December 8, 2015 at 6:45 pm #1576
Does anyone use FIFO cost method for Maximo inventory? We changed from average to FIFO recently due to contract requirements and are seeing some behavior that does not make sense. Can you help me understand what’s happening?
Expectation: Starting with a new Item Master and new Inventory record (FIFO costing), items issued from the storeroom should be charged to the customer with oldest stock cost first. Orders of new material with a different cost should only be available to customers once all original stock is exhausted.
Recreate scenario by:
- Create new Item Master record and new Inventory record for testing.
- Create a PO to order 100 widgets at $0.25 each. Approve the PO.
- Receive the 100 widgets, inspect. Now appearing in Inventory record as 100 in TRANSIT bin.
- Transfer from TRANSIT to MyBin. Issue 10 of Current Item to a work order to verify issue cost at $0.25 each.
- Inventory LIFO/FIFO Cost line now shows 90 available at $0.25.
- Create a PO to order 100 widgets at $0.50 each. Approve the PO.
- Receive the 100 widgets, inspect. Now appears as 100 in TRANSIT bin and 90 in MyBin.
- Inventory LIFO/FIFO Cost lines show oldest row 90 available at $0.25 and newest row 100 available at $0.50.
- Transfer the new 100 widgets from TRANSIT to My Bin.
- Inventory LIFO/FIFO Cost now shows in this order (including times to clarify):
- Unit Cost 0.50; Cost Date 12/08/2015 9:32 AM; Quantity 10
- Unit Cost 0.25; Cost Date 12/08/2015 9:32 AM; Quantity 90
- Unit Cost 0.50; Cost Date 12/08/2015 9:25 AM; Quantity 90
Maximo apparently moved my existing 90 widgets plus 10 new widgets, when none of my existing widgets should have been touched. I transferred 100 new units, all costing 0.50 from TRANSIT to MyBin.
January 11, 2018 at 11:40 am #2804
IBM’s response is that this was working as designed. We elected to return to average cost, as it appears many users do.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.