Consolidation unit defined as "Assigned end node" ?

Hi Gurus,
Has anybody used the "assigned end node" consolidation unit for top group bookings ?
Did you face any limitation / side effect ?
Many thanks!
Grégoire

Hi Grégoire,
Never tried it and never heard that anyone used it too. Would be interesting to hear an opinion of someone who has some experience with it.

Similar Messages

ECCS Assign consolidation of investment method to consolidation units

Dear experts,
I get trouble with on error in ECCS. After I create consolidation of investment method. In order to use this method in consolidation of investment, I have to assign this method to consolidation units.
I used tcode CXM1 to assign consolidation of investment method to consolidation units. But when I execute this tcode, there is no consolidation hierarchy. Therefore, I cannot do assignment.
Any body have ever face with the same error?
I am looking forward to hearing your suggestion.
Thanks in advance!

I dealt this issue.
Thanks.

"No Fiscal Year Variant assinged to consolidation unit" error for 3EC_CS_1A

Hi,
I'm getting following extraction error using RSA3 for datasource 3EC_CS_1A in R3 (4.7) system. Could someone shed some ideas on how to fix it.
No fiscal year variant assigned to consolidation unit 0000000000000000XX.
same error is coming for all consolidation units.
I checked ECMCT table and it has records in it.
I went to "Consolidation unit change" using CX1N and found out that above consolidation unit has our customer defined "standard fiscal year variant assigned" for the corresponding ledger listed in ECMCT.
What else might be missing & how to fix it. same error in both DEV & QAS. Appreciate any inputs
Hari Immadi
http://immadi.com
SEM BW Analyst

thanks for your post.
I checked T009 and see that fiscal year variants are maintained. K4 as well as "customer defined standard fiscal year variant". what else might be missing.
Hari Immadi
http://immadi.com
SEM BW Analyst

Reparenting - of equity consolidated units upward in hierarchy

Hi experts,
We're doing reparenting of a cons unit (upward in a hierarchy) : The scenario is explained as under:
There are two hierarchies in a single version. The consolidation units falling under both hierarchies are same. Difference being - H1 is a flat hierarchy with parent A and all other as subsidiaries (100% owned and purchase method consolidated)
H2: Has multiple levels (conso groups) with overall parent A. All other companies are equity consolidated (ofcourse parents in each group is assigned purchase method, ownership is again 100% of all units)
In H2: we're doing a reparenting. From a lower conso group(cons group CGB with parent B) a unit(unit C) is moving to the top conso group(cons group CGA with parent A). The master data changes in both conso groups have been made(period/yr of divestiture and period/yr of acquisition set in the sender group and receiver group respectively; added the cons unit C in CGA group).
The organizational change logic is being used.
After the conso group change task and COI task are run, in the report there is a difference in the equity PY surplus at level A - overall parent) in both hierarchies.
There are two equity pickups - A/c1 and A/c2
The opening balances on these accounts are getting reversed in the divestiture period in old parent.
Whereas the PY - RE(Previous year - Retained earnings) account is not getting reversed (in itself) but the balance is being posted to COI:Clearing item (COI clearing item defined in COI settings->Appropriation of retained earnings -> Net income tab)
1. The client doesnt want PY equity surplus to change. In H1 , it is not changing (not reversing) whereas, in H2 it is reversing in the same accounts - balancing to zero.
2. They'd ideally want the PY surplus to goto the COI clearing.
They'd like the system to do this entry and not fix this by doing a manual PL30 journal.
Can you tell me if there is anything in the configuration of COI that can fix this issue?
Why is the system behaving differently for A/c1 (and A/c2)and PY - RE account?
Another thing, when I look at the COI documents posted in the H2 hierarchy, I see the A/c1 and A/c2 (scopes of data for equity method) as double the amount in the new cons group (equity holdings data) whereas in the H1 (where only a total transfer doc is posted) I see the accounts (as part of equity data) with the actual value.
Thanks, AJ
Edited by: A J on Nov 17, 2009 3:17 PM

