After analysing and checking with my team, we believe that customization may impact to and moderate the system. In detail, to meet your requirement, we need to create a button or link to link directly from Approval Framework page to Voucher page. As you can see, the voucher page is the most complex page of system. So if the customization were in this page, the upgrade of the system in the future might be difficult to control. So, we would like to recommend using the alternative solution.

As you know, most of the important information can be retrieved directly from this page and does not need to access to the Voucher page to see Voucher ID, Invoice Date, Invoice number, Supplier ID, Amount, The chart field etc. so If the user want to check more detail or some more information like Accounting template, they can access to the voucher page by clicking new window to open other tab and set the page in the favourite. Besides, currently there is not any deliver way to auto-link to the voucher page to Voucher approval Page, confirmed by Oracle.

The delivered system are not showing the full Bank account number (the first part is hidden with mask) due to the general security requirements. After looking at MEF’s business requirement, there is a need to show all digits of supplier bank account for checking when approver makes decision. Our team has updated the coding to show all supplier bank digits on the Supplier Bank page and done the testing.

We do not allow for GDNT to change supplier name in FMIS by themselves.

Pay cycle is a tool for selecting and making mass payment. As for the system deliverable, the voucher selected and included in a Pay cycle are approved on the following basis: The vouchers have been approved and posted by the appropriate authority.  Pay cycle is a mechanism or tool for automatic selection of voucher amounts and printing mass payments without human intervention and 100% accuracy in selecting the voucher amount. It should contain only the final payment information like supplier; payment date; payment amount and the bank from which it is paid. This is also because of adequate information security, which means to share only the payment information. So, there is absolutely no requirement or necessity for a cross checking of pay cycle with vouchers. It will just delay the whole payment process.  However in rare cases, if any authority/ approver wants to check in detail, there are many review options in different angles provided (basically click on voucher ID to go to the Voucher Inquiry page – which is linked to all other pages relating to vouchers). This is designed to look at the best time and effort utilization of a higher authority without compromising the accounting and accuracy. So please understand the effectiveness of system and how it contributes time effectiveness to higher authorities.

The delivered system does not set the filter to identify the vouchers approved at each level on Voucher Inquiry or any other inquiry pages. However, users can always go to Approval history of each voucher to see the approval history at each level with identified time and date. However, instead of building a report, your team can create query to facilitate it.

As explain to your team before, delivered pay cycle does not have approval workflow. “System Check” payment method which is using the pay cycle processing has one step of reviewing detail, summarizing information and confirming the pay cycle after creating payments without notification in work list. This method is used for selecting and making multiple payments and printing cheque from system. As per the system deliverable, the voucher selected and included in a Pay cycle is approved on the following basis:

• Step 1: Pay cycle process is run by any user for selecting and creating payment in the pay cycle
• Step 2: The pay cycle is to be approved by payment approver. The approver can run the delivered report APX2030_Trial Register (Navigation: Accounts Payable > Reports > Payments > Trial Register) and check out the detail information for the payment. This provides a print summary of the payments to be made through the banks, before allowing making the cheque printing. If there is any issue or error in there, you should reset the pay cycle and rectify an error (for this approver has to reject the pay cycle and the officer will reset to correct the payment information). Pay cycle process is a centralized payment processing system, which generally run periodically and time based (batch process/job). So the approval mechanism is developed on a timely based manner, when the approver on a particular time (after batch timing) reviews the pay cycle payments and then approves the whole pay cycle selected payments.

The page you are asking is Voucher Inquiry (Main menu > Review Accounts payable info > Vouchers > Voucher) which is linked to Pay cycle detail data when you approve pay cycle. It’s delivery of the system and shows you the detail information of Voucher -not a payment: voucher information, amount (Gross amount, Paid amount, Unpaid amount), and the other information -included few information of supplier. So it’s unnecessary to change here. Also, about your request to see supplier bank, you can go back to payment tab in voucher to see it again by searching Voucher ID.

