UX: How do you work with smart section data sources?


I am working with payment line items in a UX app. We have a single-record smart section for a RE contract lease. I want to create a payment line item from a UX app and populate the smart section. Do I need a “smart section” child data source of the “payment line item” data source? For fields in a smart section, how should they be identified? By “label” from the Form Builder or by “name” from the Data Modeler?

You should create a child data source of payment line items: (1) You have your “payment line items” data source in place. (2) Use the ID of the current payment line item (the one you’re trying to edit) as a context-id for your child data source (the one containing the RE Contract). You may get something similar to the following code…

<triplat-ds name=”YourReContractDatasourceName”
    data=”{{ReContractForPaymentLineItem}}”>

    <triplat-ds-context name=”yourPaymentLineItemsDatasourceName”
        context-id=”{{currentPaymentLineItem._id}}”>

    </triplat-ds-context>

</triplat-ds>

Then, you can handle the “ReContractForPaymentLineItem” object through the binding created: ReContractForPaymentLineItem.name, ReContractForPaymentLineItem.status, etc.

[Admin: To see other related posts, use the UX tag or Data Source tag.]

Continue reading

Planon: How do you set up your contract management repository?


Without a proper contract management repository, you and your organisation are at high risk and not in control of supplier obligations, associated costs, and contract terminations or regulatory compliance. A structured contract registration allows you to proactively manage suppliers, validate contract-related cost and performance, ensures timely contract cancellation or change, and delivers valuable information to improve contracting policies.

Setting up your contract management repository starts with an inventory of contract categories such as activity-based contracts, performance contracts or framework agreements and the contract applications such as maintenance, services, procurement, lease or any other. For any contract, you have to collect, register and maintain a set of basic data, such as:

  • Internal information such as contract owner, department and cost centre.
  • Supplier information such as company details, address and contact person.
  • Contract status information such as active, in negotiation, for approval, or terminated.
  • Date information such as start date, notice, end date or cancellation options.
  • Asset reference, linking the contract to one or multiple assets in your asset repository.

On top of the basic data, the contract category determines the next level of contract data and information. For an activity-based maintenance contract, you have to register information about:

  • The individual activities that are contracted.
  • The timing and eventual frequency of the activities.
  • The associated budget for the contract or fixed cost per activity.

As performance contracting is a completely different concept for outsourcing maintenance, the performance contract includes different types of data and information, such as:

  • Performance definition in terms of availability and quality of assets.
  • Detailed service levels, times to start and times to complete.
  • Performance measurement methods, supplier bonus or penalty agreements, and billing parameters…

[Admin: To see other related posts, use the Planon tag or Contracts tag.]

Continue reading

IV96787: Retiring contract does not retire change orders or invoices


If you try to retire a contract that has a change order or invoice, the system should consider it, provide some logic to it, and/or provide a notification that you can’t retire it. The same should apply when you try to retire a change order that has other change orders or invoices associated to it.

The standard contract record that is in a Completed state cannot be retired if it has pending standard contract change orders or contract invoices associated to it. (The expectation was that the associated records would also be retired, or if not, a notification stating that they would not be retired.) Moving forward, the issue has been resolved by displaying an Attention message to the user that the standard contract cannot be retired because of the pending change orders or contract invoices. Also, the Retire and Delete actions on the change order form have been removed, so the user will not be able to retire the change order.

[Admin: This post is related to the 10.24.15 post about the behavior of contracts and change orders. To see other related posts, use the Change Orders tag.]

Continue reading

IV96536: Revising contract causes double-posted cost amount


After revising and reissuing a standard contract, the cost amount becomes cumulative against the budget.

As a temporary fix, do not revise the contract. Instead, post a change order to the contract. We needed to set the reverse transaction to “true” for 3 workflows. Moving forward, for capital projects, the standard contract will no longer double-post values after revising.

[Admin: To see other related posts, use the Costs tag or Change Orders tag.]

Continue reading

IV95963: Issues with lease partial payments and massive values


In TRIRIGA 10.5.2, the following issues have been seen:

  • (1) When capital leases start and end in the middle of a Semi-Annual, Annual, Quarterly, or Monthly payment period, the first and last period amortization in the fiscal line item (FLI) is not prorated correctly. As a result, the Day 1 right of use (ROU) is incorrect.
  • (2) Massive amounts are appearing in the Capital/Finance Schedule. The Interest Expense, Change in Liability Value, P&L Book Expense, Liability Value, and Net Equity fields are displaying massive amounts, like in the quintillions, even though the total rent is $240K.

We needed to fix the partial payment issue for the current and new lease accounting standards. Moving forward, we fixed an issue that when capital leases start and end in the middle of a Monthly, Quarterly, Semi-Annually, Annually payment period, the first and last period amortization in the FLI is not prorated.

[Admin: To see other related posts, use the Payments tag.]

Continue reading

Verdantix: Who are benefiting from the changes in lease accounting?


In early 2016, the US Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and the International Financial Accounting Standards Board (IASB) issued new lease standards, which require companies to include lease obligations in their balance sheets. The new standards take affect 1 January 2019 and will impact all companies that have leases for real estate or equipment and file financial statements…

For many years, IWMS software providers have provided real estate, leasing, and portfolio capabilities, which include modules that integrate details of leases and contracts with existing financial and accounting systems to provide a central database for real estate financial planning and analysis and to create the correct entries for the accounting system. The new FASB/IASB accounting standards bring the spotlight on the role of software in managing leases.

A review of the deals in the public domain shows that providers such as Accruent, Lucernex, and Qube are already swooping in on opportunities to help companies mitigate risk by ensuring compliance to these new leasing standards. In the last few months, Lucernex has announced several new contracts with retailers such as Bouclair, DXL, Bashas’ Family of Stores and Suburban Propane. Accruent has been selected by CTIL, Tillys and Sephora in just the last few weeks. We are also witnessing other IWMS vendors improving their capabilities for accurate lease calculations in accordance with the new lease accounting standards. For example, in April, Planon software received validation from a Big Four accounting firm that its leasing calculations engine was in accordance with the IASB/FASB requirements…

[Admin: This post is related to the 08.01.16 post about the competitors of IBM TRIRIGA. To see other related posts, use the FASB tag or IFRS tag.]

Continue reading

Why aren’t tasks always showing up in tabular metric reports?


Our client’s tabular metric reports, which are set to show the tasks of service requests, seem to have some issues. Although the tasks are found by the report, they don’t always show up or aren’t displayed on the list.

Here are two examples below: (1) In the first case, 6 tasks are found, but only 2 of them show up. (2) In the second case, 3 tasks are found, but none is displayed. Any ideas on what could be happening?

[Updated 05.03.17]

It seems that the user’s language (set in his profile) and the existence of a contract for the tasks affect their visibility one way or another on the tabular report. Here’s an example below: (1) When the user’s language is set to EN (English), all of the tasks show up fine. (2) When the user’s language is set to FR (French), only tasks which have a contract show up (in this case, only 1) even though all 8 are found…

Continue reading