Evaluation Path for View of Organizational Structure
Hi all,
I am trying to define new VIEWID using EVPATH which would do the following filtering (by using f.m. HRWPC_GET_NAV_SUBTREE): giving org.unit number, it would return employees of current org unit and in case that there are some sub org units which dont have the boss also all employees of those org units and in case that the sub org. unit have the boss only the boss.
I saw there is Evaluation path SBES, which shows me the employees of given org unit, or SBESX which gives all including suborgs, but I cannot find Ev. path which will do more complicated conditions.
I can see EVPATH only on T778A table with short description, is there any other way to see them with more details?
Thank you and best regards,
Anna
Hi Anna,
You will find all the existing eval paths in table T778A itself.
I am not sure if you have seen the individual maintenance too.
You can also create your own eval paths acc to your requirement too.
But as far as i know all the things wrt to eval paths can be managed there itself
Hope it helps!
Regards,
SR
Similar Messages
-
Help to evaluation path for ESS
Hi
I have to make a report/list in the portal, where an employee can see i.e. the birthday of all the colleagues directly under the employees manager.
Is there a standard evaluation path for this ? Or can someone point me in the right direction (and remember I am new to evaluation paths)
Thanks
/JakobHi Siddharth
Thank you for your reply.
I have created the evaluation path as you described, but when I test it using PPSS, with the following data :
Objekttype P Person
ObjektID 00032422 ib
Betegnelse ib, ibsen
Evalueringsvej Z_ess_co Test af at finde hvilke objekter der er løn på t
Behandlingsperiode 28.09.2008 til 31.12.9999
Where the person "00032422" is part of an organization with several employees. I was expecting a list of employees directly under the manager of employee "00032422".
Anything I have misunderstood or done wrong?
Thanks
/Jakob -
Evaluation path for B002 - OOAW
Hi
I'm creating a evaluation path for fetching all reports under a line manager. Can someone please throw light on how to configure thie in OOAW. It works fine SAP_MANG, I tried to modify but iam not able to get this.
- AravindHi,
B002 is normally used as an O-O relationship. If you look at evaluation path O-S-P in OOAW. You will see how it is used here.
O-S-P might actually meet your requirement.
let me know.
thanks.
JB -
MSS Team View evaluation path for non chief positions (s-s)
Hello,
We have a problem with display of employees under non chief manager - reporting managers (connection A002). In our organization we have line managers and under them team managers who are leading team of employees. Those managers want to see their employees under MSS Team View iView.
I have checked forum posts and try to create correct evaluation path but i didn't get results yet. I have created 2 evaluation paths:
Z_MANG (copy of SAP_MANG):
10 * B 008 S
20 S B 002 S
30 US A 208 P
Z_S-S (copy of MSSDIREC):
10 S A 002 S
20 S A 008 P
30 S A 008 US
I also included them into rules so:
Root rule (rule 1) - Z_MANG
Target rule (rule 3) - Z_S-S
I have also done customizing under Object and Data provider and if I choose standard evaluation paths (e.g. SAP_MANG and MSSDIREC), I get employees shown - if I give manager a hat (A012 connection).
Could you please help me with advice, where am I wrong? I think that first evaluation path (Z_MANG) is ok and it finds non chief manager, maybe is a problem with second one that don't show employees?
Thank you for answers in advance.
Best regards,
DavidMy first suggestion was either use Bottoms-up approach or top-down dont use both..like either use either of below
S A 002 Reports (line) or
S B 002 Is line supervisor
but figured u will still have depth issues..so therefore
you cld experiment like below..i understood your requirement, and i am suggesting this totally off-hand thats on top of my head..as i said experiement doing this way..
say you have four levels why dont you use different evalutaion path to link them between each level..
say 1st to 2nd (reports to A002)
2nd to 3rd (subordinate to A005)
3rd to 4th/4th to 3rd (Is line supervisor B 002 )etc
this way you will not have the depth issue as each one is diffeent Ev path..
...oops i can see people laughing at this solution..but well..i tried! -
Evaluation Path for Position to Position Reporting Structure
Hello Everyone,
We currently have a position to position reporting structure in place. WIth this being said, not every supervisor in our organization is the chief of a team. I am trying to create an evaluation path that will look at a position, then go up to get the positions report to position (but not go up any further), then go down to get the positions that report to the supervisor. This will allow us to start with a position, then return all the positions that the report to position has. In essence this will allow us to start with a position and get the team (though we don't have an org unit for the team). I am trying to do this for the Team Calendar in ESS.
Below is what I have. The problem is with the depth, if I enter a 2, then it is not getting the lateral positions, but if I enter a 3, then it goes up to another level and gets an additional supervisor (which I do not want).
