Core_company - How to manage old companies (without deletion)?

[YoungItiller]

Hello SNOW Community,

OOTB Core_company does not seem to have an active flag to manage old records which means by default companies, no longer with you, appear when logging tickets (for example, many more uses).

Although I have seen some suggestions to add an active flag to this form, I was wondering how people are going around managing this?

I have two ideas:
Active flag (simple on and off) and then update the dictionary definitions to omit records which are inactive. Therefore, all historical information will be available.
OR
Category based status for each of the steps in the lifecycle of a customer: 'Proposal', 'Onboarding', 'Live', 'On-hold', 'Ex-customer'.
This should mean we could further define the workflows in the system based on these criteria and omit records like 'Proposal' and 'Ex-customers' when logging INCs (for example).

I have heard you could also define the dictionary based on contracts against a company.

Thank you for your responses.

Kind Regards,

Jamie

[Jaspal Singh · Accepted solution]

Hi Jamie,

Since you are looking for more of suggestion I would suggest you to get a Type field created of type List. Something that exists on Group table where you specify Type for Groups.

It has 2 advantages.

1. No need of active flag as you can create a type 'Do Not Use' & modify reference qualifer to show only those companies that does not have type 'Do Not Use'.

2. Also, for the 2nd option of yours for Category this can be used to leverage the type entered in the Type field. Since, its a list type it can accomodate 'n' number of options & can be used as required to cater changing business needs.

[YoungItiller]

Hello Jaspal, thank you very much for your feedback.
Really appreciate the suggestion.

I'm glad to see I am not overthinking this too much.

Have a great day.

[Jaspal Singh]

Great to know comments helped.

May be if you got what was expected you can close the thread by marking appropriate answer as correct.

[Jens Damhoej]

I would go for the active solution since I have bad experiences with the "do not use" in the name or other places 😉
In order to create a lifecycle for companies you need to have som sort of proces in place to deal with companies that are no longer active.