Thanks Dan.
Appreciate if you can help on the below points as well.
1. As part of divestiture/transfer postings: The system is reversing some Previous Year(PY) equity accounts into themselves. How can we get the system to eliminate them by posting to COI Clearing account. Basically, we dont want the PY accounts to be touched?
For the Retained earnings - PY account, the system is actually posting to COI clearing account.
These PY accounts are part of some scopes for equitization.
Is there any link between the "balance carry forward" - list of items table and the divestiture postings?
Does the system check this table while posting/reversing the equity(PY) accounts?
2. I want to understand the sequence in which the system posts the documents at the old parent and new parent (group) level.
The same activity number is there for Total Divestiture, total transfer documents posted at new parent level and total divestiture document posted at old parent level.
Does the system follow bottom up approach? Thereby creating total divestiture document at old parent level.
Followed by documents at upper level (new parent level)
Also , at the upper level(new parent level), does it post documents in the way they are shown in the log? (We havent changed the default sequence maintained in UCWB - COI settings). so it will post first consolidation doc, followed by total divestiture, followed by total transfer docs at the new parent level?
Is this the reason for the double value being posted at new parent for equity holding data?
Will studying the statistical items (corresponding to eliminated equity holding items) be relevant here to understand why at upper level there is double the value being posted by system?
Thanks.

Concept of Integrated Consolidation Unit of SEM BCS

HI Experts,
I'm now in the SEM BCS 4.0 and BW 3.5 implementation. Previously I was the ECCS specialist and before the FI and AM specialist.
Now I'm in SEM BCS implementation.
I have one question in connection to the integrated consolidation unit. As the reference, I take the concept of this using the ECCS.
As you might know, the creation of integrated consolidation unit for using realtime update method in ECCS, is pulled from FI company ID.
Meanings if I set the configuration properly, I can pull out the company master data as the consolidation unit master data in consolidation monitor.
Now, in SEM BCS, I want to do the same thing. I mean, off course I can create company ID in R/3 and then create the consolidation unit manually using UCWB. But this scenario can create inconsistency, and I also think this is not the right concept of doing integration between R/3 and SEM BCS.
My question is : what is the concept of this master data integration, and what is the proper way to do it?
Any advise on this question is highly appreciated.
Thank you in advance.
regards,
Halim

Hi Halim,
You need to build properly your data basis in data model.
Assign your company to a consolidation unit role:
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_sem350bw/helpdata/en/dd/f3783bcfef4a2de10000000a114084/frameset.htm
I sent to you the file concerning BCS that you asked for in another thread.
Best regards,
Eugene

How to link ECC Company code with BCS Consolidation unit

I have to create new consolidation unit in BCS, parallelly in SAP R/3 also I have created a company code.
I could read following in the forum :-
The Company Codes from ECC are assigned to the characteristic Company in BCS, thus creating a one to one relationship between ECC & BCS company codes.
BUT HOW TO DO THE SAME.
Also any advise on Profit centre and cost centre etc in BCS in line with ECC. This is first time I am configuring in BCS,

Typically in ECC company codes are assigned to a company. The company is typically used for cons unit in BCS, but it is not uncommon for company code to be used as cons unit.
When company code is used, it is an attribute of the characteristic company and thus in the load mapping, the company is mapped to the attribute company code. This results in company code being mapped to company.
Otherwise, if company code is in the databasis as the cons unit role, then it is simply mapped to company code to company code.
For profit center and cost center, these are typically assigned the role subassignment, but it is not uncommon for profit center to be a cons unit for a matrix consolidation. However, these characteristics must first be included in the totals/databasis infocube.

CRM 5.2, how to define an assignment set in the runtime depository?

We are using CRM 5.2. I have created a new component and view and the view is exposed as an interface view. Now i have to include this in the overview page of BP_HEAD component. I have enhanced BP_HEAD component and enhanced the view required as well( View Name BPHeadOverview). I have added my new component as the used components in BP_HEAD.
But when i open the enhanced view, i don't see any available assignment blocks. Standard overview page of BP_HEAD had some available assignment blocks but the enhanced one doesn't. Also following message is shown "Define an assignment set in the runtime depository". How can i add my new component and interface view to the available assignment blocks of the overview page of BP_HEAD? Thanks for your help.
Regards
Hari

Hi Sudipta,
Thanks for your help. I am making good progress.
I believe i am quite close to completion now. Need your help with following questions though -
1) I have a context node BUILACTIVITY. Now i need to only display partial list from this context node? Is there a way i can do this directly with the context node or i have to create a new node and manipulate? If so any tips there?
2) When i create new view it doesn't have graphical representation option any more? Is it that way only? If so can i just create table view and use it?
3) When i create a form view and try to insert a table using <crmic:tableView> tag, i am getting an error messge saying "//BUILACTIVITY/Table" is not a table? What could be the issue?
Thanks a lot for your help again.
Regards
Hari

