Authorization at sales org. level and territory level?

[former_member184510]

Hi Experts,

I would like to know the difference between the authorization at sales org level and territory management level? their respective pros and cons.(if any)

My current requirement is to have a typical heirarchy structure where each manager is able to view only his/her transactions(lead, opportunity,activities etc) , accounts and related contacts he is resposible for (or his sub-ordinates are resposible for.)The sales rep is responsible for only his accounts and tranactions and has visibility to only his stuffs.

CRM 7.0 has a few new features in territory managementa s I understand. So will it be sufficient for my above mentioned requirements? Or is it recommended to have authorizations at both sales org. level and territory level.(some kind of hybrid).

any suggestion on this highly appreciated. thanks!

Aneesh

[robert_kunstelj]

You can cover your needs with both scenarios. Whatever you will choose will give you desired functionaly. We prefer to use organizational management, because we use on CRM sales oriented organizational structure and not hr structure. So it depends on what you plan to do with organizational structure on crm side.

I would also say that organizational management is stronger in authorization capabilities, but territory is more flexible and you can use rule modeler which is not applicabale for org.model.

Regards.

[former_member184510]

Thanks Robert!

I got an about about this.You told that both the approaches can be used for my requirement.If I am not mistaken then, territory management is more userfriendly and flexible (from a end user prospective) but Org. structure is more robust to handle this .

Also is the same thing valid for visibility of related transactions as well?(like lead, opportunities,activities , etc.)

Thanks once again!

-Aneesh

[robert_kunstelj]

Yes, you are corect about flexibility and robustness. The only thing I don't like about territory management is that it is displayed on partner function level in transaction and not as own assignment block.

About transaction - both scenarios are applicable for all transactions.

[former_member184510]

Hi Robert,

Thanks again for your input!.

If I boil down I have two more problems on a lower level.I already have an existing sales org structure which is being used by the TPM. Now if I create one more sales org structure to cater my present requirement, then there are chances that one employee may fall under 2 sales org structure. How do we govern that? Is it via auth object,if so, thenis there any specific field in auth obj level that governs the choice between sales org.s?

Also I was wondering how are the transactions dealt with with , in both the approaches i.e, sales org and territory management.I could not understand the underlying concept on how transactions are governed in terms of visibility. Is it also on auth object level?

Regards,

Aneesh

[robert_kunstelj]

You can use auth. object CRM_ORD_OE to allow or prevent user to be able to see transactions of just certain organizations. With this object you can specify with which sales organizations, offices, groups or service organizations users can work.

About transactions - yes, you have auth. objects to set what users can see. For organization you have objects: CRM_ORD_LP and CRM_ORD_OE. For territory you have object CRM_TERRMA.

Regards.