Norman let's not take this revenue away from non-MDs!  I've successfully implemented a script (with no UDFs) at one of my customers for SO (haven't done for PO but it would be about the same).  It was a PITA script, but it works :) 

Fixing this using Custom Office is not too hard.  UDF data flow for some sources, and a script for the others (like the contact fields, for which there is no linking business object).

I'm curious about the feasibility of enhancements on this. How much of this is feasible through scripting? How much require MD enhancements? 

Related, if there's a big customer demand for this, why hasn't an MD filled the need?

There are multiple sources for email addresses / phone numbers (SO: customer, ship-to address, contact, bill-to customer...; PO: vendor, purchase address, ship-to address, contact,...).  Instead of Sage linking them all into the transaction, and allowing us to use whatever is appropriate for the user (on the different forms...) Sage picked some logic in the past and called that WAD. 

Talk to someone individually and you can make a reasonable argument, but motivating big Sage to actually do something needs more power... like the Mod Squad suggestions, and the Sage Ideas site.

What's frustrating is that for the past several years of meetings with Sage it seems like when these types of questions are raised that the primary answer is a two part response: 

1. Hands in the air / shrug
2. "Uh, um, yeah I guess that's the way we've always done it" or "We'll look into it"

Based on this should the subscription that our mutual customers pay be reworded as "Sage Intacct Development Fee"?...

Being the non-Sage 100 consultant in the thread - is the content library or has 90 Minds in general thought about compiling enhancements built by 90 Minds consulting members into a list and publishing pricing for it? Think of it like a scripting marketplace.

For reference, DSD has a very clean way of publishing their enhancements: https://www.dsdinc.com/enhancements/marketplace/search 

Taking a page out of their book, I could see something similar along with the member who published the script, description, module, fee for service (fixed/T&M), and a "Contact" button.

With the amount of knowledge this group has on the product, I bet that would be a big benefit and also help other consultants consider selling a 90 Minds' partner's enhancement vs. building a differently engineered wheel.

Just a thought.

Can I put on my customer hat for a minute? From the standpoint of a customer I think they might be curious what their annual 6% fee increase is funding if not these types of product "enhancements". 

For updates the end users already only receive "quick wins" which if we were candid is code for "Sage isn't paying a product manager so let's have 90 Minds be the defacto PM with regards to product direction ... provided the fix doesn't cost too much time or money".

And I agree with you that scripting is something we should double down on as a skillset. 

Jane - I am thinking exactly like you. 

EVERY 90 Minder should have this customization (home-grown or purchased) in their sales/consulting kit. It is "secret sauce." It is IP. It is what can differentiate them from just "break/fix for printing crap" to "I know how to make your system sing and untangle your ops."

Some limitations in Sage 100 are only fixable through MDs or Sage -- but most are not. We should all be proactive in this.   

Hey @Jerry Norman let's not take this revenue away from non-MDs!  I've successfully implemented a script (with no UDFs) at one of my customers for SO (haven't done for PO but it would be about the same).  It was a PITA script, but it works :) 

Fixing this using Custom Office is not too hard.  UDF data flow for some sources, and a script for the others (like the contact fields, for which there is no linking business object).

I'm curious about the feasibility of enhancements on this. How much of this is feasible through scripting? How much require MD enhancements? 

Related, if there's a big customer demand for this, why hasn't an MD filled the need?

There are multiple sources for email addresses / phone numbers (SO: customer, ship-to address, contact, bill-to customer...; PO: vendor, purchase address, ship-to address, contact,...).  Instead of Sage linking them all into the transaction, and allowing us to use whatever is appropriate for the user (on the different forms...) Sage picked some logic in the past and called that WAD. 

Talk to someone individually and you can make a reasonable argument, but motivating big Sage to actually do something needs more power... like the Mod Squad suggestions, and the Sage Ideas site.

What's frustrating is that for the past several years of meetings with Sage it seems like when these types of questions are raised that the primary answer is a two part response: 

1. Hands in the air / shrug
2. "Uh, um, yeah I guess that's the way we've always done it" or "We'll look into it"

Based on this should the subscription that our mutual customers pay be reworded as "Sage Intacct Development Fee"?...

A couple of my random thoughts on the marketplace idea ( as well as why we really need to "up our engagement" )... 

