Clarity PPM1

Expand all | Collapse all

CA Clarity Tuesday Tip: Cost Plan 'Planned' calculations for past periods

  • 1.  CA Clarity Tuesday Tip: Cost Plan 'Planned' calculations for past periods

    Posted 08-13-2013 04:59 PM

    The "New from Task Assignment" feature work as follows:
    For every Cost Detail ‘Planned Cost’ in past periods, the data comes from the Actuals Units (taken
    from posted Transactions) and the Rate Matrix Cost. Therefore, the Cost Rate
    posted via the actual transaction is ignored.

    The populate feature will populate the ‘Planned Units’ from the (ETC+Actual) Units and the ‘Planned Cost’ come from the planned units multiplied by the matching row in the live rate matrix. (It will not involve the actual cost for the ‘planned cost’ calculation)
    The ‘Actual Units’ and ‘Actual Costs’ come directly from the WIP Transaction that has been posted.
    Therefore, the ‘Actual Cost’ may be different than the ‘Planned Cost’

    Example:
    Rate Matrix is configured with $100 Rate, but actual transactions may use a different rate
    Actual Units = 8 hours (1 day)
    Actual Cost = (8 x 200) = 1,600
    Remaining ETC = 16 hours (2 days)
    Actual Cost comes directly from posted WIP transaction

    Cost Plan calculations
    Planned Units = 16 + 8 = 24 hours (2 days remaining in ETC, 1 day posted as actuals = 3 days)
    Planned Cost = (24 x 100) = 2,400 (using rate from matrix)

    Screenshots Below:
    1 - Rate Matrix Row
    2 - Task Assignment
    3 - Actual Transction Posted into WIP
    4 - Cost Plan Population by Assignment

     

    Note:
    Actuals are considered to be in the past, and calculated as explained above, if the date of posting exists outside of the current fiscal period for the current system date, even if they are chronologically in the past. This can lead to planned cost discrepancies between cost plans if they use a different period type (especially quarterly/annual versus 13 period/monthly .



  • 2.  RE: CA Clarity Tuesday Tip: Cost Plan 'Planned' calculations for past perio

    Posted 08-13-2013 08:01 PM
    Hi Kathryn,

    This information is really timely for me as I am currently working through how our organisation should be using Cost Plans and Budget Plans.

    I am going to work through the examples you have provided in a bid to help me put all this into practice.

    However, I am wondering do you have any information on how I would go about populating Planned Costs into a Budget Plan.

    I need to be able to enter planned costs for future dates and I also have some non labour resources where I am trying to enter Planned Costs into my Budget Plan.

    I understand that the Cost Plan needs to be submitted and approved before it can become a Budget Plan. Do I need to ensure I have all my planned data in the Cost Plan before I convert?

    I am finding I can just use the in-line editing to update Planned Costs for labour resources. However, I am not able to do this for Non Labour resources.

    Any information you may have would be most appreciated.

    Many thanks
    Michelle


  • 3.  RE: CA Clarity Tuesday Tip: Cost Plan 'Planned' calculations for past perio

    Posted 08-23-2013 12:24 PM
    Thanks.
    The last figure would benefit if the field labels were there.

    Martti K.


  • 4.  RE: CA Clarity Tuesday Tip: Cost Plan 'Planned' calculations for past perio

    Posted 08-23-2013 12:35 PM

    another_martink wrote:

    Thanks.
    The last figure would benefit if the field lables were there.

    Martti K.
    Thanks for pointing it out!
    I will get a new picture posted.


  • 5.  RE: CA Clarity Tuesday Tip: Cost Plan 'Planned' calculations for past perio

    Posted 08-23-2013 12:38 PM
    No problem there. It's been already published in the Cookbook, too.

    Martti K.


  • 6.  RE: CA Clarity Tuesday Tip: Cost Plan 'Planned' calculations for past perio

    Posted 08-19-2013 06:34 PM
    Thanks for all the great information Kathryn!
    Chris

    Kathryn_Ellis wrote:

    The "New from Task Assignment" feature work as follows:
    For every Cost Detail ‘Planned Cost’ in past periods, the data comes from the Actuals Units (taken
    from posted Transactions) and the Rate Matrix Cost. Therefore, the Cost Rate
    posted via the actual transaction is ignored.

    The populate feature will populate the ‘Planned Units’ from the (ETC+Actual) Units and the ‘Planned Cost’ come from the planned units multiplied by the matching row in the live rate matrix. (It will not involve the actual cost for the ‘planned cost’ calculation)
    The ‘Actual Units’ and ‘Actual Costs’ come directly from the WIP Transaction that has been posted.
    Therefore, the ‘Actual Cost’ may be different than the ‘Planned Cost’

    Example:
    Rate Matrix is configured with $100 Rate, but actual transactions may use a different rate
    Actual Units = 8 hours (1 day)
    Actual Cost = (8 x 200) = 1,600
    Remaining ETC = 16 hours (2 days)
    Actual Cost comes directly from posted WIP transaction

    Cost Plan calculations
    Planned Units = 16 + 8 = 24 hours (2 days remaining in ETC, 1 day posted as actuals = 3 days)
    Planned Cost = (24 x 100) = 2,400 (using rate from matrix)


    Screenshots Below:
    1 - Rate Matrix Row
    2 - Task Assignment
    3 - Actual Transction Posted into WIP
    4 - Cost Plan Population by Assignment


  • 7.  Re: CA Clarity Tuesday Tip: Cost Plan 'Planned' calculations for past periods

    Posted 09-11-2014 05:31 PM

    Expense Resource Scenario

    For an Expense Resource, the outcome of the 'Populate Cost Plan by Task Assignment' is a bit different than a Labor resource.

