I have Pichet reviewed cost of Mackerel code VM101Y/55001 and VM105Y/55001 and have the following findings that I would like your team to set corrective actions.
1. Incomplete cost on date 2-May-13 : no carton cost
Cause : packaging PGCT55109R0 doesn't have SPS or SPS = 0 though its status is 20 (active)
Assumption : when update new SPS at the beginning of Q2, this item was left blank, no SPS was set as you can see in MMS001, historical data of SPS for this item. This item is not new and has SPS properly until Apr 1, 2013 that SPS was left blank and later was fixed on 11-May-13.
Preventive control : When update SPS at the beginning of each quarter, SPS list should be reviewed to make sure that all items with status 20 (active) has SPS properly. You may consult K.NTS how to review SPS before running it. This review is usually done before having updated SPS effective at the beginning of each quarter using "SPS test run for verify before effective".
At the date 30/04/2013, the code PGCT55109R0 was changed status from 20 to 90 then MC staff discovered it incorrect and inform to us for checking. PC informed to O&SD for checking. When checking Ms Chi informed it come back sts 20 again then we run this code again
Before setting preventive control, i will ask K.Itsaret for helping ka. I would like to know why it became status 90 i/o 20 as normal
2. Incomplete cost on date 22-Jun-13 : no carton cost, no sticker cost (new packaging item)
Cause : packaging PGCT55109R1 and PGST55144R1 are new items and SPS were not set until date 27-Jun for carton and 29-Jun for sticker while BOM including these new packaging were updated and run since 22-Jun.
Assumption : At the time of BOM change to apply these new packaging items, SPS were not properly set so the cost for these packagings in FG is -0-
Preventive control : When setting new item, packaging or any type, Costing (accounting) should check before update status to 20 (active) by MMS001 whether all setting value including SPS price is complete. In this case, these items were release to status 20 while SPS was -0-. Further, O&SD/MC while changing BOM of FG1/FG0 (in this case MC for FG0) should also help review if all items in BOM containing SPS properly. Pls see table below for responsibility of each department for new item master setting.
At that time, we had many job requirements then late in running new code when was informed to run it. This was our mistake and we try not to get this happen any more
Other observation is when SPS is updated, cost was not re-run to make that SPS effective in cost of FG. This makes cost shown in PCS301/B1(extract data from PCS300/B1-MMS003) different from PCS303/B (from product cost run). Please see capture display in the file. You may get further clarification for this from K.Itsares or K.Pichet.
We will ask for help from K.Itsaret ka