• It feels like the classic 80/20 situation: A small core group, maybe 20%, seem to generate most of the useful posts, answers, and overall value.
• Lots of folks seem to be mostly reading/consuming: Many members benefit from the solutions shared by the active posters but don't contribute much back. It creates an imbalance where many "take" more than they "give."
• Engagement feels reactive, not proactive: We see activity when someone hits a critical issue (that "Sunday 5 pm upgrade crisis" scenario), or a widely experienced issue is posted and replied to by several people,  but less consistent, day-to-day sharing or new discussion from the wider group.
• Do we as a group create enough reason for casual check-ins? For the less-active majority, maybe there isn't a compelling daily or weekly reason to log in and contribute unless they're actively troubleshooting something urgent.
• Is this 80/20 activity level sustainable? Relying so heavily on a small group of contributors leads to burnout. Plus, the group as a whole isn't tapping into the full knowledge pool of all members.
• This impacts group projects (like the marketplace idea): Initiatives like the enhancement marketplace idea are great, but they really depend on broader buy-in. There's also an issue of competitive advantage which is quite active among out BPAC level members. Getting more than the usual active 20% to actually contribute their work (their "scripts" or "wheels") will be key, otherwise, it will struggle to get traction.
  
  TLDR - We have day jobs and to some extent our collective thinking is a lot like our clients who look at their own eCommerce sites and describe an Amazon type site which they deceive themselves into believing is realistic to implement for $500.

Being the non-Sage 100 consultant in the thread - is the content library or has 90 Minds in general thought about compiling enhancements built by 90 Minds consulting members into a list and publishing pricing for it? Think of it like a scripting marketplace.

For reference, DSD has a very clean way of publishing their enhancements: https://www.dsdinc.com/enhancements/marketplace/search 

Taking a page out of their book, I could see something similar along with the member who published the script, description, module, fee for service (fixed/T&M), and a "Contact" button.

With the amount of knowledge this group has on the product, I bet that would be a big benefit and also help other consultants consider selling a 90 Minds' partner's enhancement vs. building a differently engineered wheel.

Just a thought.

Can I put on my customer hat for a minute? From the standpoint of a customer I think they might be curious what their annual 6% fee increase is funding if not these types of product "enhancements". 

For updates the end users already only receive "quick wins" which if we were candid is code for "Sage isn't paying a product manager so let's have 90 Minds be the defacto PM with regards to product direction ... provided the fix doesn't cost too much time or money".

And I agree with you that scripting is something we should double down on as a skillset. 

Jane - I am thinking exactly like you. 

EVERY 90 Minder should have this customization (home-grown or purchased) in their sales/consulting kit. It is "secret sauce." It is IP. It is what can differentiate them from just "break/fix for printing crap" to "I know how to make your system sing and untangle your ops."

Some limitations in Sage 100 are only fixable through MDs or Sage -- but most are not. We should all be proactive in this.   

Hey @Jerry Norman let's not take this revenue away from non-MDs!  I've successfully implemented a script (with no UDFs) at one of my customers for SO (haven't done for PO but it would be about the same).  It was a PITA script, but it works :) 

Fixing this using Custom Office is not too hard.  UDF data flow for some sources, and a script for the others (like the contact fields, for which there is no linking business object).

I'm curious about the feasibility of enhancements on this. How much of this is feasible through scripting? How much require MD enhancements? 

Related, if there's a big customer demand for this, why hasn't an MD filled the need?

There are multiple sources for email addresses / phone numbers (SO: customer, ship-to address, contact, bill-to customer...; PO: vendor, purchase address, ship-to address, contact,...).  Instead of Sage linking them all into the transaction, and allowing us to use whatever is appropriate for the user (on the different forms...) Sage picked some logic in the past and called that WAD. 

Talk to someone individually and you can make a reasonable argument, but motivating big Sage to actually do something needs more power... like the Mod Squad suggestions, and the Sage Ideas site.

A couple of my random thoughts on the marketplace idea ( as well as why we really need to "up our engagement" )... 

• It feels like the classic 80/20 situation: A small core group, maybe 20%, seem to generate most of the useful posts, answers, and overall value.
• Lots of folks seem to be mostly reading/consuming: Many members benefit from the solutions shared by the active posters but don't contribute much back. It creates an imbalance where many "take" more than they "give."
• Engagement feels reactive, not proactive: We see activity when someone hits a critical issue (that "Sunday 5 pm upgrade crisis" scenario), or a widely experienced issue is posted and replied to by several people,  but less consistent, day-to-day sharing or new discussion from the wider group.
• Do we as a group create enough reason for casual check-ins? For the less-active majority, maybe there isn't a compelling daily or weekly reason to log in and contribute unless they're actively troubleshooting something urgent.
• Is this 80/20 activity level sustainable? Relying so heavily on a small group of contributors leads to burnout. Plus, the group as a whole isn't tapping into the full knowledge pool of all members.
• This impacts group projects (like the marketplace idea): Initiatives like the enhancement marketplace idea are great, but they really depend on broader buy-in. There's also an issue of competitive advantage which is quite active among out BPAC level members. Getting more than the usual active 20% to actually contribute their work (their "scripts" or "wheels") will be key, otherwise, it will struggle to get traction.
  
  TLDR - We have day jobs and to some extent our collective thinking is a lot like our clients who look at their own eCommerce sites and describe an Amazon type site which they deceive themselves into believing is realistic to implement for $500.

