Approval Process Completion Conditions for different stages

Hi
I have an approval process with 2 stages. The first stage has multiple approvers running in parallel. Only one user needs to approve for it to progress.
In the second stage it needs to be approved by all users.
I can set the completion conditions to complete after one person approves but this will also set it for the second stage. 
Is it possible to have different completion conditions for each stage or im i better just having a second approval proccess action?
Hope that makes sense and thanks

Hi,
According to your post, what do you mean “you have an approval process with 2 stages”?
In SharePoint 2013 workflow, a workflow can add many stages into it, and a stage can add many same or different actions into it.
So, each separate action you added in a workflow must be in a stage, will not be in two stages.
If you want to make the workflow complete when one user approved the task process in a stage, I recommend that you can directly set the “Completion Criteria” option to “Wait for specific response” as below in the “Task Option” of the “Start a Task Process”
action.
If you want to make the workflow go to the second task process in the second stage when one user approved the task process in the first stage, I recommend that you can set the “Completion Criteria” option to “Wait for specific response” as below in the “Task
Option” of the “Start a Task Process” action in the first stage.
Then, you can set the “Completion Criteria” option to “Wait for all response” as below in the “Task Option” of the “Start a Task Process” action in the second stage.
And, you can go to “Start Options” to check “Start workflow automatically when an item is created”, publish the workflow and test whether it works in your environment.
The workflow is shown as below:
Best Regards,
Yumi Fu

Similar Messages

  • Approval process not waiting for approval tasks to be completed

    Hi All,
    I created an Approval process for a resource. When a request is created for this resource an approval task is assigned to the manager of the user.
    Before the approval task is completed by the manager the resource is getting provisioned. Is there something I am missing out here. Any suggestions about what I am missing here.
    Thanks

    The statuses shown are sometimes misleeding. There is a status for when the approval starts. There is a status when the Standard Approval process completes (this is normally set to auto complete). There there is a status for when the object specific approval starts, a status for if any of the approvals have been completed, and then one for when the whole request is completed. These don't neccessarily provide you with a sure answer to the status of the request.
    I think you need to disregard the statuses for now, and just configure the approval tasks as you intend to do so. If you do not want the standard approval to be required, set the Approve task to use the auto complete adapter. Then create an approval process specific to your resource object, and set it to the default. Then create an approval task and make to uncheck the "conditional" checkbox so that it always runs. Set your assignments appropriately, and you will be done. The provisioning will not start until all tasks are completed with a complete status for the tasks within.
    If you want to know the statuses between steps, then check those between all of the steps.
    -Kevin

  • Bapi or FM to Create Or Update multidimensional freight conditions for different scale id for different conditions

    Hello all,
    I want to create or update multidimensional freight conditions for different scale id for different conditions.
    I cound not find any Bapi or FM for this. I uesd BDC for this but i can not rely on it.
    If any one have other solution than IDOC then suggest me.
    Any BAPI or FM available then suggest me.

    Hi Gowri Rao,
    Can you please tell me, what values do you pass in table 'IT_PRICING_CONDITIONS'?
    Regards,
    Pratik

  • Can an educational institution that is not accredited use these wonderful tools? I would hope Apple makes this approval process as individual for the educational institutions as they are for the individual student's learn needs and qualifications.ing

    I would hope Apple makes this iTunes U approval process as individual for the educational institutions as they are for the individual student's learn needs and qualifications. Can an educational institution that is not accredited use these wonderful tools?

    I see that Common Sense Meda offers courses.  I don't believe they are an accredited educational institution.  Approval may be on a case by case basis so Apple can control the experience.  I hope it's open.
    I'm more concerned that Apple is excluding accredited educational institutions in many countries.

