Traditionally the NG QS will liaise with the supplier QS regarding a quotation at all stages up to acceptance/assessment (e.g. if supplementary information is required in support of the quotation). It would be beneficial if the PM were able to delegate responsibility for certain communication types (dropdown values) ,including placing actions on the contractor (see separate feature request) without necessarily being able to generate all notifications. Potentially it might also be beneficial to allow responsibility to be delegated to the QS to not accept a quotation for specific reasons (e.g. revised quotation required) whilst not delegating the ability to accept a quote.
Steve @batuhan.balaban is investigating this as we think this may already be possible via the workflow tool
Hi, I have checked the logic around Quote Reply user permissions,
the current logic seems to be that specific “Party” and “permission type” of users can be set to either draft a reply or to communicate a reply in each workflow.
Under Compensation Events Workflow group,
-PM Compensation Events WF
-Supplier Compensation Events WF
-PM Proposed Instructions WF
Have the following individual user filter setting to manage these rights,
This Replying user privilege’s are only mutually used in “Supplier CEN Replies” on “Supplier CEN” WF.
Add a box in the workflow editor which allows superuser and above to toggle on/off “limited ability of users to make financial commitments” and “limit by quote value” with value insert in workflow editor and “limit by reply status” not accepted only. Applied to party and role permissions?
Superuser do it for them
In the case of National Grid it would be helpful if we were able to delegate permission for the QS to be able to reject a quotation for the purposes of requesting a revised quotation. On the face of it, the simplest way of achieving this would be to replace the Reply User filter with more granular reply filters to cover different reply types:
‘Accept a CEN’ (Reply to Contractor CEN with status AQ [Accepted])
‘Reject a CEN’, (Reply to Contractor CEN with status R [Not accepted])
‘Accept a Quote’ (Reply to a Quote with Status 0 [Revised Quotation Required])
‘Reject and request a Revised Quotation’ (Reply to a Quote with Status 1 [Accepted])
‘Reject a quote to assess it instead’ (Reply to a Quote with Status 1 [Accepted])
‘Reject a Quote for a Proposed Instruction’ (Reply to a Quote with Status 5 [Proposed instruction will not be given])
The communicate button would need to be visible to anybody linked to the PM party with validation to prevent communication (potentially saving a draft instead) depending on the configured rule.
For other communication types (e.g. PM Notifications) it would be worth considering adding a ‘Manager’s Delegate can communicate?’ permission and then setting a flag against each Communication Type placeholder so that as well as being able to flag these as active or inactive you could flag whether these are available to a delegate or not. That way people who need full rights get the Manager permission and people who need a subset get the Manager’s delegate permissions. You could potentially do something similar with the CompensationStatuses and QuoteStatuses in order to avoid having to configure multiple sets of reply rules. In that case the communicate button would always be enabled based on the party but validation would need to be applied on hitting the button to allow/prevent communication (and potentially save a draft instead) based on the rules.