Being the non-Sage 100 consultant in the thread - is the content library or has 90 Minds in general thought about compiling enhancements built by 90 Minds consulting members into a list and publishing pricing for it? Think of it like a scripting marketplace.

For reference, DSD has a very clean way of publishing their enhancements: https://www.dsdinc.com/enhancements/marketplace/search 

Taking a page out of their book, I could see something similar along with the member who published the script, description, module, fee for service (fixed/T&M), and a "Contact" button.

With the amount of knowledge this group has on the product, I bet that would be a big benefit and also help other consultants consider selling a 90 Minds' partner's enhancement vs. building a differently engineered wheel.

Just a thought.

Can I put on my customer hat for a minute? From the standpoint of a customer I think they might be curious what their annual 6% fee increase is funding if not these types of product "enhancements". 

For updates the end users already only receive "quick wins" which if we were candid is code for "Sage isn't paying a product manager so let's have 90 Minds be the defacto PM with regards to product direction ... provided the fix doesn't cost too much time or money".

And I agree with you that scripting is something we should double down on as a skillset. 

Jane - I am thinking exactly like you. 

EVERY 90 Minder should have this customization (home-grown or purchased) in their sales/consulting kit. It is "secret sauce." It is IP. It is what can differentiate them from just "break/fix for printing crap" to "I know how to make your system sing and untangle your ops."

Some limitations in Sage 100 are only fixable through MDs or Sage -- but most are not. We should all be proactive in this.   

Hey @Jerry Norman let's not take this revenue away from non-MDs!  I've successfully implemented a script (with no UDFs) at one of my customers for SO (haven't done for PO but it would be about the same).  It was a PITA script, but it works :) 

Fixing this using Custom Office is not too hard.  UDF data flow for some sources, and a script for the others (like the contact fields, for which there is no linking business object).

I'm curious about the feasibility of enhancements on this. How much of this is feasible through scripting? How much require MD enhancements? 

Related, if there's a big customer demand for this, why hasn't an MD filled the need?

There are multiple sources for email addresses / phone numbers (SO: customer, ship-to address, contact, bill-to customer...; PO: vendor, purchase address, ship-to address, contact,...).  Instead of Sage linking them all into the transaction, and allowing us to use whatever is appropriate for the user (on the different forms...) Sage picked some logic in the past and called that WAD. 

Talk to someone individually and you can make a reasonable argument, but motivating big Sage to actually do something needs more power... like the Mod Squad suggestions, and the Sage Ideas site.

What's frustrating is that for the past several years of meetings with Sage it seems like when these types of questions are raised that the primary answer is a two part response: 

1. Hands in the air / shrug
2. "Uh, um, yeah I guess that's the way we've always done it" or "We'll look into it"

Based on this should the subscription that our mutual customers pay be reworded as "Sage Intacct Development Fee"?...

EXACTLY the same for me...what @David Overholt said. To reiterate, I read every post. IF I can answer, I do. Generally speaking, someone else has a better answer, or they answer more quickly than I do. And nobody has to worry about me being a 'taker' because I can't remember 90% of what I read anymore. 😂

A couple of my random thoughts on the marketplace idea ( as well as why we really need to "up our engagement" )... 

• It feels like the classic 80/20 situation: A small core group, maybe 20%, seem to generate most of the useful posts, answers, and overall value.
• Lots of folks seem to be mostly reading/consuming: Many members benefit from the solutions shared by the active posters but don't contribute much back. It creates an imbalance where many "take" more than they "give."
• Engagement feels reactive, not proactive: We see activity when someone hits a critical issue (that "Sunday 5 pm upgrade crisis" scenario), or a widely experienced issue is posted and replied to by several people,  but less consistent, day-to-day sharing or new discussion from the wider group.
• Do we as a group create enough reason for casual check-ins? For the less-active majority, maybe there isn't a compelling daily or weekly reason to log in and contribute unless they're actively troubleshooting something urgent.
• Is this 80/20 activity level sustainable? Relying so heavily on a small group of contributors leads to burnout. Plus, the group as a whole isn't tapping into the full knowledge pool of all members.
• This impacts group projects (like the marketplace idea): Initiatives like the enhancement marketplace idea are great, but they really depend on broader buy-in. There's also an issue of competitive advantage which is quite active among out BPAC level members. Getting more than the usual active 20% to actually contribute their work (their "scripts" or "wheels") will be key, otherwise, it will struggle to get traction.
  
  TLDR - We have day jobs and to some extent our collective thinking is a lot like our clients who look at their own eCommerce sites and describe an Amazon type site which they deceive themselves into believing is realistic to implement for $500.

Being the non-Sage 100 consultant in the thread - is the content library or has 90 Minds in general thought about compiling enhancements built by 90 Minds consulting members into a list and publishing pricing for it? Think of it like a scripting marketplace.