    If you put in some ETC hours and post some Actual units and Actual Cost, the populate by assignment will use the 'number' of expense resources for the 'Planned Units' and use the '(ETC Hours x Actual Hours) multiplied by the 'actual cost rate' defined on the live rate matrix.

     

    Example : Project has 1 expense resource assigned to 1 task with the following data:

    Sep 14: ETC Units = 0, Actual Units = 1

    Oct 14: ETC Units = 1, Actual Units = 3 (total = 4 units)

    Nov 14: ETC Units = 2, Actual Units = 0

    Dec 14: ETC Units = 3, Actual Units = 0

    Rate Matrix has $25.25 for 'Actual Cost Rate' field

     

    Create a cost plan, populate by task assignment

    Sep 14: Planned Units = 1 expense resource, Planned Cost = 1 unit * 25.25 = 25.25

    Oct 14: Planned Units = 1 expense resource, Planned Cost = 4 units * 25.25 = 101.00 (1 ETC unit + 3 Actual units)

    Nov 14: Planned Units = 1 expense resource, Planned Cost = 2 units * 25.25 = 50.50

    Dec 14: Planned Units = 1 expense resource, Planned Cost = 3 units * 25.25 = 75.75

     

    Add another resource to the same project with specific ETC units for each month - no actuals have been posted yet.

    Create a cost plan, populate by task assignments and you will now see for each month, the 'Planned Units' = 2 expense resources

    And the Planned Cost is updated by the total number of units added for each period

     

    NOTE: Because the 'Actual Cost' amount is not the same as the matrix, the 'planned cost' does not match the 'actual cost' for posted transactions.



  • 8.  Re: CA Clarity Tuesday Tip: Cost Plan 'Planned' calculations for past periods

    Posted 10-26-2018 09:45 AM

    Hello,

     

    Be aware that financial plans do not handle mobility on resources.

     

    Let's say you create a monthly cost plan for this year, with resource as a single regrouping attribute. You have a matrix organized by department and the resource at this time is attached to department D1.

     

    Six months later, the resource goes to another department D2 (with a different cost). The project manager refreshes his cost plan and sees variances between actuals and planned costs in the first 6 months of the year. Clarity uses the new department D2 of the resource whereas it should use the department D1.

     

    There should be a business rule like : "If there is no ETC on the Period, the Planned Budget is equal to Actual Cost, regardless Matrix Values.". Or : "If the data comes from the Actuals Units, the other financial properties (department, transaction class, resource class, etc.) should also come from posted Transactions".

     

    I've searched a bit on the community but I didn't see anything on this matter.

     

    Has anybody encouter this ? Or should I raise a ticket to the support ?
    Personally, I see it as a major bug.

     

    Regards,
    David

     

    PS : It is even worse if you try resource and department as regrouping attributes



  • 9.  RE: Re: CA Clarity Tuesday Tip: Cost Plan 'Planned' calculations for past periods

    Posted 09-10-2019 11:40 AM
    Hello David,

    I have the same issue and it becomes a major one for our business because it's not possible to use cost plan for following the total cost of our projects. 
    Dear community, how do you fix this issue ? how can we have a good resource management for solving this kind of Issue.

    About the fact that it's a major, I'm agree with that.  If it's not a bug, why it's working like that ? Why it's the functional explanation about the fact that total cost is not ETC Cost + Actuals cost instead of  (ETC + Actuals) * rate ?

    Regards

    ------------------------------
    PPM Consultant
    Wipro
    ------------------------------



  • 10.  RE: Re: CA Clarity Tuesday Tip: Cost Plan 'Planned' calculations for past periods

    Posted 09-12-2019 05:23 PM
    Hi Olivier,

    There are a number of ways to solve your problem as I've done it different ways over the years.  But basically what you would have to do is write a process that picks up the actuals for the previous periods from the WIP tables.  eg If I ran a populate from assignment  today, my rule might say that for periods pre Sept 2019, remove all plan data from the plan and replace with the actuals data from WIP.  The process would run after the OOTB action is complete.

    This means that if a resource changed location, department, transaction class, resource class, role etc, you would not have an issue as actuals will match plan for previous periods with the future plan against his new grouping attributes.  eg You would not be in a situation where you see two lines for Michael, one with just his actuals for previous periods for dept A and the another line for Michael with all his plan data for Dept B and only actuals for Dept B going forward.  Hope that makes sense.

    I would suggest a process after the OOTB populate button so that it is flexible but it means your process has a few more steps.  Part of the process would figure out the structure of the plan, (grouping attributes, period etc) and then do the data manipulation.  Build the process for the populate from allocations too so you get full flexibility.

    Regards
    Michael


  • 11.  Re: CA Clarity Tuesday Tip: Cost Plan 'Planned' calculations for past periods

    Posted 04-09-2019 12:18 PM

    Yes David we are having the same issue...

    The resource changed department during the February time frame; their current department has a different rate in the rate matrix and now the cost plan "Planned Cost" for January reflects the new rate not the one at the at the time.  Manual adjustments must be made to these scenarios so they reflect Planning Costs properly. 

    Mike