CUP Workflow without Stages

Dear Experts
I have Created a Wokflow with out stages for locking userId
Selected condition at initiator as request type = lock account
There is stage with only start and stop
But when I tried to create request for locking userId, it saying no stages exist?
Let me know your valuable suggestions.

I didn't know you could create a path without stages
OK - add a stage, make the approver "No Stage" and it should work.
Please be aware that anyone who can access the system can then lock any user! - No authorizations needed.
Frank.

Similar Messages

How to send the 3rd email in the MSMSP CUP workflow?

Hello GRC community,
at first thank you all for your great support during the last months. Four month ago I started the implementation of AC in our department without any GRC experience. But now, four months later we are just about to implement the AC 10.0. Thank you all.
Now we are working on the following issue, where we need your help. Let me explain what the issue is:
After the finishing the last step in CUP workflow (WS76300056) the workflow sends out 2 emails: (method CL_GRFN_MSMP_WF_TEMPLATE_BASE --> UPDATE_PATH_FINISHED sends out these 2 emails)
1.to the USER
2.to the REQUESTER
But due to our presystem which is a part of the Access request workflow we want to send out a 3rd email to a 3rd recipient. Getting the 3rd recipient is not the issue. The issue is: where do we have to implement the sending of the notification? Our own Investigation comes up to an enhancement point which seems to be the right place to add ABAP code which sends out the 3rd email.
Has anybody similar issue or the experience with the following enhancement and could help us? Or maybe there is an alternative solution? Any hints are welcome.
Package: GRFN_MSMP_WORKFLOW
Enhancement: GRFN_MSMP_END_OF_PATH_NOTIF
Thanks, and best regards
Sabrina

The send mail function will send mail to the users and or alias in the workflow step where you invoke it. The IDOC script guide will help you with implementing these kinds of things.
http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E10316_01/cs/cs_doc_10/sdk/idoc_script_reference/wwhelp/wwhimpl/js/html/wwhelp.htm
IDOC script by usage / Workflow
wfNotify is the one you want to look at specifically.
Workflow
The following Idoc Script variables and functions are related to workflows.
Configuration Variables
isRepromptLogin
IsSavedWfCompanionFile
PrimaryWorkQueueTimeout
WorkflowDir
WorkflowIntervalHours
Global Functions
getValueForSpecifiedUser
Workflow Functions
wfAddActionHistoryEvent
wfAddUser
wfComputeStepUserList
wfCurrentGet
wfCurrentSet
wfCurrentStep
wfDisplayCondition
wfExit
wfGet
wfGetStepTypeLabel
wfIsFinishedDocConversion
wfIsNotifyingUsers
wfIsReleasable
wfLoadDesign
wfNotify
wfReleaseDocument
wfSet
wfSetIsNotifyingUsers
wfUpdateMetaData
Other Variables
AllowReview
dWfName
dWfStepName
entryCount
IsEditRev
IsWorkflow
lastEntryTs
SingleGroup
wfAction
wfAdditionalExitCondition
wfJumpEntryNotifyOff
wfJumpMessage
wfJumpName
wfJumpReturnStep
wfJumpTargetStep
wfMailSubject
wfMessage
wfParentList
WfStart

CUP Workflow issue

Hi guys,
First - this isn't my issue but an issue that my colleague is having.
Their workflows have been setup and they've been working for sometime now. I wasn't involved in their setup. However last week, their BASIS team did some change (details aren't available to me as yet) and now, their CUP workflows are having a specific issue.
The path that I've examined is as follows:
Start > Manager > Role Owner > Security > Finish
The only custom approver is under Security. The rest are as delivered in CUP.
What used to happen would be that the manager would get an email with a link that, upon clicking, would go directly into the request. Now, that link takes them to a login box. My colleague said that the tool hasn't been reconfigured by him and that the only major change has been some BASIS changes.
I'm not sure where to tell him to start looking, since everywhere I've looked seems to be ok.
Thanks,
Santosh

Hi Alpesh,
That's what I had also said, that perhaps the SSO config was broken. However, my colleague insists that SSO wasn't enabled. I have my doubts about this but I have no way to validate that it was working prior to this issue.
I know that when I look at the stages, the email templates for Approved, Rejected, etc., don't have any URL in the template, only the message. As far as I know, this is how it should be. Do you agree?
Thanks,
Santosh