For reference, DSD has a very clean way of publishing their enhancements: https://www.dsdinc.com/enhancements/marketplace/search 

Taking a page out of their book, I could see something similar along with the member who published the script, description, module, fee for service (fixed/T&M), and a "Contact" button.

With the amount of knowledge this group has on the product, I bet that would be a big benefit and also help other consultants consider selling a 90 Minds' partner's enhancement vs. building a differently engineered wheel.

Just a thought.

Can I put on my customer hat for a minute? From the standpoint of a customer I think they might be curious what their annual 6% fee increase is funding if not these types of product "enhancements". 

For updates the end users already only receive "quick wins" which if we were candid is code for "Sage isn't paying a product manager so let's have 90 Minds be the defacto PM with regards to product direction ... provided the fix doesn't cost too much time or money".

And I agree with you that scripting is something we should double down on as a skillset. 

Jane - I am thinking exactly like you. 

EVERY 90 Minder should have this customization (home-grown or purchased) in their sales/consulting kit. It is "secret sauce." It is IP. It is what can differentiate them from just "break/fix for printing crap" to "I know how to make your system sing and untangle your ops."

Some limitations in Sage 100 are only fixable through MDs or Sage -- but most are not. We should all be proactive in this.   

Hey @Jerry Norman let's not take this revenue away from non-MDs!  I've successfully implemented a script (with no UDFs) at one of my customers for SO (haven't done for PO but it would be about the same).  It was a PITA script, but it works :) 

Fixing this using Custom Office is not too hard.  UDF data flow for some sources, and a script for the others (like the contact fields, for which there is no linking business object).

I'm curious about the feasibility of enhancements on this. How much of this is feasible through scripting? How much require MD enhancements? 

Related, if there's a big customer demand for this, why hasn't an MD filled the need?

There are multiple sources for email addresses / phone numbers (SO: customer, ship-to address, contact, bill-to customer...; PO: vendor, purchase address, ship-to address, contact,...).  Instead of Sage linking them all into the transaction, and allowing us to use whatever is appropriate for the user (on the different forms...) Sage picked some logic in the past and called that WAD. 

Talk to someone individually and you can make a reasonable argument, but motivating big Sage to actually do something needs more power... like the Mod Squad suggestions, and the Sage Ideas site.

What's frustrating is that for the past several years of meetings with Sage it seems like when these types of questions are raised that the primary answer is a two part response: 

1. Hands in the air / shrug
2. "Uh, um, yeah I guess that's the way we've always done it" or "We'll look into it"

Based on this should the subscription that our mutual customers pay be reworded as "Sage Intacct Development Fee"?...

I strongly believe in collaboration within a community like this.  Yes, we can be seen as competitors in a certain light, but we are also fighting the same fights, against the same technical obstacles (and same red-tape).  There is an ethical line in the sand, and believe 90Minds (leadership and membership) walks that line very well.

(I first had a taste of this kind of thing within a Lotus Notes rollout at IBM Canada in the late 90's... where the same work was being done by different departments / teams, and I learned how pay-it-forward information sharing can help everyone).

I read everything here (and on the Sage 100 Community forums), and respond when I have time (and more than trivial inputs to share).  The main benefit is that I learn a ton, just by reading... and others sharing their experiences.  Also, in return for my contributions, I feel like I generate more good-will, where others might pay a bit more attention to the questions I ask.  At 90Minds, I don't generally expect anyone will avoid replying to posts based on who is asking the question.  On the Sage site though I am convinced my posts get more attention from the Sage development... because of my participation level.  Personally, I avoid gift wrapping full solutions for free, and lean towards hints at learning (for those with a DIY spirit).  I don't want to steal consulting business from anyone, and believe that those wanting to learn themselves are less likely to pay anyone for a solution anyways.  I also want to learn, so my conscience is clear when I choose to hold back a bit.  I treat others the way I want to be treated.

Having a script marketplace here is a great suggestion, but may be difficult in reality, because scripts almost always need to be custom fit to client specifics.  (Eg. this week I learned a working SO line tariff script has to be completely re-written to work for exploding kits...).

EXACTLY the same for me...what @David Overholt said. To reiterate, I read every post. IF I can answer, I do. Generally speaking, someone else has a better answer, or they answer more quickly than I do. And nobody has to worry about me being a 'taker' because I can't remember 90% of what I read anymore. 😂

A couple of my random thoughts on the marketplace idea ( as well as why we really need to "up our engagement" )... 

