1 vote1 comment · CMS - Suggestions for features and enhancements » Payments · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
I like the idea of color-coding. We have used red to indicate returns elsewhere so could be a bit confusing here but I understand what you're trying to accomplish and if not red, perhaps some other marker.
You can print a statement for a single customer now. From the Contact Manager, pull up the customer record and then click Printing>Statement of Account. This will bring up the statement on screen where you can, like any CMS report, decide to print, email, or export to pdf, excel, word etc.
0 votesunder review · 1 comment · CMS - Suggestions for features and enhancements · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
I believe, by the wording of your question, that you understand how it is possible to manually select the option to update the linked customer's addresses with the addresses from the order. If not, or for others viewing this request, the process is shown in this video - https://www.screencast.com/t/ydlLg2uKFUX
The request here then would be to:
a) have an additional prompt or checkbox during order verify, when choosing a different customer to link the order to, to update the customer record's billing and shipping address with those from the order.
b) have an option in CMS Setup to choose which should be the default, update the customer or no (keeping in mind the operator can always manually choose the other option)
What's not really discussed here is if/when the customer's mailing (primary) address should also be updated. Something to consider. The challenge here is that if that mailing address is updated, the previous address is lost and cannot be reverted/recovered.
Also not discussed here is that this ability to update the customer record with the billing and shipping address from the order is only possible during the original save. Once the order is saved, CMS is no longer reading from the import file but instead is looking at its own data (ADDRESS table). As such there is no opportunity to use the imported order's addresses if they were not saved with the customer and the time of order verify. The data does still exist in the ORDER_XML table so could be referenced if there was enough need to warrant pursuing this change.
Please post comments with your feedback on the above or if there are other cases I've not covered here.
3 votesunder review · 1 comment · CMS - Suggestions for features and enhancements · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
An interesting idea. We've already been considering a rework to Fulfillment Manager that, among other things, would allow you to filter the orders to show/fulfill only orders with selected products. I had not considered the opposite but perhaps a good addition would be an option to filter out by certain product(s) as well.
Thank you for the suggestion.
1 voteunder review · 2 comments · CMS - Suggestions for features and enhancements · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
A great suggestion and one we've already spent time on creating a specification for. No timetable for implementing this feature but is on our radar for future development.
A related area we'd like to expand into is inventory forecasting. This would modify the quantity to order based on sales trends. The quantity to order is known is based on hard numbers like qty on hand, qty on order, qty on backorder, and of course your restock to and reorder points. The variable here is how stock needs change over time due to demand and potentially seasonality. Right now our users are managing such adjustments to order qty manually but we'd like to help automate that.
4 votes1 comment · CMS - Suggestions for features and enhancements » Purchasing · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
If I understand your request correctly, you are saying you want CMS to consider the components of unsold kits as available stock, is that right?
If so, I think I need to understand how this would work for you. Even if you could see the component inventory as available in the report, from a process standpoint, CMS does not presently have a facility to break up these assembled kits into their components.
It is functionality we have considered adding to Kit Builder, where kits are constructed (removing inventory from components and adding it to the assembled kit.) The feature would be to deconstruct kits (or explode as we've affectionately referred to it), putting the components back into stock and removing the inventory from the assembled kit.
I'll also throw out the alternative to assembled kits which is our standard kit, those which pull stock at the time of order. With this type of kit the components remain in a shared inventory from which any kit can pull from them. That component allocation takes place when the item is added to the order. In this case the Items To Reorder report would work as requested, always showing total available regardless of the kits that may pull from its stock.
For clarity, the difference between an assembled kit and a standard kit that pulls inventory at order time is the Product checkbox seen here: https://www.screencast.com/t/qLbp0nE6
1 vote1 comment · CMS - Suggestions for features and enhancements » Fulfillment · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
Thanks for the suggestion. If it were purely for reporting purposes you could use on of the User Defined product fields and then write your custom report referencing that field. If you're not familiar with the User Defined fields, here is a screenshot of where they are in Setup and the Products pages - https://www.screencast.com/t/c1pn2l3Lx
There are a number of other fields that you may not be using that could also serve the purpose if you are already using all of the User Defined fields:
...or for a small amount of custom programming we could add the field for you.
I'd be interested to understand what kind of reporting you'd want affected by this seasonal flag. I get the concept of the flag certainly but not yet fully grasping what it would do for you.
If we went as far as adding a field just for this (or a date range, like we do with discounts) we should then consider if we want product uploads to your website(s) to take this into account, only uploading during their season, for example.
Let me know your thoughts.
0 votesunder review · 1 comment · CMS - Suggestions for features and enhancements » Customers · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
I don't think I'm seeing the same thing. Here is a short video showing my attempt to reproduce what you're reporting:
Can you explain how what you're seeing differs or how your steps are different?
3 votesunder review · 1 comment · CMS - Suggestions for features and enhancements » Fulfillment · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
Currently we're using a file method to communicate with Amazon (beta) and will transitioning off of that in favor of using their web services (AWS) that would allow CMS to communicate with Amazon directly without the use of files.
