Requirements for EDI to TMS
From UG
(Difference between revisions)
(→Introduction) |
(→Workflow) |
||
| Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
This is out of scope of this project. Once TMS vendor is selected and workflow design, link will be provided. | This is out of scope of this project. Once TMS vendor is selected and workflow design, link will be provided. | ||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | |||
== IP1 New Order == | == IP1 New Order == | ||
Revision as of 18:34, 19 July 2010
Contents |
About
This is a Analysis / Requirements wiki for EDI to TMS proj
Glossary
IP - Integration Point
Introduction
Core Business Need: Jaguar needs ability to optimize truck domestic shipments:
- create optimal loads, cost, routs, etc
- automate tariffs, communication with carriers
Above features are normally present in TMS software.
To achieve that it was decided:
- buy and use existing TMS solution (phase 1)
- gradually add these features to CT2 (phase 2)
To complete phase 1 we need to implement:
Vendor evaluation
Currently there are 2 systems we are considering:
- from Descartes
- from Lean Logistics
CT2 and TMS integration
In a nutshell:
- (shipment record will be created in CT2 and approved)
- IP1: New CT2 forwarded to TMS through EDI
- (in TMS Jag oper will run optimizations and select carrier)
- (TMS sens bids to carriers)
- IP2: TMS sends updates to CT2 (Carrier suggested, estim. pick up date, etc)
- (carrier accepts the bid)
- IP3: TMS sends updates to CT2 (Carrier confirmed, etc)
- (start processing shipments)
- IP4: carrier periodically submits updates into TMS (example: actual pickup date, etc)
See Figure below:
Figure Integration Points
User to TMS interaction and workflow
This is out of scope of this project. Once TMS vendor is selected and workflow design, link will be provided.