CUP Workflow - Approval on role level

Hi Community,
I have a question regarding the design/capabilities of CUP.
Scenario:
Stage 1 - based on Functional Area --> approval on request level
Stage 2 - based on organisational area of role --> approval on role level
===========================================
In stage 2, the person A receives the request with all the roles (let's say 10). Out of these 10 roles, there are 3 within his area. I understand that 7 are greyed out and therefore only approval for "his" 3 roles is required.
Here come the questions:
- If I set the stage to "mitigation enforced", a risk analysis needs to be performed. That Risk Analysis will deliver risks that derive from all 10 roles or only the 3?
- Since approval needs to be given for the other 7 roles as well by person B, the request is forwarded to person B once the person A approves. What is the order that CUP applies here? Who gets the request first? I know that the request is not split and parallel processing does not take place since I do not use different initiators... so it must be some kind of order that is applied.
Any help on this is greatly appreciated.
Mo

Mo,
The risk analysis is always performed on full CUP request. It does not care @ who is the approver at that point.
Also, role owner level approval always happens parallely. You should try this and you will see it. There is no order. Both person A and person B can approve the request at same time.
Regards,
Alpesh

Need help with a CUP workflow scenario

Dear Experts,
I'm sure it is not just me encountered this required scenario (or something similar). I would like some pointers how to transcript it to a CUP workflow:
Application admin logs a provisioning request.
Security creates a user account and provisioning the roles on QA.
Application admin ensures that the user undergoes training on QA.
Upon passing the training, security replicates the user account and role assignment on PRD.
The esoteric solution would be one request, two paths, two provisions. Is it somehow possible?
Client doesn't use CUA.
The security requirements are higher on PRD, where SoD handling will be required.
Kind Regards,
Vit Vesely
Edited by: Vit Vesely on Apr 29, 2010 3:29 PM

Hii Vit,
If you want to have two paths for a single request than only possible solution will be to create role based initiator's.
Role Based Initiatator's can be created by following Configuration -> Workflow-> Initiator-> create.
Here Select the attibute as roles.
For example create two Initiator
Intiator1 -> having Role1 attribute -> Path1
Intiator2 -> having Role2 attribute -> Path2
Now in the request if u select Role 1 & Role 2, than request will follow the parallel path ( path1 & path 2)
Else it is not possible to have parrallel workflow path for any other attribute.
In Case you can have provisioning at end of the paths as well as end of the request.
Kind Regards,
Srinivasan

Provisioning roles in UME with CUP workflow

Hello,
to give our users permission to approve requests in CUP we assign them to LDAP groups. These LDAP groups have different UME roles.
Is there any possibility to request permnissions for UME roles via a CUP-workflow in general?
We are using GRC 5.3 SP 8.1
Thanks
Manuel Kunkel

There are some pre-requisites - you need portal content on your AS Java, the "plain" AS Java install won't do.
Here's a detailed guide on how to set this up:
http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/bpx/grc?rid=/library/uuid/502a14db-6261-2c10-22b5-95117ab0e5ed
Frank.

Starting Workflow without a Task ID

Hi All,
Is there a way to start a workflow without having a Task ID? Is there an alternate way? Is there a BAPI/FM or an SAP Transaction to accomplish this?
Any help will be greatly appreciated.

Hi developer,
I am not sure whether I have understood your requirement, but if your workflow is event driven, that is has a Start Event, then you can trigger/start the workflow by manually triggering the event by calling the function module SWE_EVENT_CREATE.
You can also start workflows from transaction SWUI,
Regards,
Aditya

Workflow Without Approval

Hello all,
SAP_ABA 700 0011 SAPKA70011 Cross-Application Component
SAP_BASIS 700 0011 SAPKB70011 SAP Basis Component
PI_BASIS 2005_1_700 0011 SAPKIPYJ7B PI_BASIS 2005_1_700
ST-PI 2005_1_700 0003 SAPKITLQI3 SAP Solution Tools Plug-In
SAP_BW 700 0010 SAPKW70010 SAP NetWeaver BI 7.0
SAP_AP 700 0007 SAPKNA7007 SAP Application Platform
SRM_PLUS 550 0007 SAPKIBK007 SRM_PLUS for mySAP SRM
SRM_SERVER 550 0007 SAPKIBKT07 SRM_SERVER
I have created bid without Approval. But event WF is created with status: "READY_FOR_WORKFLOW".
SWEL: Dont find receiver.
What should i do to create bid without Approval ?
Please help me.