  • PO approval process in ECC for extended classic scenario

    Hi All,
    At this moment we are using SAP ECC for procure to pay process. In the existing system set up, our ECC purchase order goes for approval via SAP enterprise portal(EP). We are planing to implement SRM 7.0 Extended classic scenario, so that user can take the advantage of creating PO in their web portal. We don't want to disturb our existing ECC PO approval process at this point of time.  
    So our requirement is :
    User will create PO in SRM. Same PO will replicated in ECC and the PO will goes for approval in in ECC and the PO output will generate in ECC. Can it me possible in extended classic scenario ?
    Thanks in advance.
    Regards,
    Jennifer
    Edited by: Jennifer Batty on Aug 8, 2011 5:08 PM

    Hi Jennifer,
    Since SRM PO will be leading PO in extended classic scenario, why donot you design the process controlled workflow in line with the existing release strategy that you are using for ECC PO?
    Thanks and regards,
    Ranjan
    Ranjan Sutradhar

  • Different conditions for different columns

    Hi,
    I have two tables and both have 3 common columns. I have to write a query joining the two tables and get different columns with different conditions.
    For e.g., I have the tables test and test1.
    create table test (a1 varchar(10), a2 varchar(10), a3 varchar(10), a4 date, a5 number, a6 number, a7 number, a8 number);
    create table test1 (a1 varchar(10), a2 varchar(10), a3 varchar(10));
    insert into test1 values('abc', 'a', 'z');
    insert into test1 values('xyz', 'b', 'y');
    insert into test values('abc', 'a', 'x', trunc(sysdate,'MM'), 100, 200, 300, 400);
    insert into test values('abc', 'b', 'z', trunc(sysdate,'MM'), 567, 4778, 4234, 6767);
    insert into test values('xyz', 'a', 'y', trunc(sysdate,'MM'), 5467, 2134, 5678, 8332);
    insert into test values('xyz', 'b', 'z', trunc(sysdate,'MM'), 3534, 744, 678547, 46);
    insert into test values('abc', 'a', 'x', trunc(add_months(sysdate,-1),'MM'), 700, 800, 900, 600);
    insert into test values('abc', 'b', 'z', trunc(add_months(sysdate,-1),'MM'), 565477, 474578, 4456234, 226767);
    insert into test values('xyz', 'a', 'y', trunc(add_months(sysdate,-1),'MM'), 235467, 2342134, 255678, 258332);
    insert into test values('xyz', 'b', 'z', trunc(add_months(sysdate,-1),'MM'), 324534, 25744, 678547, 78846);
    select * from test1;
    A1     A2     A3
    abc     a     z
    xyz     b     y
    select * from test;
    A1     A2     A3     A4                     A5     A6     A7     A8
    abc     a     x     05/01/2010 00:00:00     100     200     300     400
    abc     b     z     05/01/2010 00:00:00     567     4,778     4,234     6,767
    xyz     a     y     05/01/2010 00:00:00     5,467     2,134     5,678     8,332
    xyz     b     z     05/01/2010 00:00:00     3,534     744     678,547     46
    abc     a     x     04/01/2010 00:00:00     700     800     900     600
    abc     b     z     04/01/2010 00:00:00     565,477     474,578     4,456,234     226,767
    xyz     a     y     04/01/2010 00:00:00     235,467     2,342,134     255,678     258,332
    xyz     b     z     04/01/2010 00:00:00     324,534     25,744     678,547     78,846I have to write a query to get values for columns a1, a4, a5, a6, a7 and a8. For each distinct month fro mthe column a4, the values for columns a1, a4 a5 and a6 should be based on the condition test1.a1=test.a1 and test1.a2=test.a2. The condition for columns a7 and a8 should be test1.a1=test.a1 and test1.a3=test.a3.
    How can I do this?
    Thanks,
    Machaan

    remove the 4th join and only duplicate test;
    SQL> ed
    Wrote file afiedt.buf
      1  select distinct
      2  case
      3          when t11a1 is null then
      4            t12a1
      5          else
      6            t11a1
      7        end as a1
      8        ,case
      9          when t11a4 is null then
    10            t12a4
    11          else
    12            t11a4
    13         end as a4
    14        ,case
    15          when t11a5 is null then
    16            t12a5
    17          else
    18            t11a5
    19         end as a5
    20  from (
    21        select t11.a1 as t11a1
    22              ,t11.a2 as t11a2
    23              ,t11.a3 as t11a3
    24              ,t11.a4 as t11a4
    25              ,t11.a5 as t11a5
    26              ,t11.a6 as t11a6
    27              ,t11.a7 as t11a7
    28              ,t11.a8 as t11a8
    29              ,t12.a1 as t12a1
    30              ,t12.a2 as t12a2
    31              ,t12.a3 as t12a3
    32              ,t12.a4 as t12a4
    33              ,t12.a5 as t12a5
    34              ,t12.a6 as t12a6
    35              ,t12.a7 as t12a7
    36              ,t12.a8 as t12a8
    37        from test1 t1
    38            ,test  t11
    39            ,test  t12
    40        where t1.a1 = t11.a1
    41        and   t1.a2 = t11.a2
    42        and   t1.a3 = t12.a3
    43* )
    SQL>
    SQL> /
    A1         A4                A5
    xyz        01-APR-10     324534
    xyz        01-MAY-10       3534
    abc        01-APR-10        700
    abc        01-MAY-10        100