Regrading to your concern on the voucher ID 00000***, I would like to explain you as follows:

In logical business practice, when a supplier submit invoice to MEF at any initial point either in LMs, or DI or DCDM or MEF or any department where in mandates raised, the supplier invoice carries the supplier name, the supplier address, Supplier name to be paid and the supplier Bank account (if have bank account).There are rare cases arise, where in the Supplier required to make a modification to the payee/remitted supplier. In such cases, as per business logic, the voucher needs to be cross checked and approved again from the initiator level even it has been posted. So in FMIS, the voucher will be resubmitted from the initiator when the following supplier payment information changed: Remit Supplier Address, the system is designed following the standard logical business process as explained above.  In case of voucher ID 00000***, the payment officer has changed the Remitted supplier which inherited from voucher information and the voucher has been pushed back to FAD for approval. So this one is normal behaviour of the system. Regarding to your request on separate voucher page from payment page, it seems inconsistent as the voucher and the payment is two parts in one whole account payable process.

As informed by contractors, they said that because of your operating system (Windows) is high version. Therefore, if it is not fully supported by system, please try using a different computer version.

The Approval Framework searching function is used for reviewing/ searching the voucher for approval which is in Pending; Denied or Approved status and has not been posted. So you cannot find the posted voucher in this navigation. You can review the posted voucher in other reviewing facilities or delivered report as:

– Regular Entry- Review Account Payable Info > Voucher > Voucher- APX1020_Posted Voucher Listing

In some case like this, you can go to invoice information and change some information in the ” voucher information” tab –> the Save–> then change to correct one–> then save again –> check budget again–> and re-submit to work flow.

Please click on “Vouchering Options” tab of the Control group, then select “Currency code” as USD. Then you can create control group in FMIS for USD advance in two decimal number ex. 1,123,213.xx

Dummy bank 1202 and 1204 are used by all PTs. So when pay cycle is run based on payment selection criteria, the system will pick up the payments meeting that criteria. If users see this case happen, please kindly remind users that they need to click “Exclude all” first then only select their payments

This happens due to duplicated supplier short name. If you search by supplier short name, it will pick up the first supplier with that duplicated short name. The solution is that you need to update supplier short names so to avoid duplication.

This error is due to missing code in bank security customization for this page.

I would like to give the solution as follow:

• 1st step: Reverse your first original voucher as this voucher is only pad with zero amount. Then you can create new voucher.
• 2nd step: For your adjustment voucher => Unpost and edit it by copying from the new Regular you create again.

Because the following actions were performed on the voucher:

1. Voucher created and submitted
2. Approver denied the voucher
3. Approver submitted the voucher to approval again
4. Initial submitter modified the voucher and resubmitted the voucher
5. Approver approved the voucher => so here, the approval history showed two threads for comment history as there were two submitters: initial submitter as well as the approver, who submitted the voucher after denying it.

This is confirmed by looking at the Audit logs, also a correct flow of the system.

Because this voucher has been running budget check before. So after the approver denied, the creator needs to update the fields related to amount (such as economic code, currency) then saves (if you want the system to allow you to run budget checking again). Then the button “Submit for approval” will appear.

Regarding to this issue, you have to create a Journal Voucher to transfer from the incorrect one to the correct one.

This is the standard function of the system, and we cannot change. For more information you can check here:

https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E51433_01/fscm92pbr2/eng/fscm/fapy/task_ReviewingVouchersSelectedforPayment-9f7020.html

About your question

1. I would like to feedback as follows:

– Number 13 + 14: clearing date of payment

– Number 16 + 16.1: payment status.
The list shows all delivered payment status. For FMIS, please focus on the following:

+ Cancelled => payment has been cancelled+ Paid => payment has been paid+ Selected => payment has been selected for payment+ Settlement => regular voucher has been cleared by prepaid voucher- Number 17+17.1: payment has been posted or not

2. About question 2, I would like to feedback as follows:
   Payments do not have origin, only voucher has origin. So please refer to Voucher consolidation listing query to extract information related to origin.

Accounting Date of Payment Tab is not used for Pay Cycle criteria. However, for Pay Cycle Criteria is only related to Bank account and Bank schedule. The accounting date will be used in Pay Cycle Page.

• “Payment Not Applied” means that the Prepaid Voucher/Prepayment has already copied the Regular Voucher for clearing, but the users not yet click apply. Currently our FMIS system do not let the users to save if they just copy but not apply, so this case will never happen in our system. Therefore, when users run the report, they may never see the result for “Payment Not Applied” Status. Actually, we are considering to hide some status from query report if they are not used in our system.
• Similarly, the status “Payment Not Approved” refers to the restriction warning status which let the users know that the apply payment for clearing the Prepaid Voucher and Regular Voucher are not approved by the workflow. Currently, our FMIS system does not have this workflow.