• It feels like the classic 80/20 situation: A small core group, maybe 20%, seem to generate most of the useful posts, answers, and overall value.
• Lots of folks seem to be mostly reading/consuming: Many members benefit from the solutions shared by the active posters but don't contribute much back. It creates an imbalance where many "take" more than they "give."
• Engagement feels reactive, not proactive: We see activity when someone hits a critical issue (that "Sunday 5 pm upgrade crisis" scenario), or a widely experienced issue is posted and replied to by several people,  but less consistent, day-to-day sharing or new discussion from the wider group.
• Do we as a group create enough reason for casual check-ins? For the less-active majority, maybe there isn't a compelling daily or weekly reason to log in and contribute unless they're actively troubleshooting something urgent.
• Is this 80/20 activity level sustainable? Relying so heavily on a small group of contributors leads to burnout. Plus, the group as a whole isn't tapping into the full knowledge pool of all members.
• This impacts group projects (like the marketplace idea): Initiatives like the enhancement marketplace idea are great, but they really depend on broader buy-in. There's also an issue of competitive advantage which is quite active among out BPAC level members. Getting more than the usual active 20% to actually contribute their work (their "scripts" or "wheels") will be key, otherwise, it will struggle to get traction.
  
  TLDR - We have day jobs and to some extent our collective thinking is a lot like our clients who look at their own eCommerce sites and describe an Amazon type site which they deceive themselves into believing is realistic to implement for $500.

Being the non-Sage 100 consultant in the thread - is the content library or has 90 Minds in general thought about compiling enhancements built by 90 Minds consulting members into a list and publishing pricing for it? Think of it like a scripting marketplace.

For reference, DSD has a very clean way of publishing their enhancements: https://www.dsdinc.com/enhancements/marketplace/search 

Taking a page out of their book, I could see something similar along with the member who published the script, description, module, fee for service (fixed/T&M), and a "Contact" button.

With the amount of knowledge this group has on the product, I bet that would be a big benefit and also help other consultants consider selling a 90 Minds' partner's enhancement vs. building a differently engineered wheel.

Just a thought.

Can I put on my customer hat for a minute? From the standpoint of a customer I think they might be curious what their annual 6% fee increase is funding if not these types of product "enhancements". 

For updates the end users already only receive "quick wins" which if we were candid is code for "Sage isn't paying a product manager so let's have 90 Minds be the defacto PM with regards to product direction ... provided the fix doesn't cost too much time or money".

And I agree with you that scripting is something we should double down on as a skillset. 

Jane - I am thinking exactly like you. 

EVERY 90 Minder should have this customization (home-grown or purchased) in their sales/consulting kit. It is "secret sauce." It is IP. It is what can differentiate them from just "break/fix for printing crap" to "I know how to make your system sing and untangle your ops."

Some limitations in Sage 100 are only fixable through MDs or Sage -- but most are not. We should all be proactive in this.   

Hey @Jerry Norman let's not take this revenue away from non-MDs!  I've successfully implemented a script (with no UDFs) at one of my customers for SO (haven't done for PO but it would be about the same).  It was a PITA script, but it works :) 

Fixing this using Custom Office is not too hard.  UDF data flow for some sources, and a script for the others (like the contact fields, for which there is no linking business object).

I'm curious about the feasibility of enhancements on this. How much of this is feasible through scripting? How much require MD enhancements? 

Related, if there's a big customer demand for this, why hasn't an MD filled the need?

There are multiple sources for email addresses / phone numbers (SO: customer, ship-to address, contact, bill-to customer...; PO: vendor, purchase address, ship-to address, contact,...).  Instead of Sage linking them all into the transaction, and allowing us to use whatever is appropriate for the user (on the different forms...) Sage picked some logic in the past and called that WAD. 

Talk to someone individually and you can make a reasonable argument, but motivating big Sage to actually do something needs more power... like the Mod Squad suggestions, and the Sage Ideas site.

What's frustrating is that for the past several years of meetings with Sage it seems like when these types of questions are raised that the primary answer is a two part response: 

1. Hands in the air / shrug
2. "Uh, um, yeah I guess that's the way we've always done it" or "We'll look into it"

Based on this should the subscription that our mutual customers pay be reworded as "Sage Intacct Development Fee"?...

This has been a great discussion!

• If anybody here is interested in exploring how we can increase community engagement, please consider the Membership Committee. That is one of our goals this year.
• If you aren't already, change your 90 Minds settings so you are emailed nightly a digest of all the activity for a group from that day. It is a very effective way to efficiently develop a sense of what's going on. 
• I'm no expert on using the Ideation site, but I don't see an item close the the missing functionality that started this thread? Base on what we heard at MOTM it seems to me that Sage could be more interested in this than before. 
• My approach toward customers dissatisfied with functionality as they see it is always to try to discuss. "Yep, it doesn't work the way you think it should. I can't do anything about that. How do you want to work around this?" Learning to genuinely trying to engage with that question is key to improving our customer satisfaction. As Wayne points out, some customers simply aren't interested. I see those too. But others are curious to one degree or another, and they appreciate the patience of working through the consideration with them; they feel "seen." And I always try to briefly document such incidents in email, because we really don't know how that information might be used internally.  
• I don't think any of us are in danger of good ideas being "stolen." I haven't seen it. As for stealing customers, if you encounter this, please let @Anne Sawyer know. We don't encourage this.
• A marketplace here would be very, very hard to implement in way that pays off for the group. However, I do think a separate Community where our members who have come up with cool stuff could be popular in many ways. "Member Success Stories" is something the Membership Committee is considering. I'd like to see some sort of mechanism that let's us be reminded of and find member solutions such as @Todd Martin 's API product. 