S A 002 Reports (line) to 2 S
S B 002 Is line supervisor of 1 S
S A 008 Holder 3 P
Has anyone developed and Evaluation Path that does this (gets a positions team without having an org unit) and can offer assistance?
Best Regards,
ScottMy first suggestion was either use Bottoms-up approach or top-down dont use both..like either use either of below
S A 002 Reports (line) or
S B 002 Is line supervisor
but figured u will still have depth issues..so therefore
you cld experiment like below..i understood your requirement, and i am suggesting this totally off-hand thats on top of my head..as i said experiement doing this way..
say you have four levels why dont you use different evalutaion path to link them between each level..
say 1st to 2nd (reports to A002)
2nd to 3rd (subordinate to A005)
3rd to 4th/4th to 3rd (Is line supervisor B 002 )etc
this way you will not have the depth issue as each one is diffeent Ev path..
...oops i can see people laughing at this solution..but well..i tried! -
Hi experts,
I would like to change the evluation path (wegid in the R3 system) for the Nakisa.
Example: Currently Nakisa uses some kind of evluation path, but I would like to use another one e.e. "ZM_OSP".
My question is how can I do this?
I realized that on the admin screen of Nakisa: Hierarchies -> DataConnection -> Organization Structure-> Data Connection: there is a BADI called "BAPI_3_DataSets_O2O" But I can'T find this BADI in the system
I also noticed that probably this budi uses the HCM_GET_ORGSTRUCTURE_AS_XML fucntion module toget the org. data, but there is no object in the " where used list" of this FM...
Please help
Thanks
N.G.The best way to find the used BAPi is the RFC trace (ST01 trasnaction)
-
Evaluation Paths for Audit Requirements
Hi,
For requirements, which belong to the "Subrequirements" requirements category, is "A500" typically the value that one would specify for this?
Thank you,
EricYesterday, I defined the evaluation path as you suggested. I am still seeing problems, so I assume that I must have something misconfigured or unconfigured somewhere else. This implies that I'm probably not done bothering the forum yet....
As far as getting the "SC" requirement selection into 4.72, it is not much of an issue for me, since we are supposed to be upgrading fairly soon, and for testing purposes, I should be able to use an eval path. I might still post an OSS message, as you suggest.
One thing that would be nice would be a complete "changelog" to view somewhere. I can see the release notes for my version in the implementation guide, but it would be nice to see the release notes for all versions. This would allow someone to make a quick determination about what became available and when. If such a changelog already exists, can you tell me where to access it?
Thanks again for your help, Joachim.
Best,
Eric -
Evaluation Path for Appraisal docs
Hi Friends-
These FMs using such Evaluation Paths creating Appraisal docs for Given ' Org Unit ' 'O'
1) HRHAP_DOCUMENT_PREP_ORG using 'BOSSORG' ,
2) HRHAP_PREP_READ_ORG_STRUCTURE using 'HAP_ORG',
3) STRUCTURE_BUILD_MULTIPLE_ROOTS using the same 'HAP_ORG'
What Evaluation Path i shd pass in these FMs to create Appraisal docs for Given Employees ' Perner' ?
These all FM used in one standard Report RHXHAP_APP_DOC_PREPARE which i need to copy and enhance for pernr also ...
Or is there Standard FMs are there which creates Appraisal docs based on Employees 'P' ?
Pls share your inputs on this.
Regards
Meetaok
-
Evaluation Path for Direct Reports only
Hi
We have written an evaluation path to return direct reports for a given manager (to use in an Adobe Interactive form). We get the correct employees returned, but also the manger himself. Ideally we want a list of names that doesn't include him.
Here's our path:
No Obj A/B Rel Rel name Priority Rel Obj Type Skip
10 US B 008 Holder * S
20 P B 008 Holder * S
30 S A 012 Manages * O
40 O B 003 Incorporates * S
50 S A 008 Holder * P
What change should we make to not include the manager in the returned set?
Thanks
TrishHello,
Sorry but you can't.
SAP considers that Manager is not assigned to his own org unit (A012 not equal to A008).
I had the same issue and i had to create 2 evaluations path :
- one to get the list of employee (manager include)
- one to get the manager only
and exclude the second one in the report.
Edited by: Cédric LEFRANCOIS on Dec 21, 2009 11:47 AM -
Evalution path for PFAL to handle concurrent employee asignment.
Hello,
While using PFAL to push any object of type 'P'(employee), the standard process is creating IDoc segments only for the given employee, But how is it possible to create IDoc segments for its other assignments also?
