I see that we have gained a new tab! I can’t see the point of splitting the payments/receipts into two tabs. Couldn’t you just use a filter view to show only payments/receipts if there is a need to separate them?
This was necessary due to internal improvements I’ve been working on. The change is not related to specific user request.
Even if there is no benefit, or even if it’s worse, this is the way it needs to be so I just need to make it as painless as possible.
2 Likes
I think it is a great improvement and prevents accidental mistakes. The more this split is developed over time the better as it can be drilled down even to permissions. One can prevent errors of wrongly assigning accounts to payments / receipts easier, or is clear that a payment can be to a vendor/supplier/other (maybe reinstate Payee to group these) and receipt to customer/client/other (maybe reinstate Payer to group these). I actually found it weird when moving from another popular acounting application to find that Manager did not split this. A work around can always be to have two windows open one with receipts and the other with payments if needed to switch all the time.
Doesn’t bother me. I just wondered why anyone requested it as I couldn’t see any point to it.
@eko I just import bank statements now, so impossible to make mistakes nowadays.
We have a lot of cash transactions so it matter to us. The split help different staff doing different things. Those that sell can enter the receipts and those that purchase inventory can focus on payments. In both instances they will not make errors. As for bank statements I agree for all electronic receipts and payments we make that it does not really matter.
Fair point. I don’t use cash transactions, so didn’t appreciate that. I was just curious as to the purpose of the change.
I preferred seeing the transactions in the same place independent of sign of the amount but can work with either. It now means I have to drill down on a bank account to see a similar display.
On the positive side it does mean
- Payments form default can be set to contact type supplier
- Receipt form default can be set to contact type customer
Would be nice to have tax code sale / purchase defined by the contact type and not have to allocate a specific supplier / customer (and generate dummy supplier & customer) to make this happen.
When there is no single customer or supplier in a payment/receipt (the other situation) determining tax code sale/purchase from the sign of the amount is useful.
1 Like
Have to agree. Tabs have proliferated. Personally was cleaner when tabs were more of the ‘module’ with multiple transactions beneath. Bank alone now has 5 tabs! Bank Accounts, Receipts, Payments, Transfers, Reconciliations. Curious why buttons at top within a tab - New Receipt, New Payment, Transfer etc. or for fixed assets New Asset, New Depreciation entry etc. can’t suffice. Is it just that User Security model design is limited to ‘by tab’ maybe?
Again just expressing personal preference and observation obviously this is purely UI and makes no difference to the great underlying functionality Manager provides. Just trying to understand philosophy.
1 Like
Yes this is my main annoyance. Tabs are growing. Personally I think you should have one tab for banks and within that deal with transactions instead of having a tab for every aspect of the bank.
1 Like
It all depends on how you use Manager. I already explained that there are many businesses that also have significant cash transactions. Also not everyone uses the bank statements as their main entry for payments and receipts as some will manually enter each payment and receipt and then reconcile with the bank statements. Indeed a more involving process but some insists on working that way. As you can activate through “customize” many of the tabs that you want to use, maybe that part can be more sophisticated. In any case whatever we mention here was made superfluos by @lubos post
Even if there is no benefit, or even if it’s worse, this is the way it needs to be so I just need to make it as painless as possible.
I am thinking more along the lines of moving reconciliations, payments, receipts into the bank account tab. You then select payments/receipts etc from within the bank accounts tab. Then you see what you currently see in the tabs present now.
Yes I know that this will violate the whole structure of Manager where you are prime buttons and drill down within each tab. But I honestly can’t see the point in having 5 or more tabs related to the bank account. I would keep them separate as they are, but not in tabs, but under bank accounts tab.
Every other part of manager has one tab for one thing. - Suppliers, Customers, Employees and all the subsequent transactions relating to that. Bank Accounts are the only exception to this rule.
Makes sense also.
That leaves out users who only have cash accounts.
That is not true. Suppliers are invoked for Purchase Quotes, Purchase Orders, Purchase Invoices, Debit Notes, and Goods Receipts. Customers are likewise involved with Sales Quotes, Sales Orders, Sales Invoices, Credit Notes, Late Payment Fees, and Delivery Notes. Employees are connected to Payslips, Fixed Assets to Depreciation Entries, and so on. Multiple tabs for related functionalities are the rule in Manager, not the exception. That is what allow streamlining of entry screens (according to which tabs are enabled). They also allow context to free users from having to make arcane accounting decisions.