If anybody wants to discuss or explore any of this Member-related stuff, please feel free to call me.

I strongly believe in collaboration within a community like this.  Yes, we can be seen as competitors in a certain light, but we are also fighting the same fights, against the same technical obstacles (and same red-tape).  There is an ethical line in the sand, and believe 90Minds (leadership and membership) walks that line very well.

(I first had a taste of this kind of thing within a Lotus Notes rollout at IBM Canada in the late 90's... where the same work was being done by different departments / teams, and I learned how pay-it-forward information sharing can help everyone).

I read everything here (and on the Sage 100 Community forums), and respond when I have time (and more than trivial inputs to share).  The main benefit is that I learn a ton, just by reading... and others sharing their experiences.  Also, in return for my contributions, I feel like I generate more good-will, where others might pay a bit more attention to the questions I ask.  At 90Minds, I don't generally expect anyone will avoid replying to posts based on who is asking the question.  On the Sage site though I am convinced my posts get more attention from the Sage development... because of my participation level.  Personally, I avoid gift wrapping full solutions for free, and lean towards hints at learning (for those with a DIY spirit).  I don't want to steal consulting business from anyone, and believe that those wanting to learn themselves are less likely to pay anyone for a solution anyways.  I also want to learn, so my conscience is clear when I choose to hold back a bit.  I treat others the way I want to be treated.

Having a script marketplace here is a great suggestion, but may be difficult in reality, because scripts almost always need to be custom fit to client specifics.  (Eg. this week I learned a working SO line tariff script has to be completely re-written to work for exploding kits...).

EXACTLY the same for me...what @David Overholt said. To reiterate, I read every post. IF I can answer, I do. Generally speaking, someone else has a better answer, or they answer more quickly than I do. And nobody has to worry about me being a 'taker' because I can't remember 90% of what I read anymore. 😂

A couple of my random thoughts on the marketplace idea ( as well as why we really need to "up our engagement" )... 

• It feels like the classic 80/20 situation: A small core group, maybe 20%, seem to generate most of the useful posts, answers, and overall value.
• Lots of folks seem to be mostly reading/consuming: Many members benefit from the solutions shared by the active posters but don't contribute much back. It creates an imbalance where many "take" more than they "give."
• Engagement feels reactive, not proactive: We see activity when someone hits a critical issue (that "Sunday 5 pm upgrade crisis" scenario), or a widely experienced issue is posted and replied to by several people,  but less consistent, day-to-day sharing or new discussion from the wider group.
• Do we as a group create enough reason for casual check-ins? For the less-active majority, maybe there isn't a compelling daily or weekly reason to log in and contribute unless they're actively troubleshooting something urgent.
• Is this 80/20 activity level sustainable? Relying so heavily on a small group of contributors leads to burnout. Plus, the group as a whole isn't tapping into the full knowledge pool of all members.
• This impacts group projects (like the marketplace idea): Initiatives like the enhancement marketplace idea are great, but they really depend on broader buy-in. There's also an issue of competitive advantage which is quite active among out BPAC level members. Getting more than the usual active 20% to actually contribute their work (their "scripts" or "wheels") will be key, otherwise, it will struggle to get traction.
  
  TLDR - We have day jobs and to some extent our collective thinking is a lot like our clients who look at their own eCommerce sites and describe an Amazon type site which they deceive themselves into believing is realistic to implement for $500.

Being the non-Sage 100 consultant in the thread - is the content library or has 90 Minds in general thought about compiling enhancements built by 90 Minds consulting members into a list and publishing pricing for it? Think of it like a scripting marketplace.

For reference, DSD has a very clean way of publishing their enhancements: https://www.dsdinc.com/enhancements/marketplace/search 

Taking a page out of their book, I could see something similar along with the member who published the script, description, module, fee for service (fixed/T&M), and a "Contact" button.

With the amount of knowledge this group has on the product, I bet that would be a big benefit and also help other consultants consider selling a 90 Minds' partner's enhancement vs. building a differently engineered wheel.

Just a thought.

Can I put on my customer hat for a minute? From the standpoint of a customer I think they might be curious what their annual 6% fee increase is funding if not these types of product "enhancements". 

For updates the end users already only receive "quick wins" which if we were candid is code for "Sage isn't paying a product manager so let's have 90 Minds be the defacto PM with regards to product direction ... provided the fix doesn't cost too much time or money".

And I agree with you that scripting is something we should double down on as a skillset. 