In a similar manner Walmart has functionality that allows you to upload and download orders in Excel from their Seller Center
or they also offer an API for direct communication
The latter is more complex and would require a dedicated CMS plug-in so that would be an option further down the road unless there is high demand for it. The Excel method, however, may be possible to work with sooner than later.
Let us know your Walmart order volume and get us a couple of sample order downloads from their Seller Center and we can advise on what your options are for optimizing the import/export.
1 vote2 comments · CMS - Suggestions for features and enhancements » Fulfillment · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
The imported (and unverified) orders have not yet been stored in our tables so traditional SQL queries would not be possible. I understand you're asking for "SQL-like" queries but thought we should get that on the table first.
I'll provide one example that came up not too long ago. We had a request to have a validation check for orders whose customer had an outstanding balance, and another when that customer was set to 'do not accept orders'. Here these are not elements of the order data that could be queried but instead referenced their matching customer...which is not yet know (established during verify). Here special code had to be written to establish the customer match so that the customer data could be queried.
In summary, without being able to do typical SQL queries, we've instead had to program validation checks unique to their purpose. While this doesn't currently lend itself to an adhoc query, I don't want to discount it either.
We should examine some examples that are driving this request. If we find that having access to X, Y, and Z would fit most of the need, it would be worth exploring to see if/how we could make that happen.
To start the process I'd encourage you to post back here with some examples of cases you're trying to handle better, and what elements you'd want in the query. Consider if these examples are representative of most of the foreseeable need, as much as that can be known. Can we get it down to small set of criteria (e.g. X, Y, and Z) that, if you had them, would largely address the need.
I will close by stating that generally it is not too difficult for us to add new (specific) validation checks. While we do charge custom programming for them, they are typically only two hours. Each year we add more and expect the list to continue to grow.
0 votesunder review · 1 comment · CMS - Suggestions for features and enhancements » Email · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
Good to understand this scenario. Shipment confirmations can be configured uniquely for each shipping method but not order confirmations, which I think is what we'd want to use.
We've been considering a revamp to how email confirmations are set up. Instead of making them order source specific, we'd instead have a list of order sources that you could select that this confirmation would be used for. We'd do similarly shipping methods for shipping confirmations and will now also look at doing the same for order confirmations.
3 votesunder review · 2 comments · CMS - Suggestions for features and enhancements · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
I like the approach although on its own it wouldn't seem to solve the workstation specific need.
Do just your remote users run on terminal service sessions or do your local users as well?
I ask because we store workstation specific settings in the registry which, for TS sessions, is shared among all users. This is where we'd store the workstation warehouse default if implemented. As long as the warehouse selection should be the same for all remote users, I think this approach will work.
Otherwise noting the limitations of the current method of workstation specific settings with TS so you can comment if this is something we'd have to change to make it work for your situation.
5 votes7 comments · CMS - Suggestions for features and enhancements · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
Thanks for the update on this Doug.
Presently we have the ability to assign SKUs to order sources for those we have integrations with such as CommerceV3 and Magento.
This assignment of SKUs to order sources allows you to control which products get uploaded to which sites, so you could run multiple sites with different or shared products (a single SKU could be assigned to any or all import sources.) That is the rub though in that it only works for sources that we have integrations with.
I'll explore the possibility of support non-integration SKU:source assignments and the addition of a field dedicated to that site's product code there. As you'll see in the screenshot, we've already started adding source specific fields such as the product URL (coming in the next release.)
Worth moving this into a separate Suggestion if there are other related changes desired.
Acknowledging your reporting comment but I'm having troubles getting past the idea of not having a unique vendor sku per CMS SKU and in what situations or frequency that is required. If it occurs, it seems it would be the exception to the rule and, if so, I'm not sure it warrants the amount of work needed to build it into SKU Wizard or that anyone else would need it. If you disagree, can you give me a better sense of the situations in which you or a vendor wouldn't need their vendor sku codes to be unique?
That said, I recognize that even if this is not needed often, you have a lot of SKU's per product and is cumbersome to manage. If it helps, a simple SQL statement can be used to update all of the SKU's for a product to the same vendor sku:
Set PRIMSUPSKU = 'xxxx'
Where PROD_CODE = 'widget'
This field was intentionally omitted from the those that could be copied in the SKU Wizard. We believed its value would have to be unique for each SKU (size/color combination).
Are there cases where a vendor does not have a uniquely identifying code (vendor sku) for each size/color and you'd want the same vendor sku for each size/color combo in CMS?
3 votesunder review · 2 comments · CMS - Suggestions for features and enhancements · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
We do this now for dropship items but, since you mention doing this for back ordered items, I read that you're wanting a similar processing option for back ordered stocked items.
Like dropships, this process could result in multiple PO's generated for that order as the items could be from different vendors.
Can you elaborate on what differentiates when you'd want to generate PO's for a single order vs the current more general handling of creating PO's for resupplying your stock and/or multiple orders?
In part I'm trying to understand if there is a set of rules we should consider to trigger PO creation (like we do for dropships).
