locked
Which is the best entity out of box to Implement the Contracts and SLA (service level agreements) both RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hi People,

    I know that DCRM OOB provides the Contract entity. I am in a situation where there are many different types of Contracts, MOUs, SLA's  in our organization (Seems they all are same). How to implement all these types of Contracts, SLA's.

    Also, How to tie invoicing (Invoice entity) to contracts or MOUs or SLA.

    I looking for some strategy...

    If any idea, please let me know.

     

     


    Puneet Joshi
    Tuesday, January 31, 2012 9:48 PM

Answers

  • Hi Puneet,

    The specific scenario I can relate to, is developing a custom entity to capture supplier agreement detail. Essentially a contract that’s arranged when a temporary worker accepts a placement at a client.  We initially created a brand new custom entity and added the required fields, such as start/end date, lookup to client, terms etc.

    The main problem was the activity rollup, real case example of this was and various workflows creating “contract Renewal Activities”, where the regarding entity was the Supplier contract.  We found that users had to navigate to the expiring contract, to check the status of these activities rather than seeing them directly in the open activity list of the company.<o:p></o:p>

    Hope this helps<o:p></o:p>



    My Blog
    Twitter

    • Marked as answer by Puneet Joshi Wednesday, February 8, 2012 6:41 PM
    Wednesday, February 8, 2012 5:37 PM

All replies

  • Hi  Puneet

    Personally I would develop on the existing contract entity and distinguish the variation with a contract type option-set, then hiding and displaying alternate contract detail using client side JavaScript (perhaps having a tab or section for each type).

    I’ve been in a situation before where I’ve developed a custom entity to replace the out-of-box Contract entity, and it’s problematic a few months down the line when you want to take advantage of the built in features.  Also, Activities associated to custom entities don’t roll-up to their parent records, which equals more clicks to navigate, and less happy users.

    Having said that, this is only opinion, I’m sure the community will have a mountain of experience with this.

    Many thanks
    Craig


    My Blog
    Twitter
    Thursday, February 2, 2012 11:11 PM
  • Thanks Craig.
    Puneet Joshi
    Monday, February 6, 2012 8:51 PM
  • Craig,

    Thanks for sharing the experience. Can you describe a little bit on Problems that you faced, I wanted to know the real time problems so that i can present a case to the Business user and try to convince them to use OOB Contract entity with type have in.

    Real time problems will give a fair chance to explain.

    Also, What kind of activities you have associated with custom entity.

    Please help me out here. Your reply was a great help and made me confident.

    Hope to hear soon from you.

    Thanks.


    Puneet Joshi
    Monday, February 6, 2012 9:23 PM
  • Hi Puneet,

    The specific scenario I can relate to, is developing a custom entity to capture supplier agreement detail. Essentially a contract that’s arranged when a temporary worker accepts a placement at a client.  We initially created a brand new custom entity and added the required fields, such as start/end date, lookup to client, terms etc.

    The main problem was the activity rollup, real case example of this was and various workflows creating “contract Renewal Activities”, where the regarding entity was the Supplier contract.  We found that users had to navigate to the expiring contract, to check the status of these activities rather than seeing them directly in the open activity list of the company.<o:p></o:p>

    Hope this helps<o:p></o:p>



    My Blog
    Twitter

    • Marked as answer by Puneet Joshi Wednesday, February 8, 2012 6:41 PM
    Wednesday, February 8, 2012 5:37 PM