My understanding of the Advanced Planning and Scheduling Module I gleaned from Insights is Capable to Promise will look to schedule a temp job considering supply/demand/lead time of constrained materials to provide a potential ship date.
I’ve managed to train Sales to project expected balance for individual parts on a given date themselves using Time Phased Inquiry with suggestions unchecked. This is usually sufficient, but TPI only uses due dates to calculate running balance. Unfortunately, we have quite a few long lead parts that are further complicated by promise dates months past the due date. These are also usually the parts with the most lines of activity to unsnarl before we can get an accurate balance estimate for a date.
IT has been gracious enough to add a new column to use promise date where available or due date when not and calculate a new running balance column by that sort. However, this customization is invisible to Epicor’s scheduling.
My concern is CTP will continue to use the running balance calculated by due date alone and quote an assembly ship date based on having those parts months earlier than promised.
Really looking for someone with APS/CTP experience to tell me where the flaw in my thinking is here before I can consider writing up a cost justification.
My understanding has always been that Epicor always uses Promise Date if it is entered. If it is not entered, then it goes by Due Date. I have not extensively tested this, so I can’t say for sure. Are you saying that you are not seeing the Promise Date populating in Time Phase and other places?
Job:198554 will actually reduce our on-hand balance to two. However, Time Phased Inquiry claims we’ll have the four. PO: 396975 is affecting the balance based on due date instead of promise date.
Header promise date is blank.
All of the releases have promise dates. That looks to be where it’s pulling the 6/27 date from into Time Phased Inquiry, but it’s not using it in a way that affects balance.
A partial receipt would be exceptionally rare as our standard would be to generate a new release for the remainder. This is just an example though. All of our promise dates are ignored by Time Phased Inquiry.
What is the purpose of promise dates? The promise date is an optional field that would represent the initial promise date from the supplier, and might well be the date you would want to use in checking supplier performance, but due date is the one used by the MRP and purchasing system.The due date would be calculated from lead times and required dates on a job (or entered), and the promise date would be when the supplier said he could deliver. However, if the supplier says he can’t deliver for that date, we would advise that the due date be changed, as that is the one used by MRP.Due date is the date when the company needs the item and promised date is the date the supplier promised to ship the item,Best practice would be to use the promised date for date changes coming from the supplier, the due date could change as well but that depends on the company needs and processes, but the promised date would be the one to change, due date is taking into consideration for purchasing purposes and suggestions coming from jobs and the like, but it all comes down to how your company deals with delayed shipments and maybe additional fees for the delayed shipment.
Why is it that once a PO is approved, why does the Due Date window turn grey but not promise date? The due date is the one that is subject to change. This is the intended behavior. To have “Promise Date” field enabled even after Purchase Order has been Approved, was enhancement that was implemented some versions ago.The reason is: The approval process is supposed to be run once the PO is ready to be transmitted to the vendor. The user would not know the Promise Date until the PO is received by the vendor. When the vendor supplies the Promise Date, such Promise Date value may be set without un-approving the Purchase Order. This is counter intuitive.
Does Buyer Workbench use Promise Date or Due Date for calculations?
Buyer Workbench uses promise date for that, but If no promise date exists for the PO release line, it uses the assigned due date for the comparison. This would be the only place in Epicor to consider promise date and only for those specific indicators.
Does Supplier Performance use Promise Date or Due Date? On Supplier Performance, a dashboard that comes from a BAQ (Business Activity Query), pulls information from multiple tables to provide with the data displayed. It has calculated fields but they do not involve promise dates, only due dates.
MRP using due dates only and not considering promise dates is the concern that generated the post. This confirmation is unfortunate, but it is what it is.