Hello,
Check if SWB_COND has been configured correctly to trigger the BID workflow without approval.
Test this workflow using SWUD and also, test the event triggering using SWU0.
If this is correct, workflow should be triggered.
Kind regards,
Ricardo

Initiating workflows - without check in

Hi,
Is there any way to initiate or start a workflow without check in a file or document.
I know, there is a criteria based workflows and basic workflows which starts only upon checking in a new document or creating a revision of the existing document.
But, our requirement is for having a Problem Reporting... where in, if there is any problem in an existing document (already checked in) then the user should be able to start a workflow with the existing document and in further processing of the workflow, the other users may change the document.
So, how to start a workflow without creating a new version or checking in the document.
Please help

Hi ,
You can check at creating a WF by change of metadata which can be done by the reviewing user . This will entail you to create a custom component that would create / initiate a workflow based on the metadata (custom one) which will act as trigger . This metadata can be a boolean one as well which would trigger a wf or be added to a existing workflow (if already started) when it is set to Yes .
Hope this helps .
Thanks
Srinath

AE/CUP 5.2: Workflow with stage performing RA automatically

Hi All,
I would like to have a workflow as followed after a request has been created
- Stage 1: Change Role Assignments if required
- Fork: issued risks?
- Stage 2: YES. Mitigate risks
- Stage 3: NO: Approve ticket and provision
The issue I have is that I need to perform a risk analysis before the fork. Is it possible to incorporate a stage that automatically a risk analysis is performed by the system and depending on the result YES/ NO the request is routed.
If i turn on the risk analysis after request submission the changes of role assignments is not considered. So this is not a solution for me.
Thank you and Best regards
Marco

Marco,
Sorry to let you know but right now there is no way to run RA automatically at stage level. You can only run RA automatically on request submission. Someone will have to manually run the RA. Make RA mandatory at that particular stage so the approver has to run RA.
Regards,
Alpesh

Problem in CUP workflow-Stage configuration

Dear all,
We are facing a problem in workflow path. The workflow for create user has got 2 stage approval. In the first stage the approval type is "All approver" and the CAD for this stage is defined on the basis of business process of the role. So if few roles are added to a user belonging to different business process, the request is forwarded to all the approvers of stage 1. However even if all the approvers of that stage has approved the request, but still the request is showing as "pending for other approvers" and not getting forwarded to the next stage. But if I change the configuration to "Any one approver", the request is forwarded to next stage after approval by any one approver.
Please suggest
Regards,
Nitin

Hi Nitin,
I guess you have made CAD on the basis of business process of role.
Check that one again that all approvers are approving the request.
if in the request has two role Role 1, Role2
Role 1 has Business Process BP1,
Role 2 has Business Process BP2.
BP1 in CAD has APP1, APP2 approvers
BP2 in CAD has APP3, APP4 approvers.
Then for that CAD stage with setting all approver's.
APP1, APP2, APP3, APP4 has to approve the request.
Please make sure all approvers are approving.
Also try to change the setting for Approval Level ( Role/Request ) in the stage.
Hope it helps.
Kind Regards,
Srinivasan

CUP workflow

Hello Everyone
I have couple of question regarding the workflow
My approver doesn't get a link as to approve the request or to reject it, rather he gets a link as View
and when the approver clicks on the link which say '' view'' it take him into the CUP .
I was more expecting like 2 links in an email one called
1.Approve
2.Reject
Why is this ?(approver has full rights)
2. And always the email goes to Junk folder
3. I have user called Eric Servranckx and he exists in LDAP as Servran and in SAP as ESERVRAN
so when I raised a request it went through workflow and at the final stage when approver try to approve the request it errored out says ''user type RE doesnt exist'' ?( auto provisoning actiavted )
and I did the field mapping for LDAP where I matched SAP user ID to sAMAccountName
LDAP is Active directory and we are GRC AC 5.3
4.And also how to delete a request in CUP
can anyone share your experience and sort me out
Regards
Kevin

Kevin,
Please find my response below:
was more expecting like 2 links in an email one called
1.Approve
2.Reject
Why is this ?(approver has full rights)
This is a stage level setting. If you go to that particular stage, it contains configuration parameters called "approve by email" and "reject by email". If you configure them to "yes", the approver would see email link for approve and reject.
2. And always the email goes to Junk folder : This one has to be figured out from your email client and SAP.
3. I have user called Eric Servranckx and he exists in LDAP as Servran and in SAP as ESERVRAN
so when I raised a request it went through workflow and at the final stage when approver try to approve the request it errored out says ''user type RE doesnt exist'' ?( auto provisoning actiavted ) : This one has to be looked in more detail.
and I did the field mapping for LDAP where I matched SAP user ID to sAMAccountName
LDAP is Active directory and we are GRC AC 5.3
4.And also how to delete a request in CUP
There is no way to delete a request. You have to contact SAP to get a SQL deletion script for requests.
Regards,
Alpesh

Change/Edit Request Attributes in CUP at Approval Stage

Hi All,
We have SAP GRC AE/CUP 5.3 SP07 installed in our environment. In our work flow of the request, there is a requirement that some of the request attributes need to be changed by the role owner/ approver at the approval stage of the request. The request contains both SAP standard as well as some custom attributes. I only see an option to edit the validity date or the roles/profiles of the request at the approval stage. Is this option configurable? If not, do we have any work around to achieve the requirement?
Thanks, Anil

