I am currently working on setting up a sequential process flow in NetSuite to track a multi-step production process. The challenge arises from managing an intermediate material that undergoes multiple stages of processing, where the input and output material appear similar but are defined by different stages. Process Overview: 1. Initial Stage: We start with a base material ("Material A") that undergoes an initial processing step to become "Material B." This transformation is tracked through a sub-assembly or BoM, defining the required inputs and outputs. 2. Intermediate Stage: A portion of "Material B" is further processed into "Material C" through a subsequent sub-assembly. Only a specified volume of "Material B" is carried over to this stage. 3. Final Stage: The process continues with "Material C," which is further refined or transformed, completing the multi-stage production workflow. Issue Encountered: The input material for each stage is essentially the same substance, distinguished only by the stage of processing it has undergone (e.g., "Material A" to "Material B" to "Material C"). This setup has led to a component loop error in NetSuite, as the system detects a circular reference between stages due to the repeated use of the same base material. Objectives: • Track Each Stage Separately: Maintain distinct records for each stage to accurately capture changes, volumes, and conditions. • Avoid Circular References: Ensure that the process flow remains linear, with clear start and end points at each stage. • Manage Inventory Volumes: Accurately track the volume carried over between stages without creating redundant loops. Questions: 1. Best Practice Recommendations: How can we best structure the sub-assemblies or BoMs to avoid circular references while maintaining accurate tracking of materials through each stage? 2. Sub-Assembly vs. Assembly Setup: Would it be more efficient to manage this process using sub-assemblies for each stage, or should all steps be consolidated within a single assembly structure? 3. Volume Management: What strategies or configurations can be used to specify volume carryovers between stages without causing reference errors? Any guidance or suggestions to address these challenges would be greatly appreciated. Our goal is to maintain a robust and error-free process flow while accurately capturing each production stage's distinct characteristics.

AI generated answer (using internal Slack threads):

Based on the conversations, here are some suggestions to address your challenges: 1. Best Practice Recommendations: You can structure your sub-assemblies or BoMs in a way that each stage of the process is represented by a different item. For example, "Material A" can be an item, "Material B" can be a sub-assembly that includes "Material A" and additional components or processes, and "Material C" can be another sub-assembly that includes "Material B" and further components or processes. This way, you avoid circular references while maintaining accurate tracking of materials through each stage. 2. Sub-Assembly vs. Assembly Setup: It would be more efficient to manage this process using sub-assemblies for each stage. This allows you to track each stage separately and avoid circular references. As one user mentioned, you could use an item group or a kit item rather than an assembly, which would treat the components individually. 3. Volume Management: You can use custom searches to split the input into finished goods by assembly component. This can help you understand how your costs are being driven and manage inventory volumes. However, this would not change the accounting the system is doing. Remember, these are just suggestions based on the conversations and may not be the perfect solution for your specific situation. You may need to experiment with different setups to find what works best for you. ****** Disclaimer: This response was generated by an artificial intelligence assistant based on previous conversations from multiple Slack channels, and may contain inaccuracies or mistakes. ******