Items
With our conversion from the AS400 based ERP system, we had over 18,000 unique items being
converted. These items were set up across our 30 inventory organizations. Items were all configured for
the MAS Master organization, Validation organization and the various inventory organizations which
resulted in over 80,000 item-organization setups. In the old system, each item-unit-of-measure (UOM)
had a unique item number; in the new system those multiple items became 1 item with multiple UOMs.
Our company decided to also implement Oracle planning and forecasting, which meant the item setup
planning data at each inventory organization now mattered.
COLLABORATE 14
Page 1
Examples:
[832|60|FOOD ITEMS|][825|60|FOOD ITEMS|][600|60|FOOD ITEMS|][100|60|FOOD
ITEMS|][EA|65|EACHES (FOOD & SHAMPOO ITEMS)|]
[CS|60|FOOD ITEMS|][EA|65|EACHES (FOOD & SHAMPOO ITEMS)|]
6. Default Receiving Sub-Inventory for specific organizations
7. Mass item updates
Solution Options
We looked at several different solutions from developing tools in-house, form personalizations, nightly
rd
jobs, database triggers and 3 party solutions to ease the burden of item setups and maintenance. Our
final solution(s) must be flexible and not allow bad data into the system. One of the primary goals was to
allow the end user to update a lot of data without having to involve software development. Would this be
an in-house developed tool or externally purchased product? There were pros/cons with both of these
options.
Starting down the list of maintenance items that we identified prior, we started brainstorming options for
the solution(s). Form personalizations, nightly concurrent requests, triggers are solutions we could easily
develop in-house and would accomplish many of the new item maintenance updates that were needed
such as the COGS and Sales Account GL strings. Adding a new required DFF for the product code upon
item creation, allowed the implementation of a database trigger to automatically derive the COGS and
Sales Account strings. A database trigger was also used for the creation of the categories for each new
item. Forms personalization handled the validation of UPC numbers and forced the entry of several fields
to uppercase when necessary. Using a new lookup based on inventory organization, we were able to
create a nightly concurrent program to update the default receiving sub-inventory. And, the potentially
long and cumbersome freight class string that our users really expressed concern over, would be built
nightly by another concurrent request program.
The two items on our list that turned out to be the most difficult to accomplish were the mass item updates
and creation of new items. One of our team members had prior experience with a custom solution to feed
in item updates through use of an excel template. However, the validation and entry was subject to a lot
COLLABORATE 14
Page 2
of failure points. There were also issues as the tool was not flexible enough to handle different field
updates easily. We still continued down the path of the home grown solution thinking it was the best way
to create and update items the easiest.
It wasnt until we started digging deeper into the current business process of adding new items did we
start thinking outside the box for a solution. As the complexity of the excel spreadsheet solution was
growing, more thought was moving into the idea of automating the handoff of the item creation question
form. The brainstorming process began and a mockup utility was created in MS Access to display the
possibility of automating the item creation input to the various groups in the company before the item
would be loaded into the system. This utility established a predefined workflow for each new item being
requested and would notify the individual groups when it was their turn to add in the new item data
relative to their area. It kept track of new item requests in an organized manner. No items would be
loaded into Oracle unless all data areas for that item had been completed.
As we started getting estimates back from our development team on a utility of some sort to load and
update items, we found the quotes were much higher than expected and the concern was still the
rd
flexibility of the tool. We began looking into 3 party tools to assist in the validation and import of
changes to items in Oracle. The hope was to find a ready-made solution that was flexible.
COLLABORATE 14
Page 3
from Item Wizard to import the items into inventory. The end user is able to view the item import job after
it has finished checking for any errors or warnings similar to the Requests form in Oracle.
Conclusion
Oracle eBusiness offers many options and tools to maintain the data integrity. By using various triggers,
DFFs, backend processes, and form personalizations, we were able to solve many of the potentially time
consuming item maintenance tasks. We found we had to be flexible and creative while always keeping
the end goal in mind: Making item maintenance and creation easier for our end users. When all other
options were exhausted or proved to be costly, we had to look outside of our known set of tools. We
rd
ended up finding a stronger solution by combining an in-house tool and a 3 party tool, Item Wizard. All
while streamlining and improving an existing process.
With the solutions we implemented, we saved our end users hours of frustration, hours of maintenance
and gave them more ownership of their data. The solutions have proven to put the majority of the
updates in the hands of the end users and out of the hands of the development staff.
COLLABORATE 14
Page 4