Hi Harleen and Alpesh,
We are in GRC 5.3 SP8 and we would like to allow approvers in each stages to change the validity date (e.g. Valide to date) in a role request.   Here is the situation:
I have a workflow path which has two approval stages.   Both stages were configured to allow "Change Request Content".    What I noticed is the approver in the first approval stage can change the validity date and then approve the request.    But when the request is on the 2nd approval stage, the approver can no longer modify the validity date.
Is this the same scenario which Harleen said that "You cannot edit the information of a request once it enters the approval stages"?   If this is the same scenario, do you know whether a fix is considered by or available from SAP?
There may be situations where we don't want the 2nd approver to overwirte what 1st approver has approved.   However, in some situations we may want to keep that flexibility to let the later approver to have the last say.
Thanks for your input.

Workflow without 'save as' and huge storage consumption.

I use Aperture & photoshp daily. Aperture no longer has 'save as' .. Photoshop hasn't, as yet followe suit, I am told. Very concerned about workflow changes incurring more complexity, more steps and hughe storage waste.
Current work flow: I open one of the apps, then an image, initiate a bunch of edits, 'save as' my final desired result. I now have 2 files, the UNTOUCHED original and the edited second image.
Several calls to Apple. They are not sure how the missing 'save as' works into this work flow, do not know how many more steps will be needed and how mush more complex. They did say, for the first time, now you have to check out each program to see how it's 'save as' concept will work... I guess and try to remember them all. WOW!
Also, with the 'versions' concept and processing raw images, instead of 2 files residing in memory at the end of the multiple edits, there will be a version for each edit step meaning there could be like 20, 50, even more huge files ... not wanted, not needed but consuming huge amounts of storage.
It was finally decided there had to be a way to purge all those unnecessary files to win back storage space. More work and how?
Their final assessment, you may not be able to proceed with Lion... with the future Mac's ongoing OS. I guess all photographers are at a loss then. Sad.
Is this hopefully just a bad dream??

The new Autosave/Versions paradigm is ideal for the situation you describe as “Current work flow”. It’s not a bit more complicated, it’s safer, and — if you can get past the fact that it is different from what you are used to — it is more logical. What you are doing is creating a new, modified copy of the original. So, open the original and Duplicate (File > Duplicate). That creates a new copy that you can edit, but it is treated like a new file, so when you close it, you get a Save As dialog. Or you can save it manually at any time just like any new file. No extra steps — just Duplicate at the beginning instead of Save As at the end.
I said it is safer. Consider the following: In your current work flow: by accident or absent mindedness, you mistakenly Save rather than Save As. Now your original is clobbered. Of course, if you are smart, you have a backup. Otherwise it is gone. In the new workflow you might forget to duplicate at the beginning. But it’s not too late! Go ahead and duplicate later. When you duplicate an edited file you get a dialog asking what to do with the original. The choices are to leave it in its edited state or to revert to its original state. Even if you close the file without duplicating it, you can still re-open it and revert using Versions.
As Pondini pointed out, you misunderstand how versions work. Versions are not files. It is more like a super sophisticated Undo. As you edit a file, only the latest version is saved in the file. Enough information to reconstruct intermediate versions is saved in a hidden versions database. So in your scenario, you still have only 2 files plus some information in the database. In general the versions information should be efficiently stored.
This is how Aperture has always worked. As Terence Devlin pointed out, no version of Aperture has ever had a Save or Save As command. I wouldn’t be surprised if Aperture served as an inspiration or testing ground for Autosave/Versions. I am a serious amateur photographer, and I am not the least bit sad. I think this is a great advancement.

Error in CUP Workflow

Hello,
when i am creating the request i am getting the following request Error Creating Request.
There is a Two Stage Workflow for which i have configured the following steps:
1) created a Initiator with Attributes like Functional area with Condition OR.
2) created a CAD with attributes Functional area and assigned the approvers For Eg: Role Owners (SAP ECC User ID)
3) Created a STAGE in which i have selected the CAD which i have created and also created a Stage for IT Security and Approver Determinator for that stage is Security Lead
4) Finally i have created a Workflow path and assigned the INITIATOR & STAGES to that workflow path.
So when i try to create a request by selecting the Functional area (which is the initiator in my case) it is giving the error error creating request
Did i miss any configuration?
Regards,
Kumar Rayudu

Hello,
Please find the below answers:
1) Have you configured number range and activated it?
YES
2) Have you associated stage with path and initiator with path?
YES
Now it is working fine but with the same configuration settings!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How is it possible?
Regards,
Kumar Rayudu

CUP Workflow without Stages

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for