By using this website, you agree to our Terms of Use (click here)
Is it possible to have separate vendor lists per Branch in Acumatica?
It seems like the Vendors are shared between the Branches. But, in come cases, I want the Branches to act like standalone companies with separate Bendor lists.
I thought that maybe this could be done with Row-Level security. I thought that I could create a separate Security Group per Branch, but it would be a real pain to remember to manually add the Vendor to the Security Group every time I add a new Vendor.
Hi Kermit,
First of all, thanks to Lawrence Gilliam for point this out over on the LinkedIn Acumatica ERP Software User Group.
It is possible to use the Row-Level security groups and have them be dynamic so you don't have to manually add new Vendors every time. But, the way you do it is with the Vendor Class which isn't the best if you were planning to use the Vendor Class for something else.
You could create a separate Vendor Class for each Branch. When you create the Vendor Class on the Vendor Classes screen, there is a Default Restriction Group field that you could use for this purpose. You would create a separate Row-Level security group for each Branch using the Vendor Access screen, then create a separate Vendor Class for each Branch using the Vendor Classes screen. Then match the two together using the Default Restriction Group field on the Vendor Classes screen.
If you do this, then you just assign the Vendor Class to every new Vendor. The Vendor Class will default the Vendor to the appropriate Branch's row-level security group and only users with access to that Branch's row-level security group will be able to see the Vendor in the system.
Not ideal since you can't use the Vendor Class for other purposes. But you could always use an Attribute to take the place of the Vendor Class.
One other idea on this, but it isn't as "industrial strength".
The first idea is more "industrial strength" because users would not be able to use vendors unless they have access to the Branch.
On the Segmented Keys screen, you can check Auto Number to automatically generate the Vendor IDs, then fill-in the Numbering ID to assign a Numbering Sequence to the Vendor numbering.
Then, on the Numbering Sequences screen for the numbering sequence that you selected in the Numbering ID field above, you can have different numbering sequences for each branch. So, you could begin the Vendor IDs with the Branch IDs, then have it auto-number after that.
Here is an example of two different Vendor ID numbering sequences for the HQ and VA branches:
The key is the Branch field highlighted above which allows you to have separate vendor numbering sequences per Branch.
Then, in the vendor lookup magnifying glass field that you will find throughout Acumatica, you can add a filter that makes sure the Vendor starts with the Branch ID and save it as a Shared filter like this:
Still not ideal because the user has to select the filter manually and nothing will prevent them from selecting ALL RECORDS, but at least it's another idea.
If they only use one Branch, then they could select that Branch's filter as the default filter for their user.
Neither idea is ideal, but at least there are a couple of options. It would be best to tie Vendors to a specific Branch, but I don't think it's possible without customization.
Thanks for the options Tim. You're right, not ideal, but it's not too bad in my situation because most of the data entry users (they are the ones I'm most concerned about) only have access to one Branch.
I could use the first option above and make an Attribute for categorizing my Vendors (what the Vendor Class would normally do). I would just need to add the Attribute to all of the reports that I want to filter on.
Use of the master vendor list by all branches is by design. The branch is assigned during Bill entry so it's possible to report on ONLY A/P transactions for a branch. It's also possible to limit access to each branch to individual A/P employees so they can't create a Bill or a Payment from an unauthorized branch.
I believe if you use those user-restrictions you will 'automatically' create the branch-segmentation you desire.
It is my humble opinion that creating three vendors for Sprint in three separate branches is a waste of time.
It also disallows the payment of Same Vendor Bills from a "Corporate" entity using a master cash account where automated due-to and due-from entries keep the branches in balance using a common cash account.
Totally agree Mike. Not a good idea to have three separate Sprint vendors. Better to just have one Vendor as Acumatica is designed for.
But I've had this request from people because they want to do consolidated GL reporting, but they want their companies to stay separate, including separate vendor lists.
In my opinion, it would be better to have one vendor and manage separate locations under the vendor, but then who owns the vendor master record? In places where the companies are very separate, but they want consolidated GL reporting, they have to go with multiple Branches. And if they want separate vendor lists as well, then they can kind of achieve it using the method outlined above.