Question:
Hi all...
I've built an purchase requisition release system with classification.
Lets say approval value per material group:
1. 0-1.000€
2. 1.000-100.000£
3. 100.000-€
Now if a first level approver (a person with authority to release PR's up to 1000€) creates a PO in that value range (<1000€), he/she can release it self!
How can I configure the system that a PR creator cannot release hir/hers own PRs even he/she has the authority/release code to release PRs in that value range. In that case PR should go to the level
2. even the prive is less...
Answer:
Hi,
in case that you set up your release strategy based on price and mat. group only you can't do it. You must include the field requisitioner in strategy.
However, why you want to do this anyway?
If a person has the authorization to release PRs until a certain amount that means from a business process point of view that this person can authorize procurements until this fixed amount (in your case 1000EUR). Why shouln'd he be authorized to release the PR, if he creates the PR himself?
I assume that he is on supervisor or manager level. If he really wants to commit a fraud, your solution won't prevent him from that. He will just let his staff create the PR for him and then release it himself.
Answer:
Hi,
You should look at Enhancement M06E0004 which includes Function Module EXIT_SAPLEBND_002. Get your ABAPer to help you define your requirement in the ZXM06U22.
Cheers,
HT
Answer:
Hi,
in case that you set up your release strategy based on price and mat. group only you can't do it. You must include the field requisitioner in strategy.
However, why you want to do this anyway?
If a person has the authorization to release PRs until a certain amount that means from a business process point of view that this person can authorize procurements until this fixed amount (in your case 1000EUR). Why shouln'd he be authorized to release the PR, if he creates the PR himself?
I assume that he is on supervisor or manager level. If he really wants to commit a fraud, your solution won't prevent him from that. He will just let his staff create the PR for him and then release it himself.
In normal case, we have a requisitioner (with no release code) and approvers. We can only have one class/release group for item wire release, so if I enter "requisitioner" into classification, I have to enter a value for that in all release strategies. We run into conflicts in normal workflow by doing this.
In business perspective what you said makes sense in most cases. However, we have "personal" purchase items, for an example training, that really could use another opinion/approval from superior.
Answer:
Hi,
in case that you set up your release strategy based on price and mat. group only you can't do it. You must include the field requisitioner in strategy.
However, why you want to do this anyway?
If a person has the authorization to release PRs until a certain amount that means from a business process point of view that this person can authorize procurements until this fixed amount (in your case 1000EUR). Why shouln'd he be authorized to release the PR, if he creates the PR himself?
I assume that he is on supervisor or manager level. If he really wants to commit a fraud, your solution won't prevent him from that. He will just let his staff create the PR for him and then release it himself.
In normal case, we have a requisitioner (with no release code) and approvers. We can only have one class/release group for item wire release, so if I enter "requisitioner" into classification, I have to enter a value for that in all release strategies. We run into conflicts in normal workflow by doing this.
In business perspective what you said makes sense in most cases. However, we have "personal" purchase items, for an example training, that really could use another opinion/approval from superior.
Answer:
Hi,
you are right that implememting the requistioner field would have a huge impact as you have to implement into all release groups.
Why don't you create a new material group for these personal purchase items as you use material groups as characteristic already. Should be possible as it looks like that it concerns services and non-stock items. Then you assign a new release strategy to this material group based on:
1. 0-1.00.000€
2. 100.000-....
with the rlease indicators for 2. and 3. in you rprevious post.
Hope this help!
Answer:
Thanks,
That would be one solution to look at, although it puts unnecessary burden to 2nd level approver because she/he must then clear all these PR's that should/could be approved at 1st level.
This issue is somewhat unpleasant, because I was informed that accounting laws say a person cannot approve own purchases. It's hard to believe that SAP don't have a standard functionality to prevent this.
Don't have access to ABAP resources at the moment to check out user exit Ha Tran suggested. However if we could prevent this happening via user exit, we still have to maintain alternative and working release strategy for scenarios like this.
Answer:
In this last reply concerning accounting laws the person who replies ("Guest") assumes that validating would be a one-actor play.
Why?
It would rather be normal that the requisitioner refrains himself from validating his own request and calls on the following level of responsibility who is also authorized to use the former's release code in addition to his own.
_________________
Andrzej
akrason@excite.com
Answer:
Hi,
I am not sure but I think this user exit just allows you to expand the CEBAN table. As you don't want to change all release strategies by introducing additional characteristics, it won't help you.
I don't understand you comment regarding to accounting laws. The release of a PR is company internal process and can be handled according to the company policies and does not has to follow any accounting laws.
The easiest solution would be to convince your customer that if a person with the authorization to release up to 1000EUR for certain materials or services, should also have the authorization to release the PR, if created by himself.
Why does your customer not want that the person who creates the PR can release it. If your customer tells you because of accounting laws, then convince him that they definetely apply in teh case of release of PR as PRs are internal documents.
Answer:
Hi Bernd,
First of all, my initial understanding was that what he would like to look at is the setting where if you approved the PR, then you can not release PO and that's why I would recommend the User Exit.
In respect of your recommendation, I would not be having any objection unless no PO release strategy is applied before PO is sent to the vendor. Of course, if you are implementing PO release strategy, then the approval of PR is purely for internal management purpose (or even for the approval of quantity rather than value since value is copied from MAP of material master or manually entered). However, if no PO release strategy is set in place, then the approval of PR is very important from the internal auditing point of view.
Hope this helps.
Cheers,
HT
Answer:
Yes, sorry for not explaining the scenario properly. Ha Tran is right,
We don't have release for POs at all. The purchase process goes through PR and PR release and purchasers can only convert released PR's to PO's. Therefore, releasing the PR is authoring the purchase.
Our auditors have made a point about people being able to release their own PR's when the purchase is stricty "for personal use", lets say training or a new mobile phone...