You advocate here, as you have in other forum topics, for fewer tabs that would suit your individual workflow. The ultimate expression of that philosophy would be elimination of all transaction type tabs except Journal Entries. You can reduce every type of Manager transaction to a journal entry. But I doubt you would find the program as easy to use.
2 Likes
@lubos, the only thing left now is for the two tabs to have separate custom field settings. Users can skip the fields they won’t need but it not the right thing. I wouldn’t want to see, Checked By, Authorised By, etc fields on a receipt form. That should be for payment only.
1 Like
I was using examples not stating an exact list. Obviously Cash Accounts could be similarly accommodated, or included within the bank accounts tab as well for all I know. I was just listing examples not specifying the criteria.
From a non accountant point of view, Purchase Orders, Invoices etc are completely separate from Suppliers, Customers etc. Hence my point about bank accounts having multiple tabs for receipts, payments, reconciliations etc is as I said. Non Accountants would regard bank transactions as well something that goes in the bank account tab! But I won’t argue semantics as this is a distraction from the point that I was making.
Yes you are quite correct that the logical conclusion would be to just have Journal Entries by my philosophy. Obviously breaking things down into tabs makes accounting easier hence the value in having suppliers, customers, bank accounts, employees, inventory items etc. But the opposite is always true - you end up breaking things down into too many parts which can counterintuitively actually make things harder. This is the problem with an ever growing tab list.
This is not really about my preferred work flow, but more I am providing feedback on how I think the program could be improved. I personally think that sticking rigidly to the concept of how tabs should work is resulting in more tabs. I would incorporate all the bank related tabs into bank accounts and within bank accounts you could have the separation for receipts, payments etc.
The Reconciliation tab for example is really wasted. You use it once a week/month (some businesses may do it daily), but once you have reconciled, you don’t really do anything else in it. Why does this need to be in it’s own tab. Why can’t you have a reconciled column for each bank account in the bank accounts tab.
I am not really wanting to argue about it, because at the end of the day, only the developer can decide what to do. I would even merge the suppliers/customers into one tab with a tick for supplier/customer which I believe is the direction the program is going in anyway.
@Lubos improved the Cash Accounts tab allowing for entry of Receipts and Payments and the Bank Accounts tab with clear import of bank statements without possibility to enter receipts and payments. I am not sure if it is intentional to restrict bank accounts to statements only. However, if for bank accounts in addition to importing bank statements one could have the same Receipts and Payments options as in Casg Accounts then the receipts and payment tabs can disappear from the tabs list on the left. Maybe I am missing something here…
Hi Patch,
Would it work for SME’s wanting to have separate clerks assigned for receipting and Payments?
I do not know what NG Software considers their target market.
There are software package which have direct support for each type of employee however
- All business have differences in detail of there work flow, procedures and responsibilities
- Because of this all software which support a business detailed workflow must be customised to each business requirements
- The required customisation is done infrequently for each individual business and requires detailed specialist knowledge of the software package and how to customise it.
- this customisation process requires very significant investment to do
- Software with the required flexibility, is always complex and expensive to set up because it is so flexible.
So Manger may evolve into supporting the functional requirements of each of your employees. However if it did it would not be suitable for a large percentage of its current user base.
But to answer your question the answer is of course yes otherwise why did you select Manager in the past knowing receipt and payments were one one tab at that time. It is also of dubious benefit to force your sales clerk to send sales refund processing to the purchasing clerk. Even with this protection a misguided clerk is likely to still be able to enter a negative amount receipt / purchase so inadvertently avoid your restrictions.
By the way. Lubos has already stated this discussion is not irrelevant as he has re-divided receipts and payments for back end not user preferences.
Of course … on the same TAB may work for self operated accounting system… But if its a server based version, the tabs should be different. Otherwise its defeats the purpose of being a server installation.
The answer to you question why I had choses the application in the past, is that I was not an active user of the application. Now I have started testing extensively. While using it, I am coming across some issues.
The issue of Audits is another area., Accounting software gets audited in my region. So If I have to use Manager, then it needs to have strict controls,. If its used in a SME environment, it needs to have user delegations. And of course, reference numbers in sequence for each source documents. If you dont have the basics, thn you leave room for mismanagement. I believe Manager is a great software, all it needs to have separate modules, tested verified and locked.
The developer here listens to scenarios and works on everyones request. But really the developer needs to have the accounting basics laid out in flow processes. I can help test it out fully.
Is better for access control to split it. Creditors clerks do not need to see the business income.
Steve Jobs said 3 clicks then you need to be where you want to be. So to put something inside another tab inside another one, is going backwards, not forward. This improvement is moving forward.