  • Approval process - 2 users in stage

    Dear all,
    Question about the approval process.
    I have a stage where 2 users can approve, but only one is required
    It works fine when they approve document. As soon as one user approve, the originator user receive alert and can create the document.
    However when they want not to approve , the system ask for both user to not approve the request before changing the status of the request from pending to rejected and sending the alert to the user.
    If only one say no, the status remains pending, and an action of the second user is required to make the system change the status.
    Why to approve, only one is required, and to reject, both are required? is there a way to have the same process in approval than in reject ?
    Thank you
    Sébastien

    Dear Sébastien,
    This is in the initial design of this process. We can do nothing about it.
    You may post a DRQ here http://forums.sdn.sap.com/forum.jspa?forumID=265 or on Idea Place for this request.
    Thanks,
    Gordon

  • WSUS Manage Approval for different Groups

    We have different products the the company hosts and they require that servers be patched on Test servers prior to a code release. Once the the servers are tested then the same set of patches should be deployed to the production servers during a scheduled
    time when the code is released to the production servers. And that is the case for other products but the cycle between the product is always different. So we always want test group be product match the production group by product. What is the best solution
    to implement for this type of environment to be able to approve any missing update to the test group for a product and when time comes how to push the same updates to production groups.
    The way I have it seems messy because i have bunch of nested groups by datacenter > product name > purpose of the server "wether it is QA webserver, prod webserver, dev webserver, other servers,
    etc... and what i do is from Update Reports, run "Update Status Summary" report on the test group that has a status of "Needed, Failed, No Status" and from there approve the updates to that test group. Install the updates, etc... and then
    when I want to deploy the updates to certain groups, I run the "Updated Tabular Status for Approved Updates", select the same test group that was deployed to and the option "Installed/NotApplicable, Needed" and approve to the Production
    group. Seems like I am doing this all wrong. Appreciate the help. Thanks.

    Hi,
    I’m not sure if I have got your idea correctly. After you approved for test group, and there is any problem. You need approve for production group or all computer group.
    A similar question here:
    How does the WSUS approval process work ?
    For more information about approval process please refer to:
    Approving the Updates
    http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc708474(v=ws.10).aspx
    Step 7: Approve and Deploy Updates in WSUS 3.0
    http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc708475(v=ws.10).aspx
    Hope this helps.

  • None approval process for Purchasing Info Record

    Hi,
    Are there some approval process in SAP for Purchasing Info Record?
    Now, we use ME11 to creat Purchasing Info Record. And use ME12 to modify Purchasing Info Record. I feel it is very dangerous. Becase if someone make a mistake. Nobody know.
    If the price is lower than actual price, vendor must ask us modify it. If the price is higher than actual price, I am not very sure what will happen.
    So, we are seeking for an approval process in SAP system.
    Dan Yang

    >
    DanYang!@# wrote:
    > Hi,
    >
    > Are there some approval process in SAP for Purchasing Info Record?
    > Now, we use ME11 to creat Purchasing Info Record.
    And use ME12 to modify Purchasing Info Record. I feel it is very dangerous.
    Becase if someone make a mistake. Nobody know.
    >
    > If the price is lower than actual price, vendor must ask us modify it.
    If the price is higher than actual price, I am not very sure what will happen.
    >
    > So, we are seeking for an approval process in SAP system.
    >
    > Dan Yang
    There is no approval process in standard,Since it serves as master.
    Better provide authorization for ME11 & ME12 to restrict it.
    Raise quotation to maintain vendor prices.

