if (Supplier/Customer/Employee), creating 3 JDE Address Book records

Eric Lehti

VIP Member
How do you teach your users to not set up additional(duplicate) JDE Address Book records for the same entity, if it is a customer AND a supplier?

Do you use the F0101 field ABAT1 to designate an entity as Vendor/Supplier/Customer/Employee/whatever?

I just learned this morning that our people set up multiple Address Book records for the same entity if it is both a customer and a supplier.

Example: We already have a customer set up with an F0101 Address Book record and an F0301 customer record. F0101 Search Type field ABAT1 is 'C'. People in Sales and Accts Receivable always do Name Search (P01200) with ABAT1 set to 'C'.

If our Accts Payable people want to purchase from this same entity, they perform name search (P01200) on ABAT1=V'endor. On not finding this entity in Address book (because they searched on ABAT1=V, they create a new F0101 Address book record with ABAT1=V and set up a F0401 Vendor master record.
User express surprise that a single JDE Address book entry can be used for all purposes (Accounts Payable, Accounts Receivable, Human Resources.
 
I'm PRETTY SURE that as long as "Payables YES" is
set on the address book you get an F0401 w/any ABAT1.

Gene
 
Gene, You are right about those fields referring to vendor and customer. But how do your users do Name Search? Do they set ABAT1 field to limit their search to Customers? or Vendors? Our use of field ABAT1 for this purpose causes our users to think that a JDE Address Book Record cannot be both a customer AND a Supplier/Vendor.
How you use the ABAT1 field? Does ABAT1 field designate Customer or Suppler at your site?
 
Hi Eric,

Your users BOTH A/R and A/P need to be doing their search for all ABAT1
types, as you could have a Vendor already setup that your A/R people now
want to use for a customer. Then all they would need to do for that
Vendor Record is set the Receivable flag to a Y. And the same goes for
the A/P people doing their search on all ABAT1 types and setting the
Payables flag to a Y on the Customer Record. This is pretty much what
we do here.

A word of caution here: When doing their search on the name or address
or city, abbreviations can cause people to not find a record and you'll
end up with duplicates. Like St. and Street, Ave and Avenue, St. and
Saint, Corp. and Corporation, Inc and Incorporated, etc. They should
search first not including or using these.

Jim
 
Hi Eric,

I feel your pain. And I’m a bit zealous about the topic…many years ago we moved from the G/L method to A/P method for 1099’s and it was discovered days before 1099’s were due out there were hundreds of duplicate vendors. I was charged with oversight of the related address – 1st address numbers modifications.

From then on I insisted all users, regardless of whether casual or extreme data entry, are trained to search the address book same as yours (and not the 'masters').

Our solution was to introduce a customised P01012/W01012B with a default wildcard for search type in the header filter AND the header ALPH field disabled. Basic training/orientation includes practice searches using the wildcard before AND after a string for the ALPH field on the QBE. And of course we intentionally guide them (training environment of course) to find: a name with and without the middle initial; a company with and without ', Inc.'; LLC Vs. L.L.C.; an unobvious nickname and a proper first name (ex nn=Linda/p=Melinda/*inda*); ‘And’ instead of ‘&’; using ‘ath’ to find Cathi, Cathy, Kathy, Kathi, Katherine, Kathleen, Cathleen, Catherine, path, marathon, etc. and as many other examples as needed until the message is hammered home and we observe them using the before and after ‘*’ on a partial string second nature. We also have one AT1 type directly correlated an offline number scheme (all others are next number table). Provides the opportunity to train on the number filters for QBE as well.

This lesson has actually been a good foundation for using the QBE in all applications. When users are later shown how to use the ‘work with accounts’ search screen (who hasn’t abbreviated Depreciation/Depr/depr somehow somewhere in an object), search for invoice numbers (allows users to detect a ‘duplicate’ because someone padded an invoice number with a leading ~space bar~), a remark/explanation field, I want to see everything over $200,000…you get the idea.

Apologies for rambling…

tarkan
 
Back
Top