on 12-07-2016 4:15 PM
Hi all,
We have an IC matching report that shows in rows ENTITY, INTCO, ACCOUNT and in columns amounts, first the amount reported by the entity and then the amount reported by the partner. So an example could be
ENTITY A - PARTNER B - IC payables : entity : 1000 - partner : 1005
ENTITY A - PARTNER C - IC receivables: entity : 2000 - partner : 2000
...
This works fine when I let the user select an individual entity. The report will show, for the selected entity, all partner data.
However, when I run this from a group point of view by selecting all base members of my group node in the entity structure, I get every amount twice. In the above example I would get the row shown:
ENTITY A - PARTNER B - IC payables : entity : 1000 - partner : 1005
and further down in the report I would get
ENTITY B - PARTNER A - IC receivables : entity : 1005 - partner : 1000
Is there a way to create a report that shows
for the first entity all partner companies
for the second entity all partner companies apart from the first
...
Let's say I have 3 companies, A, B and C I would like to see
A vs B
A vs C
B vs C
what I currently get is
A vs B
A vs C
B vs A
B vs C
C vs A
C vs B
Ideally I would like this to be a dynamic report, so if I add a company the report automatically updates.
Thanks,
Arnold
Hi Vadim,
I am looking to compare IC payables with IC receivables. Let's say I have the following data:
A has a payable against B and B has a receivable against A.
A has a payable against C and C has a receivable against A.
B has a receivable against C but C has no payable against B.
The report I have would, when only A is selected as an entity, show the following:
A - B : pay -rec
A - C : pay -rec
This is fine. But when I run the report for all entities in my group I get this:
A - B : pay - rec
A - C : pay - rec
B - A : rec - pay
B - C : rec - 0
C - A : rec - pay
C - B : 0 - rec
What I would like to see is
A - B : pay - rec
A - C : pay - rec
B - C : rec - 0
The requirement is to see every combination of entitiy and partner once and not twice.
Thanks,
Arnold
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
When we talk about the IC matching report we want to compare IC payables on one side with IC receivables on another side.
Not clear what do you want to achieve?
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
User | Count |
---|---|
15 | |
3 | |
2 | |
1 | |
1 | |
1 | |
1 | |
1 | |
1 | |
1 |
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.