  • Workflow approval process for cFolder

    Hi friends,
               We are using SRM 7.0 with PPS. Is it possible to implement workflow approval process in cFolder for Before Publish the RFx , Final approval of Bidder Technical Bid etc. If possible then How to implement workflow in cFolder?
    Regards,
    Abhijeet

    Hi Abhijeet,
    You do not have workflows in cFolders.
    Suggest to use status networks in cFolders instead.
    Best regards,
    Ramki

  • Approval process for order confirmatiom

    Hi Expert
    I want to implement approval process in collective maintenance order confirmation process. (T code IW48)
    for example technician will enter actual hours and then this work hrs will be validated/ approved by maintenance planner
    and they actual costing will take place.
    Can anybody suggest how can I do this?
    Regards
    Prasad

    Prasad,
      I don't think you could do this using the Confirmation transactions IW48.However you could accomplish the same if you could use the CATS process to post time sheet .Approval process is available for the same. Once approval is done, the data is posted and then transferred to the PM application.
    Regards
    Narasimhan

  • Approval with completion in SRM is not working

    Hi ,
           I am not sure this is how standard built for Approval with Completion for Item Level Workflow.. Here is the scenario.. I am implementing custom BRF for Product approval ( Material Group ). My requirement is to activate 'INQUIRE' option in material group approval path..
    I have configured as follows
    Process level type 'Approval With Completion' Task id '40007952' Decision Type 'Item-Based decision for Entire document' for material group approval path.. The problem that i am facing is..say for example
    I have 4 items in a SC . First 2 items product category is 'PRO_CAT1' , remaining 2 items product category is 'PRO_CAT2'. Approver for 'PRO_CAT1' is Approver1 and PRO_CAT2 approver is Approver2.  Here is the problem when the workitem route for approval..
    all the 4 items Approve / Inquire / Reject radio Buttons are editable for Approver1 or Approver2 . Which is wrong.. Once any of the approver take the decision the work item in other approver inbox will be automatically deleted which is also wrong.
    My requirement is Approve / Inquire / Reject radio Buttons should be editable for respective approvers for their respective items.. for the above example Approver1 should be able to Approve or Inquire or Reject for first 2 items. Approver2 should be able to Approve or Inquire or Reject for remaining 2 items. But the system is behaving such a way that Approver1 and Approver2 are able to Approve or Inquire or Reject for all the 4 items.. my question is this how the Approval With Completion works for Item Level workflow?... Is Yes! then how can I implemented inquire option for item level approval?
    Thanks,
    John.

    Hi Masa,
       Thank you for this input, I am not sure whether you understand my requirement. Here is my requirement, I have to implement item based approval with inquire option. Is this possible? let us take an example.. Product category approval..If a SC has different Category then the respective category approval can only take the approve/inquire/reject for their respective item.
    I tried to use '4 "Item Based Decision for Partial Document" for Approval with completion but system through an error message said I can't use '4 "Item Based Decision for Partial Document" for Approval with completion.
    I also read the document from help.sap.com said we can only use decision type 1 and 2 for approval with completion. 
    is there a custom soluction for this requirement?
    John

  • Approval Process in SSHR using Approval Management

    Could any one suggest for the below mentioned issue ?
    I have set up the approval process using approval management. But when I tried to test the approval process in both the ways ('Create a test transaction' and 'View a real transaction's approval process), I am receiving different error messages.
    1. if I test by using 'View a real transaction's approval process'
    receiving the error message saying "ORA-20001: The attribute TRANSACTION_REQUESTOR_PERSON_ID probably has an invalid query string. The attribute caused the following exception:
    -972
    ORA-00972: identifier is too long"
    2. if I test by using 'create a test creation' receiving error message as "ORA-20001: Casey Browning (Browning, Doctor Casey) lacks a supervisor, so OAM cannot complete the chain of authority for the transaction"
    What am i missing in the setups ?
    which way is the recommended way to test the process ?
    Your response is more appreciated.
    Regards
    Jhansi

    For you to test Approvals, you have to setup a number of things;
    1. Supervisor Hierarchy (If using that as hierarchy)
    2. Job Levels (If using Job-level approvals)
    3. New rules for SSHR functions.
    The getApprStartingPointPersonId function returns the starting point person ID for the transaction in the HR_API_TRANSACTIONS table. It uses that to traverse the supervisor hierarchy based on the approval.
    Hope this helps.

