Cybertrax 2.1 Client (Q and A)

From UG

Revision as of 18:41, 22 June 2010

New Questions

Need visibility defined per user type, MOT, client, office, internal user group, etc

Part A) new fields: visibility, Read/Write Access must be defined for each type of user, MOT, etc;

We have significant number of new CT fields introduced: PO Issued by, Piece price, Approved For Date, etc

Important questions for each field:

Are they visible? This must be defined separately for:

• a] each of 4 types of users: jaguar/internal, shipper, planner, client

• b] each MOT: air, ocean, etc.

• c] each Client Company? (show them for EA Arden Domestic only?)

• d] each Office? ? (show them for NY only?)

• e] each Jag operator/group? ? (show them only for operators dealing with EA Arden Domestic?)

A

• a)
  • client - do not change functionality
  • shipper/planner/jaguar - may see all NEW fields
• b,c,d,e – visible for any value for now

Need read or write defined per user type, different phases in the lifetime of the shipment

Next question is: If new field is visible then are they open for read or also write? Must be defined separately for:

• a] each of 4 types of users: jaguar/internal, shipper, planner, client

• b] different phases in the lifetime of the shipment (example: commodity info may not be changed after Ct is approved)

Some of this already defined, but not all – it is a matrix: (option a) X (option b)

A

• a)
  • client - do not change functionality
  • jaguar - can edit all fields (for now)
  • planner - can only edit its own fields as defined in Requirements
  • shipper - can only edit its own fields

Some new fields seem to duplicate existing

New fields

- Authorization status,

- Approved For Date,

- Approved By

- “Approved On

- etc

seem to serve same purpose as existing:

- Authorized By,

- Authorized MOT (could be hold),

- Authorization Method,

- On Customer Hold

- Pending Approval

We have to make a decision if we want to:

Option a) “discontinue” some of the old fields (then we must analyse where on pdfs/reports, etc we used them and delete or archive)

Option b) re-use some of the old fields (and potentially rename)

Option c) keep all as is but define better the difference and purpose

A

see "(data dictionary)"

Existing Authorization process seems to overlap with new

We have authorization process for Client/internal now. Are we going to keep both it or replace it by new?

A

Keep both

Approval Report

1) it needs to be defined in details

2) We already have Approval report defined. Options:

a) Change existing

b) Keep old but then we need another name for new report

Do we need to limit # of lines on internal to 1 line? (blocking adding lines)

A

Yes

Should jag users be able to edit commod table created by shipper at all?

A

Yes

Answered Questions

How to avoid situation when planners ignore some new shipments for a long time?

A

Currently this is not required for phase 1 and will be addressed for possibly phase 2. Although, suggestion was given such as auto approve or auto reject, based upon a certain amount of time. Yet this is something that would need to be further discussed and defined by Elizabeth Arden.

When Jag operator may see or "start to move" CT?

A

Once a record is approved by a planner or an E.M, that shipment will then show on the live tab for both the internal & client applications

What additional read-only fields edited by Jag oper Shipper will see?

A

A: Trucker, Estimated Pick up date, Actual Pick up date, Estimated Delivery date, Actual Delivery date, Approved (with name of person who approved, including the date & time), Hold (with name of person who placed on hold, including the date & time), Rejected (with name of person who rejected it, including the date & time)

EM and Planner - same thing?

A

A:No, not the same thing, but they are similar. They play the same role in the approval process.

Any requirement for release date?

A

A: ASAP, ideally just several weeks