Marty Zigman

Conversations with Marty Zigman

Certified Administrator • ERP • SuiteCloud

Marty Zigman LinkedIn

Marty Zigman

Holding all three official certifications, Marty is regarded as the top NetSuite expert and leads a team of senior professionals at Prolecto Resources, Inc.. He is a former Deloitte & Touche CPA and has held CTO roles. For over 30 years, Marty has produced leadership in ERP, CRM, and eCommerce business systems. Contact Marty to set up a conversation.

BiographyYouTubeLinkedInX (Twitter)

2 thoughts on “Prolecto Freight Container: A Superior NetSuite Inbound Shipment Alternative

  1. Jarrod Tuxworth says:

    Hi Marty,

    It’s such a critical area for many business, and it doesn’t get the attention it deserves, so it’s great to see this thorough approach in action.

    I think the main challenge that NetSuite have internally when trying to further develop this area, is that there are so many touch points with other areas of functionality that need to be allowed for. You’ve addressed many in your article, but I suspect based on individual client circumstances there are a number of additional areas that would need customization to support this approach:

    – 3 way matching would no longer be available given the PO is receipted unseen.
    – A similar problem that the native inbound shipment has will arise on receipt if there are variances between the inbound shipment / freight container and the physical goods received. I imagine you would be required to receive the container in full in all circumstance due to the behavior of the transfer order, and make any adjustments separately?
    – Often it is useful to create the inbound shipment prior to the change of ownership taking place, as it can be useful as part of the planning process to identify what goods are intended to be shipped on what dates. It seems that the requirement to receive the PO to bring it onto the inbound shipment would preclude the ability to do this, as this would bring inventory onto our balance sheet that we don’t yet own.
    – Similarly, if we want to use inbound shipments for inventory where the change of ownership does not happen until the goods are received, or particularly if we have a combination of some PO’s that have EXW terms and others that have DAP terms in the same container, allowing for this may be difficult.
    – Upon receipt, the physical products will be marked with the PO as opposed to the TO, so shop floor staff may have difficulty finding the correct transaction to receive against. There is the risk that if partial lines have been shipped, the receiving officer may receive against the quantity that remains open on the PO, instead of the matching TO, which becomes difficult to keep reconciled. This is especially true if the containers are only used for a subset of inventory purchases, rather than all inventory purchases.
    – It seems like it would be difficult to use the WMS receiving process in conjunction with the container record, meaning any native label printing, image capture, etc. as part of the WMS receiving process would be lost. The native inbound shipments can be received on the WMS.
    – It would be important that the native location field on the PO remains set to the final destination warehouse, such that MRP / Supply Allocation etc. are working off correct data. This would also be important for the returns process to behave appropriately. It seems that you have already solved for this by adding custom location fields to your logic.

    This is by no means intended as a list of criticisms (in fact I think your solution is excellent and a big step forward for many businesses) but rather a means to open discussion on related processes.

  2. Marty Zigman says:

    Hello Jarrod,

    Thank you, you bring up good considerations. A couple of comments:

    1. Not taking ownership property rights: we would suggest yet another virtual location which indicates that the ownership is not ours. Then, what ever shows up on the balance sheet from that location we could reclass at the end of the period.
    2. Receiving operations: Indeed, the solution we offer is to receive on TOs. But our solution has receiving focus on containers not on purchase orders. We would work with our client warehouse operations to refine their practices. Furthermore, we have many clients that are in 3PL operations. Thus we send advanced ship notifications based on the TO number. They should be indifferent to how they receive the container.
    3. Final PO Destination Elements: yes, we had to create reports that would help inventory logistics managers to see where purchase orders were ultimately arriving. This included the expected receiving date elements. Our SQL reporting tools fully allow us to create the joins needed to create the right reports.

    I respect that most clients are trying to get Inbound Shipments working because it is the “goto” offer. Thus, we usually help our clients carefully prepare for these inbound logistics as engagements often take a some more time than what most people originally estimate.

    PS, you look like the kind of analyst that would thrive on our team. Just saying…

    Marty

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *