Lesson 5 of 5
Testing
6 min
An intercompany scenario has not been tested until both sides have been checked. A tester who posts 1710's billing and sees revenue has tested half the scenario. The acceptance criterion is that both partners record matching amounts that reconcile, or that every difference is explained and accepted. That makes intercompany testing a two-team exercise from the start.
Scenario list
| Scenario | Seller-side check (1710) | Buyer-side check (1810) |
|---|---|---|
| Cross-company expense recharge | Expense share and receivable from 1810 | Expense and payable to 1710, same amount |
| Central payment | Payment and receivable from 1810 | Supplier cleared, payable to 1710 |
| Intercompany stock transfer with billing | Goods issue, revenue, receivable | Goods receipt, supplier invoice, payable |
| Cross-company sales | Internal billing to 1810 | Supplier invoice; customer invoice to Great Lakes Fleet Services |
| Intercompany loan and interest | Loan receivable and interest income | Loan payable and interest expense |
| Reversal and credit memo | Reversal or credit memo posted | Mirror posting on the buyer side |
Contoso's intercompany test scenarios with partner-side checks.
Deliberate mismatches
Positive tests prove matching works when everything agrees. They do not prove reconciliation finds problems. Add deliberate mismatches: a supplier invoice keyed at the wrong amount, a recharge posted only on one side, an invoice without trading partner, a shipment received a period later. Each should appear in the reconciliation worklist with the right status, and the classification and reason code process should work end to end.
- PostExecute the scenario in both company codes
- Check each sideSeller and buyer documents, accounts and trading partner
- Run matchingMatching run for the pair; review status
- Inject mismatchesPlanned errors appear as open items
- ResolveClassify, fix or explain; rerun; close pair status
Evidence
- Document numbers on both sides for every scenario, with the cross-company code transaction number where applicable.
- Partner balances by account and trading partner for the test period, side by side.
- Reconciliation status for the pair: matched items, unmatched items, and their reason codes.
- For each deliberate mismatch: proof it was detected, the classification, and the fix.
- Sign-off statement: no unmatched differences, or each remaining difference explained and accepted by both owners.
Schedule the intercompany tests so they include a period end. Many intercompany defects only show at the boundary: a shipment issued on the last day of the month and received on the first, a recharge posted after the partner closed its period, a valuation run that treats the intercompany balance differently on each side. Running the scenarios across a month end in the dry-run close, with both finance teams following their real calendar, tests the process as it will run in production. Ask Luis to include the intercompany reconciliation status as a checkpoint in the cutover rehearsal as well, since open intercompany items are part of the balances that will be migrated.
What would you do?
Priya's intercompany test report shows 12 scenarios passed, each verified in company code 1710 only. The 1810 team was not available. What should happen before sign-off?
- Every intercompany scenario has a seller-side and a buyer-side check.
- Add deliberate mismatches to prove reconciliation finds and classifies differences.
- Evidence: documents on both sides, partner balances by trading partner, reconciliation status and reason codes.
- Both entities' owners sign; remaining differences need explicit acceptance.
Check your understanding · not graded
Lesson check
1. What is the key acceptance criterion for intercompany testing?
2. Why inject deliberate mismatches?
3. Who should sign off intercompany results for 1710 and 1810?