I need to create IDoc segments of all the assignments for the employee given in PFAL selection screen.
Is there any evalution path (relating to 'CP') could help?
Thanks.
Edited by: Parthasarathi Mohanty on Jun 1, 2011 1:01 PMHi,
Thanks,
A209 evaluation path adds the IDoc segment of the Central Person (CP) related to the 'P'.
I need the IDoc segments of all the assignments of the P.
For e.g: The 'P' entered in the selection screen of PFAL has 3 assignments with a single CP.
I need the IDoc segments to be created for all the 3 assignments. (Segments related to CP not required) -
Evaluation path for team calender in MSS
Hi Experts,
I need to configure an evaluation path as follows.
1. A manager M1 belongs to org unit O1. He manages Org unit O2.
2. Org unit O2 reports to O1. similarly O3 also reports to O1.
3. Now I need to develop a evaluation path in which, M1 should have visibility to all employees from both O2 and O3 in his MSS..
I have tried out many combinations with A002 and B002 relationships. but it not working.
So could you help me to build this evaluation path.
Thanks
Sameerthere are standard evaluation paths available which should fulfil thsi requirement
Check SAP_MANG
SBESX
MSSDIREC
You can use report report RHSTRU00, to check your own path -
Hi all,
Is there a way to assign MSS role dynamically to an employee if he has employees reporting to him?
We have got to know that this can be achieved by configuring some evaluation path.
Any pointers would be appreciated!
TIA!Diana,
Where actually do you assign the roles ,is it in the portal or you have a CUA system where all the role maintenance is done over there.if second one is true you can write a custom program and assign the role by checking the direct reportees
Thanks
Bala Duvvuri -
Evaluation path in Organizational Management
Hi everyone ,
Can anyone explain me what is the Evaluation path in Organizational Management?
Thanks in advance.Hi.
Evaluation paths represents a chain of relationships between object types.
By specifying the several objects and relationships the evaluation path will analyse your organization structure and retrieve the several objects included on it.
You can maintain evaluation paths on img -> Personnel Management ->Organisation Management-> Basic Settings-> Maintain Evaluation Paths
Using SAP documentation to be more precise:
An evaluation path is an instruction to the system which determines which object types and relationship(s) are to be included in an evaluation of your organizational plan.
One or more relationships are then used as "Navigation paths" for evaluating structural information in your organizational plan (relating to the organizational or reporting structures) or matrix organization. The sequence of the relationships included in the evaluation path is decisive in how the results of the evaluation are displayed.
Example
Evaluation path "Staff assignments along organizational structure" (SBESX):
No. Object type A/B Relationship Priority Type rel. object Skip
010 O B 003 * S
020 S A 008 * P
030 O B 002 * O
For more information on priorities, see also: Priority
First of all in this evaluation path, the positions assigned (S) to an organizational unit (O) are determined, then, the holder (P) assigned to each position is determined. As well as this, the next organizational unit down in the organizational structure is determined, the above procedure then takes place for this organizational unit. This procedure is repeated for all further subordinate organizational units.
In the "Skip" field, you specify that a particular relationship is to be included in the evaluation path, but that the last object type in this relationship is not to be displayed.
So, if the skip field were selected in the first line of the above example, this would mean that the organizational units and persons would be displayed, but not the positions that the persons occupy.
Activities
1. Check the evaluation paths in the SAP standard system.
2. Create your own evaluation paths. These must be alphanumeric and have a- maximum of eight digits. They must begin with the letter "Z".
Further notes
Each relationship is defined by its short name ("A002", for example) and the evaluation text as an evaluation path and can not, therefore, be changed. You can change the evaluation text but not the short name of other evaluation paths.
Create new evaluation paths, if you have defined new objects and want to carry out evaluations for them in conjunction with object types that already exist. You also need new evaluation paths if you are modifying existing evaluation paths, by selecting a "Skip" field, for example. Copy the evaluation path into the customer name space (beginning with "Y" or "Z") and enter an evaluation path.
Regards,
Pedro -
Re: Depth of Evaluation for Standard Evaluation Paths (Bottom Up Approach)
Hi All,
We are facing a unique issue when using OOSP and defining evaluation path. for e.g. we used the standard SBESX (Staff assignments along Organizational structure). We also defined the following fields to test the Org structure results for a user's structural authorization on what he/she can see (e.g. Org unit(O), Positions(S), Users(P))
1. Object Type = O
2. Evalutaion Path = SBESX
3. Status vector = 12345
4. Depth (D) = 5 (which defaults to 1 automatically if we set the sign field to -(negative) for Bottom-up approach (displaying org structure bottom to up)
5. Function Module = RH_GET_ORG_ASSIGNMENT
6. Key Date = D
The issue we have is for the above settings on OOSP Depth field defaults to 1 everytime we use the Bottom up approach (i.e setting the Sign field to - (negative)). Has anyone encountered the above problem with the depth field? Let us know if you had any fix or you had to escalate this to SAP?