Consolidation Unit Clearing account for Income / Expenses elimination

Hi,
When companys are leaving the group, where the parent comapany has some income/expenses elimination transactions with the company leaving, there is still balance on the parent company on consolidation unit clearing account with the company leaving the group as partener company.
This shows incorrectely the retained earning for the parent company for posting leve20 when balances on consolidation unit clearing account is not included. Please advise.
We are not unsing COI but we are using Group change functionalities when company leaves the grop.
Furthere, in all auto elimination document type for Balance Sheet Elimination and Income statement elimination, we have assigned same consolidation unit clearing account. Please advise.
Best Regards,
UR

When viewing the results using the standard reporting mode I suspect the balances are okay. Please clarify in detail how the data is being analyzed so we may better assist.

SEM-BCS how to make Consolidation Unit with Business Area

Hi all,
I am newbie in SEM-BCS and implementing BW-based BCS. Our situation is as follows.
Situation
- we have 7 companies worldwide and 4 different Business areas.
   Every company consists of at least two business areas in R/3.
- we have sales transaction in FI among companies.
requirement
- we need consolidated F/S in whole consolidation group and consolidated F/S in Business area level.
actually, we are planning to make the consolidation unit in company level.
Do we have to break down consolidation unit in business area? or just breakdown category solves our requirement?
If we have sales transaction even between business areas within certain company, do we have to make it in business area?

Following are the answer to your questions
Q:   What to do for using this cube in BCS?
A:    Add the business area to the cube. Generate the data basis and the business area gets added to all ODS/DSO , virtual cube.
Suggestion: To avoid deleting the Profit center cube, since you can reduce the complication.
Q:   Is it the problem about DATA BASIS Role?
A:   No. Assign the role of subassignment or consolidation unit as needed. If you are giving the role of consolidation unit to business area, you need to insert the char Partner business area also in the cube.
Q:   Is there some materials to solve this situation?
A:   Refer the matrix consolidation material in help.sap.com from BCS portion. As per SAP literature any relevant object can be made as second consolidation unit such as business area, functional area etc. Dont fear. Once you start it the issue will be resolved in few days.
Expected complication:
If you are going to make business area as subassignment then it is simple. But if you are making business area as Consolidation unit, go for partner business area in cube.
Ensure with your BI consultant that all BCS messages are addressed in BI infoobject for business area specifically.
Things can get complicated only if we allow for it get complicated. But you are doing great.. Keep posted.. Good luck.!!!..

Consolidation Unit in the wrong position in Accounting Techniques tree

Hi all,
I'm facing a problem with a consolidation unit (A) in the Accounting Techniques tree (T1).
The issue is resolved when I delete the unit A from the consolidation group tree (T2) but, when I add the unit A to the consolidation group tree (T2) again, the unit appears in two places, and that is not correct.
I've tried to delete and move the unit through the Accounting techniques tree (T1), but the problem continues.
Can you help me??
Thanks in advance.
Inge Eichhorns

In some cases it is standard for a cons unit to be included in the Acctg Techniques assignment multiple times. Because the assignments may different at various levels in the hierarchy, especially when not inherited downward.
One way to check this or change this is to check the assignments via the cons group view by clicking on the cons group and selecting View > Cons Group.
Edited by: Dan Sullivan on Nov 19, 2009 10:38 PM

Consolidation Unit: consolidate only until period 09 (divestment).

I have another problem related to consolidation:
I have a consolidation group with several consolidation units assigned to. For one assigned consolidation unit, I want to consolidate only up to period 09. So, I have edited the year and period of divestment (2008/09). I was hopping that, that consolidation unit wasn't proposed in the consolidation monitor for interunit elimination (for period 10).
Does anybody know what else do I have to do for this purpose?
Thanks,
Paula

This sounds like a minor bug. I suggest you search SAP Notes for solution and if none is found notify SAP via customer message.

How can I define a new Search Node type?