Jane - I am thinking exactly like you. 

EVERY 90 Minder should have this customization (home-grown or purchased) in their sales/consulting kit. It is "secret sauce." It is IP. It is what can differentiate them from just "break/fix for printing crap" to "I know how to make your system sing and untangle your ops."

Some limitations in Sage 100 are only fixable through MDs or Sage -- but most are not. We should all be proactive in this.   

Hey @Jerry Norman let's not take this revenue away from non-MDs!  I've successfully implemented a script (with no UDFs) at one of my customers for SO (haven't done for PO but it would be about the same).  It was a PITA script, but it works :) 

Fixing this using Custom Office is not too hard.  UDF data flow for some sources, and a script for the others (like the contact fields, for which there is no linking business object).

I'm curious about the feasibility of enhancements on this. How much of this is feasible through scripting? How much require MD enhancements? 

Related, if there's a big customer demand for this, why hasn't an MD filled the need?

There are multiple sources for email addresses / phone numbers (SO: customer, ship-to address, contact, bill-to customer...; PO: vendor, purchase address, ship-to address, contact,...).  Instead of Sage linking them all into the transaction, and allowing us to use whatever is appropriate for the user (on the different forms...) Sage picked some logic in the past and called that WAD. 

Talk to someone individually and you can make a reasonable argument, but motivating big Sage to actually do something needs more power... like the Mod Squad suggestions, and the Sage Ideas site.

What's frustrating is that for the past several years of meetings with Sage it seems like when these types of questions are raised that the primary answer is a two part response: 

1. Hands in the air / shrug
2. "Uh, um, yeah I guess that's the way we've always done it" or "We'll look into it"

Based on this should the subscription that our mutual customers pay be reworded as "Sage Intacct Development Fee"?...

I agree that this has been a GREAT discussion!  And I have to add, as others have, that I do read all the 90minds posts, every day when my digests arrive.  It's my morning coffee news.  I have to say that 90minds is the first place I go to search for information when researching a topic or software or ... well just about anything having to do with Sage100. 

I would respond to more postings, but there are many quick responders out there who beat me to it.    

This has been a great discussion!

• If anybody here is interested in exploring how we can increase community engagement, please consider the Membership Committee. That is one of our goals this year.
• If you aren't already, change your 90 Minds settings so you are emailed nightly a digest of all the activity for a group from that day. It is a very effective way to efficiently develop a sense of what's going on. 
• I'm no expert on using the Ideation site, but I don't see an item close the the missing functionality that started this thread? Base on what we heard at MOTM it seems to me that Sage could be more interested in this than before. 
• My approach toward customers dissatisfied with functionality as they see it is always to try to discuss. "Yep, it doesn't work the way you think it should. I can't do anything about that. How do you want to work around this?" Learning to genuinely trying to engage with that question is key to improving our customer satisfaction. As Wayne points out, some customers simply aren't interested. I see those too. But others are curious to one degree or another, and they appreciate the patience of working through the consideration with them; they feel "seen." And I always try to briefly document such incidents in email, because we really don't know how that information might be used internally.  
• I don't think any of us are in danger of good ideas being "stolen." I haven't seen it. As for stealing customers, if you encounter this, please let @Anne Sawyer know. We don't encourage this.
• A marketplace here would be very, very hard to implement in way that pays off for the group. However, I do think a separate Community where our members who have come up with cool stuff could be popular in many ways. "Member Success Stories" is something the Membership Committee is considering. I'd like to see some sort of mechanism that let's us be reminded of and find member solutions such as @Todd Martin 's API product. 

If anybody wants to discuss or explore any of this Member-related stuff, please feel free to call me.

I strongly believe in collaboration within a community like this.  Yes, we can be seen as competitors in a certain light, but we are also fighting the same fights, against the same technical obstacles (and same red-tape).  There is an ethical line in the sand, and believe 90Minds (leadership and membership) walks that line very well.

(I first had a taste of this kind of thing within a Lotus Notes rollout at IBM Canada in the late 90's... where the same work was being done by different departments / teams, and I learned how pay-it-forward information sharing can help everyone).

I read everything here (and on the Sage 100 Community forums), and respond when I have time (and more than trivial inputs to share).  The main benefit is that I learn a ton, just by reading... and others sharing their experiences.  Also, in return for my contributions, I feel like I generate more good-will, where others might pay a bit more attention to the questions I ask.  At 90Minds, I don't generally expect anyone will avoid replying to posts based on who is asking the question.  On the Sage site though I am convinced my posts get more attention from the Sage development... because of my participation level.  Personally, I avoid gift wrapping full solutions for free, and lean towards hints at learning (for those with a DIY spirit).  I don't want to steal consulting business from anyone, and believe that those wanting to learn themselves are less likely to pay anyone for a solution anyways.  I also want to learn, so my conscience is clear when I choose to hold back a bit.  I treat others the way I want to be treated.

