Why don’t we name the divisions into cost centers
Also, why is there no possibility to change the font from Google Fonts for all languages of the world?
because Manager is not targeted to be used in any specific industry. users globally use the same for different purposes.
you can set any language you need. read the guide Set language | Manager
if you mean changing the font style then read the guide https://www.manager.io/guides/18025
1 Like
In service activities, the company can have multiple branches and we treat each branch as a cost center, and therefore I recommend returning the old name of “divisions” to “cost centers”
The name Divisions was adopted when Manager enabled the possibility to use them also in BS. You cannot talk about a cost center on a BS account.
1 Like
what is BS Account
Balance Sheet
Sorry I didn’t understand
Sorry I didn’t understand Your reply
@mgaber Divisions and Cost Centers are two different words that mean more or less the same thing. If anything, Divisions are more general than Cost Centers.
That’s just part of the naming conventions of Manager and it just needs some getting used to, that’s all.
1 Like
As argued before these are hierarchical grouping mechanisms. Ideally we should be able to name one or more “groups”. So if I want to use “Cost Center” I would be able for example to assign (select) CC111 to expenses / costs in P&L and if I want to use a business unit / Division to BS and/or P&L I would be able to assign (select) for example Loans Division to a liability. I should be able to run reports for any of these groupings.
1 Like
It was already proposed if I am not wrong. I don’t know if it is in the ideas.
No naming convention will please everyone. Sales invoice, tax invoice, or sales voucher; sales quote, proposal, or tender; payment or disbursement; income statement or profit and loss statement; every transaction or report in accounting could be called by alternate names. And that is just in one language. The same is true for organizational structure names. The developer always needs to choose something. Adapting the program to the preferences of one user will alienate others.
1 Like
Exactly, and at the moment there is only a 2 level hierarchy - Organisation on Level 1 and divisions on level 2.
With only 2 levels, the term “Divisions” is fine, but if there is progress to more levels this may not be the best terminology as “division” is a very common title used by organisation’s when naming reporting centres.
In my experience, I have worked for an organisation that had a hierarchy of six levels, and a seventh was suggested but never implemented.
Common names that organisations use for reporting centres are: Division, Department, Branch, Business Unit, Cost Centre, Program, etc. These will always be ongoing sections of the business, and be distinct from a project which is a short term activity with an expected completion date.
I think that a better term to describe the reporting centre functionality would be segments, as segments is rarely a title used by organisations for naming reporting centres
On most I agree but not on what you define as project except for clear start and end dates (except for no cost extensions). I deal with development projects (donors such as USAID, B&MGF, etc. They are all multiyear and may run budgets of many millions. They are as much “businesses” in terms of accounting as units and divisions, even more comprehensive. I also managed projects under a program which belongs to an organization.
I agree that this can be the case, and so, if need be, this can be handled by using the reporting centre functionality.
Many organisations have the more common finite project type and that is the reason for having separate project functionality.
Balance sheet can duplicate the same assets for each branch with different code and keep track of divisions, as well as customers and suppliers
I almost got your idea in the name of divisions instead of cost centers