Hi experts!
I'm trying to modify PPOME transaction, but I can't create a new Search Node type. Can anybody give me the necessary steps I have to do? Other question, Is it possible to create a new Search Node for a Organizational unit? Or this only could be possible for new objects types?
Thanks a lot,
Regards,
Rebeca

Hi Rebeca,
You need to create a Search node only if you create a new object type (e.g. ZP).
For org unit, you don't need to create one (unless you wanna change search details)
Otherwise, you can use existing search nodes for standard object types.
What you can do is, you can add a search node to an existing scenario in order to make it visible in the object manager part (left-hand side of the screen).
To create a new search node :
Goto SPRO Personnel management - Organizational Management - Hierarchy Framework - Object manager - define your own search node -
> Define search node : Add new entries here.
To add a search node to a scenario (e.g. to make a new search node visible on the left-hand side of PPOME)
Goto SPRO Personnel management - Organizational Management - Hierarchy Framework - Object manager - define your own search node -
> Scenario Definition (Object manager) : Select the scenario (for PPOME it is OME000), double click the "Search nodes" and create new entries to add the search node here. Then double click the "Search tool", copy the lines of a similar search node and change search node field to the new one.
Best regards,
Dilek

BCS how to change the accounting technique of consolidation unit.

Hi, expert,
    We have a C/I method with accounting technique 'equity method', but when we assign the method to consolidation unit, the value of 'accounting technique' of consolidation unit is 3 (mutul stock method ), not 2 (equity method).
   How to crrect this.
I really appreciate your input on this matter
Thanks.

Thanks, Dan and Collet
   In my compandy hierarchy, each consolidation unit with the method is 3, not 2. include inheritance and not inheritance.
   When I double click one of consolidation unit. a maintain window display, I change accounting technique in this window, the syste issue another message UGMD016 ('The value 2 is invalid for characteristic METHOD'
                                                                     Characteristic METHOD has no master record with the value 2.
                                                                     (The non-existing value was stored as an attribute for characteristic and value .)
   This mean that the method is incorrect?
   But the accounting technqiue of the method is '2 equity method';

Consolidation unit's divestiture

Hi all,
We are implementing SEM-BCS 6.0 and we have a question.
In 011.2008 we defined in the Consolidation Group that a consolidation unit had Divestiture Accounting at Beginning of Period.
But in 012.2008 when we execute the upload of data from BW it uploads data to the total of records although the consolidation unit was already divested in the prior period.
Should we delete this consolidation unit from the hierarchy?
Because we read in this forum, that after a divestiture the consolidation unit should only be deleted from the hierarchy in the next year.
Thanks for your help.
Best regards

Hi Dan,
Thanks for your answer.
Youu2019re saying that although the data is loaded is ignored in the reporting.
But if data is loaded isnu2019t it considered in the consolidation methods? As in the method for IU IU Elimination and Reconciliation or Consolidation of Investments?
Thanks for your help.
Best regards.

Merger of two Consolidation Unit

Hi,
I am working on a project where I need to Merge Two Consolidation Unit of the same Consolidation Group.
For Example, Consolidation Group A1 & A2 is under Consolidation Group ABC. Now we need to Merge Cons. Unit A1 into Cons. Unit A2 under the same Cons. Group ABC. How to handle this in SEM - BCS?
I cannot use Consolidation Group Changes as this is not transferring but it is merging of two Cons. Unit.
Your input is highly apprecialbe.
Regards,
Viral Joshi

Hi HI COLLET Thibaud ,
Thanks for the reply and sorry for my late reply. I was gathering information that you asked from the client. Now picture is more clear.
Ex.
Consoildation Unit: A & Consoildation Unit: B. Both are under Consolidation Group AB
Parent Unit : C
Now Consoildation Unit: A is getting transferred to Consoildation Unit: B. Business wants to transfer Balance Sheet as on Date. There is no Goodwill. Everything is getting transferred at Book Value.
Now for Share Capital purchase, there are two options suggested. One is to buy share of Consoildation Unit: A by Cash and second is to buy share of Consoildation Unit: A by issuing Shares of Consoildation Unit: B.
If we go for option 1 of purchasing through Cash, then there will be impact only on Cash Outflow from Consoildation Unit: B and Share Capital Reduction from Consoildation Unit: A. This will happen becasue Consoildation Unit: B will pay Cash to Consoildation Unit: A and Consoildation Unit: A in turn will pay for Share Capital and reduce its Share Capital. But if we go for option 2 of issuing shares of Consoildation Unit: B, then there will be change in the Share Capital of Consoildation Unit: B and reduction in the Share Capital of Consoildation Unit: A. In any case, there will be reduction in Share Capital of Consoildation Unit: A.
So what do you suggest in this scenario? What will be the BCS impact if we go for option1 or option2. Just to remind, we are transferring everything including Share Capital in FI. But I am wondering the steps and impact on BCS...
Your input is highly appreciable and definately will be rewarded with points !!!
Thanks..
Best Regards,
Viral Joshi

Consolidation unit defined as "Assigned end node" ?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for