Having a script marketplace here is a great suggestion, but may be difficult in reality, because scripts almost always need to be custom fit to client specifics.  (Eg. this week I learned a working SO line tariff script has to be completely re-written to work for exploding kits...).

EXACTLY the same for me...what @David Overholt said. To reiterate, I read every post. IF I can answer, I do. Generally speaking, someone else has a better answer, or they answer more quickly than I do. And nobody has to worry about me being a 'taker' because I can't remember 90% of what I read anymore. 😂

A couple of my random thoughts on the marketplace idea ( as well as why we really need to "up our engagement" )... 

• It feels like the classic 80/20 situation: A small core group, maybe 20%, seem to generate most of the useful posts, answers, and overall value.
• Lots of folks seem to be mostly reading/consuming: Many members benefit from the solutions shared by the active posters but don't contribute much back. It creates an imbalance where many "take" more than they "give."
• Engagement feels reactive, not proactive: We see activity when someone hits a critical issue (that "Sunday 5 pm upgrade crisis" scenario), or a widely experienced issue is posted and replied to by several people,  but less consistent, day-to-day sharing or new discussion from the wider group.
• Do we as a group create enough reason for casual check-ins? For the less-active majority, maybe there isn't a compelling daily or weekly reason to log in and contribute unless they're actively troubleshooting something urgent.
• Is this 80/20 activity level sustainable? Relying so heavily on a small group of contributors leads to burnout. Plus, the group as a whole isn't tapping into the full knowledge pool of all members.
• This impacts group projects (like the marketplace idea): Initiatives like the enhancement marketplace idea are great, but they really depend on broader buy-in. There's also an issue of competitive advantage which is quite active among out BPAC level members. Getting more than the usual active 20% to actually contribute their work (their "scripts" or "wheels") will be key, otherwise, it will struggle to get traction.
  
  TLDR - We have day jobs and to some extent our collective thinking is a lot like our clients who look at their own eCommerce sites and describe an Amazon type site which they deceive themselves into believing is realistic to implement for $500.

Being the non-Sage 100 consultant in the thread - is the content library or has 90 Minds in general thought about compiling enhancements built by 90 Minds consulting members into a list and publishing pricing for it? Think of it like a scripting marketplace.

For reference, DSD has a very clean way of publishing their enhancements: https://www.dsdinc.com/enhancements/marketplace/search 

Taking a page out of their book, I could see something similar along with the member who published the script, description, module, fee for service (fixed/T&M), and a "Contact" button.

With the amount of knowledge this group has on the product, I bet that would be a big benefit and also help other consultants consider selling a 90 Minds' partner's enhancement vs. building a differently engineered wheel.

Just a thought.

Can I put on my customer hat for a minute? From the standpoint of a customer I think they might be curious what their annual 6% fee increase is funding if not these types of product "enhancements". 

For updates the end users already only receive "quick wins" which if we were candid is code for "Sage isn't paying a product manager so let's have 90 Minds be the defacto PM with regards to product direction ... provided the fix doesn't cost too much time or money".

And I agree with you that scripting is something we should double down on as a skillset. 

Jane - I am thinking exactly like you. 

EVERY 90 Minder should have this customization (home-grown or purchased) in their sales/consulting kit. It is "secret sauce." It is IP. It is what can differentiate them from just "break/fix for printing crap" to "I know how to make your system sing and untangle your ops."

Some limitations in Sage 100 are only fixable through MDs or Sage -- but most are not. We should all be proactive in this.   

Hey @Jerry Norman let's not take this revenue away from non-MDs!  I've successfully implemented a script (with no UDFs) at one of my customers for SO (haven't done for PO but it would be about the same).  It was a PITA script, but it works :) 

Fixing this using Custom Office is not too hard.  UDF data flow for some sources, and a script for the others (like the contact fields, for which there is no linking business object).

I'm curious about the feasibility of enhancements on this. How much of this is feasible through scripting? How much require MD enhancements? 

Related, if there's a big customer demand for this, why hasn't an MD filled the need?

There are multiple sources for email addresses / phone numbers (SO: customer, ship-to address, contact, bill-to customer...; PO: vendor, purchase address, ship-to address, contact,...).  Instead of Sage linking them all into the transaction, and allowing us to use whatever is appropriate for the user (on the different forms...) Sage picked some logic in the past and called that WAD. 

Talk to someone individually and you can make a reasonable argument, but motivating big Sage to actually do something needs more power... like the Mod Squad suggestions, and the Sage Ideas site.

What's frustrating is that for the past several years of meetings with Sage it seems like when these types of questions are raised that the primary answer is a two part response: 

1. Hands in the air / shrug
2. "Uh, um, yeah I guess that's the way we've always done it" or "We'll look into it"

Based on this should the subscription that our mutual customers pay be reworded as "Sage Intacct Development Fee"?...