Best regards,
-MuraliS0003562672 wrote:>
> hi murali,
>
> I cannot give you an answer on why exactly the depth filed is defaulting to 1 when using the negative in the sign fields (T77PR-SSIGN). but can you perhaps explain what you're trying to accomplish with your structural profile. in that case, maybe I/we can figure out a way to circumvent the use of the sign field...
>
> Edited by: Dimitri van Heumen on Mar 19, 2008 2:24 PM
> (typing errors)
Thanks for your reply Dimitri.
Here is what we are trying to acheive with the Org structure below:
O - 00001004
S - 00000253
O - 00001005 O - 00001006
S 00000251 hradmin1 S 00000256 essuser2 (120)
S - 00000252
O - 00001007 O - 00001008 O - 00001009 O - 00001010
S - 00000257 S - 00000259 S - 00000260(121) S - 00000254 (122)
S 00000258 essuser1 S 0000255 hradmin2(114)
Position # 00000255 (far right down below in the above Org structure) is the HR Specialist for (Org #00001006 and Org #00001009). Employee # 114 (far right bottom) has been hired into this position 255. They should be able to see Employees 120, 121, 122 and themselves(114).
We have created a structural profile for the user hradmin2(114) and attached him to a role which has ess/mss functionality. We are trying to use the evaluation path SBESX to test what org units, postions and users this user hradmin2(114) can see which should meet the requirement stated above that he should see 120,121,122 and 114 themselves.
So from the Org structure above it is a bottom up scenerio where hradmin2 must see org units 00001010, 00001009 and 00001006 and whenever we set the sign field to -ve (bottom up approach of displaying org structure) and depth of lets say 4 it automatically defaluts to 1 and when we check hradmin2 authorization profile in oosb we only see org unit 00001010 being displayed and not the org units above it for this bottom up approach.
Are you aware of any methods to acheive this for the org structure above?
Thanks
-Murali
Edited by: Murali Sripadam on Mar 19, 2008 1:47 PM -
How to modify organizational structure for workflow?
Hi,
What is the best practice for modifying the organizational structure for workflow? I know I can do all the changes in development and move it to production via transport system but is that always required.
It seems tedious to transport the org plan from dev to prod every time there is a position change etc.
And it does not allow you to change it in production since the client is locked.
I don't even have all the users I have in production in my dev box so I can't assign the correct ones to positions. Would it mean I have to have the users in the dev box mirror the ones in production?
Thank you,
SergiyThis answer depends on the HR managment that you have there, if the HR area is a good coordinated area the best answer is to configure the system for automatic transports and pass the HR structures in this way, you can lock some dangerous infotypes in the T77TR tables and be sure that you will not have any trouble with that data. the best thing using this option is to have a specific DEV client to transport the HR structures.
If you will not have any control between the Dev Environment changes and some people will modify in Prod and other people will make transports in a Dev environment, the best option is to open the client and modify the Org structures every time you need it.
Refers to the SAP Press book Practical Workflow, section 5.4.2.
Regards.
Maybe you are looking for
-
FCPX how many times can it install on the same computer?
From time to time I like to wipe the drives and start afresh or, whenever there is a new OS, I will perform a clean install. This entails wiping the drive and reloading all software. Most of the apps have 'de-authorize' function, this allows me to us
-
Hi,I´m trying to register on my t-mobile and it requires a 10 digit number, I am unsure what this is, any help?
-
Shared Variable Engine clock is consistently inconsistent
From the annals of the weird: I noticed a while back that the DSM displays a different time than my system clock when I manually change a NSV value. I didn't think much of this, but then I noticed that it is not just wrong but inconsistently wrong. H
-
Suggestion: How to Increase the sales of Ipad?.
ANSWER: Make your Ipad can use as a telephone. It dependes on customer choice whether they buy iphone or ipad. Customer satisfaction please...WHOSE GUY WAN'T CARRYING 2 IPHONE PRODUCTS AT THE SAME TIME? Kindly Enable 3G/4g phone and Wireless in Ipad
-
Re: I : Workflow applications -Reply
Daniela, We at Claremont Technology Group are in the implementation stage of a Forte/Workflow system for Public Employee Retirement systems. We are using Action Technologies' "Action Workflow" to handle the workflow portion of the application. Action