I also question if this should be an option from Fulfillment Manager>Back Orders to generate PO's for selected orders.
It would be helpful again to just understand when/why to create PO's just for a specific order.
4 votesunder review · 1 comment · CMS - Suggestions for features and enhancements » ToDos · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
Not the first time this has come up but first we've seen it on User Voice. The way we've thought about it thus far has been two tiered:
1) Allow an employee to be able to see ToDo's they have created for others, not just those they own.
2) Have an employee permission that would allow the view/editing of ToDo's owned by others, even if they did not create them. This is more of a management function vs #1.
Please post you comments on how this aligns with your expectation/need or how else you might visualize the solution.
12 votesunder review · 1 comment · CMS - Suggestions for features and enhancements » Customers · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
To clarify this request for other voters:
There is a CMS (workstation-specific) setting called 'Save Column Order & Width in Find Customer' that allows you to reorganize the columns and their widths in the search results when using Find Customer. If the setting is not used, search results will always be displayed using CMS's default.
Another means of search for a customer is the automatic search that takes place as you start entering a new customer into Order Entry or the Contact Manager. CMS displays a list of 'Candidates' of names in your mail list that could match the one you are typing in. More of a reactive search vs a proactive search.
The request here is to allow changes to the search results in the candidates list to also be governed by the above setting, retaining the column order and widths for future searches on that workstation.
19 votesunder review · 1 comment · CMS - Suggestions for features and enhancements » Fulfillment · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
We had considered adding this to CMS in January 2015 when the carriers started applying dimensional rating to ground services. It was hard to anticipate how much it would be needed and, as it turned out, there wasn't much demand at the time. That is starting to shift now with USPS offering cubic pricing to some shippers in our space so we are taking a fresh look at what it would take to add this.
I agree though that it would appear to consist of creating a list of commonly used packages and their dimensions so they could easily be selected in a combo in the Manifest instead of having to enter the dimensions each time. I'm hoping we can also incorporate package identification by barcode to make the selection easier. In many cases the boxes already have barcodes on them (e.g. Priority Mail) and the shipping clerk is often already using a scanner - http://wiki.newhavensoftware.com/index.php/Shipping_Station_-_Best_Practices#Shipping_Best_Practices
1 voteunder review · 1 comment · CMS - Suggestions for features and enhancements » Purchasing · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
CMS does have two user-defined fields for products that may fit the bill. See my example here - http://screencast.com/t/ybZ8Dc0kLAF
On a related note, CMS also allows you to set an expiration date on inventory lots during the receiving of purchase orders. See - http://screencast.com/t/uGJySAeymxKD
Noting this expiration date field is not currently available in Stock Manager to be set for inventory received manually (not through Purchasing). That would seem to be a reasonable enhancement for us to make if it was needed.
6 votesunder review · 1 comment · CMS - Suggestions for features and enhancements » Customers · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
Some clarification on the request:
Proformas use their own numbering system, prefaced by a P, that helps distinguish them from real orders.
Presently when a proforma order is saved as a completed order, the proforma order number is not retained and CMS assigns a new sequential numerical order number to it.
While CMS knows that the order was converted from a proforma and there is evidence of this in the History tab of the orders' customer record, there are situations where it would be helpful to be able to retrieve that order by its original proforma order number.
This request would be for CMS to retain that original proforma order number after its conversion to a completed order and allow for searching based on it (much like we do for reforderid for imported orders.)
2 votes2 comments · CMS - Suggestions for features and enhancements » Customers · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
Yes, this would be possible.
If we were to act on this it seems we should do it wherever notes are available in CMS including:
*Contact Manager/Order Entry - Primary Notes
*Order Entry Invoice and Internal Notes
*Purchasing - PO Notes to Vendor and Internal
Probably not necessary in places like Products - Tech Info and Web Text, for example, but comment if you feel otherwise or if there are other places this timestamp would be needed.
I've seen this implemented elsewhere with a button that you'd click to insert the timestamp as a prefix or suffix to your notes. This would be an easy implementation but it's then incumbent on the user to click the button lest the notes be added with no timestamp. Please consider that (may be situations where that's preferred) and comment if this approach is acceptable or if you'd not want to allow notes to be added without a timestamp.
A bit more complex is the question of what to do when someone is editing notes, not just adding a comment. If/how would you envision that being timestamped? I think this leads back to just adding a button to insert the timestamp if/when desired but let me know if you agree.
0 votesunder review · 1 comment · CMS - Suggestions for features and enhancements » Purchasing · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
CMS supports two styles of attribute selection. One is just for the selection of size/color and the other adds a column for filling in a quantity as well. The former is more often used in B2C situations where a customer is just ordering a single item. The latter is more often used in B2B where the customer is ordering multiples of the same product in different sizes/colors. I'll share screenshots of each for comparison:
Either could be a great addition to the purchasing system but wanted to see which you prefer.
The options w/o qty would be much easier to implement and maybe we'd start there as a first iteration if you thought that would be a useful step forward.