  • Handling similar developments for different rollouts

    Hi Fops,
          We are in process of going for different rollouts. Were in we have identified certain developments which would be common to other Regions but with some modifications .
    As there is just difference in days between different rollouts , we have to start working on those identified developments -which are in common .
    Can anyone please tell me how can i differentiate the code from one region to other . Say i am using a same enhancement for all the rollouts , is there any standard way to restrict codes to that particular region/rollout .
    Or can we do it using a Function Module , if so please help.
    Valid replies which meets my requirment will be awarded!!
    Thanks,
    Aru

    I am not sure if there is a standard way of doing this, but one possible option (although not a efficient one) is to maintain a Ztable with the release number and release dates. And you can differentiale between the releases in the code by doing a select on this Ztable with the current date. If the current date(sy-datum) is greater that the release date then only execute the code. Again this is not a ideal solution, but you can use it if you dont have any other choice.

  • BRM Approval Process and MSMP Stage Configuration Problems!

    G'Day All,
    I've raised a question in the following blog but it got to a stage where it is not related to the original post anymore. So I would like to draw upon your collective knowledge and appreciate it if you all can jump in and help me out here.
    http://scn.sap.com/thread/3555700
    So this is where I'm at this point:
    Why use two kinds of Approvals in BRM Role Generation?
    Role Content Approval - Through BRF+ Condition
    MSMP Approval - Role Owner etc
    It seems redundant to have two approvals for pretty much the same thing. I believe in both cases (I am guessing) the Approver would be the same person, approving precisely the same thing. So why not have just one?
    Is there a way I can tie up the BRF+ Approver Rule I created, with an 'Agent Rule' in MSMP so I can use the conditions defined to dictate who the request should go to.
    For Example:
    Condition1: Then Request should go to Approver1
    Condition2: Then Request should go to Approver 2
    * These Conditions are defined in BRF+ Approver Rule and linked in IMG and 'Role Owners' in NWBC.
    Alternatively, I tried creating an Initiator Rule from scratch for SAP_GRAC_ROLE_APPR Process ID, using BRF+ with the exact same conditions and everything seems to be OK except the Configuration ID part in Stages. Screen shots of my MSMP WF is as follows:
    Step 1: Process ID
    Step 2: Maintain Rules
    Step 3: Mantain Agents
    Step 5: Maintain Paths
    Step 6: Route Mapping
    I have encountered errors while generating the WF, which are as follows:
    I tried defining my own configuration ID for Stage 1:
    So I tried changing the name of the config ID thinking maybe there is a particular naming convention I have to follow:
    Next I tried using the default configuration ID and link my Agent ID to it:
    So I would appreciate it if any of you could tell me what on earth is happening as I never had this problem with my other Initiator Rules. Is there a particular 'Naming Convention' for stage config IDs or can I give anything as long as they start with a Z/Y/X?
    Regards,
    Leo..

    Hiya Colleen,
    For each path did you go into the Stage Settings of the Step?
    No I haven't as at this point my focus is on testing the WF, so I haven't really mucked around with any settings. So let me know if there is something I need to do in Stage Settings please.
    By the way, the default approval is useful if you are actually using the SAP delivered Agent Rule for roel Owner.
    Thank You.I gathered that from my problem.
    Are you splitting the intiator rule as you want to send the request to different approvers or because you want to do different approval steps? If the first scenario (different approvers) you could just use the BRF+ rule to set the approvers. But if you want the different levels of approval then the MSMP would be used.
    I only created this Initiator Rule because I wasn't sure how to Integrate my Approver Rule created in BRF+ with MSMP WF. My intention is to send the approval to its intended Approver based on the defined Condition. So I believe BRF+ will take care of this as long as long as the 'SAP delivered Agent Rule for Role Owner' is used (as pointed out by you earlier).
    Another thing - for the initiator rule you have covered Single Role Sensitive and Non Sensitive but do you have any other Roles? If so, you have not factored them in.
    Again at this point I am just testing and trying to learn how to integrate BRF+ into Role Methodology Process, so I just picked Single Roles.
    Regards,
    Leo..

Maybe you are looking for