Evaluations for PS

Dear all
I don't know if this is the right forum to post my topic. So please let me know if I'm wrong.
I have quite a huge problem with available views in the workforce planning, in the planning board of the structure view CN41 and a lot more.
Let me explain
In the transactions (CN41, CMP3....) I have always a direct link between projects but it's impossible to view the project name and the project number.
I make a practical example with the transaction CMP3. In the upper part I have a list with the persons and their assigned activities. How should the responsible person of a work center know for what projects his staff is working for? This is inacceptable.
Somebody knows if there is a possibility to add always the relative project and number in such views?
Thank you for every response I get

Hello
thank you for the reply
the assignment itself in CMP3 doesn't show you the project number or name. The CMP9 doesn't show you either.
Or when I'm using the CN41N and I'm applying there a filter for ex. all activities with a certain control key and afterwards I want to see them in an Gantt chart I'm NOT able to the any project specific information.
In general: Is there a possibility to add these information in these views or would that be a change (request) for the SAP standard?
Thank you
Edited by: Jimsonweet on Nov 21, 2011 3:44 PM

Similar Messages

Perform VENDOR EVALUATION for MORE THAN ONE VENDORS at a time

Hello all,
Please guide for any process where i can perform Vendor Evaluation for MORE THAN ONE vendors AT A TIME.
At my location there are around thousand vendors, which are to be evaluated, and difficult to perform the evaluation process one-by-one.
(ME61/ME62/ME63)
Detailed replies with various possibilities would be highly appreciated.
Thanks & Regards,
Joy Ghosh

The vendor evaluation for some thousand vendors at the same time has already been in SAP long before they developed LSMW. The purpose of LSMW is to load data from a legacy system, of course you can (mis-)use it for a lot other things.
But you should not always use LSMW if you are to lazy to go thru the SAP standard menu to find a transaction like ME6G
There you define a job that runs RM06LBAT report.
You first have to define a selection variant for this report. this can be done in SE38 by entering the report name, select variant, clicking display, then entering a name for the variant and clicking Create.

Problem: Run Time Evaluation for Future Period

Hi SAP Gurus, can someone help me solving this problem:
My client need to run time evaluation for 2-months period ahead of time. But every time I tried, time evaluation always stops at end of the current month, no further dates in the future. I had created attendance data 2002 for all the future dates. IT7, 2002, 2006 and all configurations seem to be OK (T510S,T569R). Test run is also OK with good future results. What could possibly be missing? Thank you in advance.
Bill

Thank you very much, Arun, Banu, Stefan and Om.
Yes, I have entered the "Evaluation up to" date (60 days later);
The schema has a function "Check FUT".
Test future run result was generated correctly.
Still I can't have future results in real run.
So, what else I should check into?
Thanks again.
Bill

Activate invoice evaluation for the company code.

HI,
I m doing vendor evaluation . want to make settings for main criteria "INVOICE".
With sub criterias
Quantity Variance & Price Variance.
In order for evaluation results for the above two subcriteria to be generated automatically,
you must activate invoice evaluation for the company code.
Where do i do the above setting.
regards

Tell the user to run SU53 and send that info to your authorizations person. SU53 will show what was actually the problem if it was related to authorizations. This has to be done instantly after closing the error message (preferably in a new session).
The difference between test and production environments could be that the user has another type of access there.

Exchange Evaluation for interest accrued (difference procedure)

Hi experts.
How can I run exchange evaluation for Accrued Interest, posted with Difference procedure?
I'm using Difference method to post Interest Accrual. This is working but the issue is that this instrument is in a different currency and I need to reevaluate the interest.
There is no issue if I use Reset procedure for interest. But here the requirement is to use Difference procedure.
is it possible to do this in TRM-TM-MM?
Regards.
Lucciano Guazzelli

Hi,
Which SAP version/EhP pack are you using?
In ECC6.0 EhP4, system takes care of exchange difference in subsequent accruals for foreign currency transactions, and post the difference.
In the first month, TPM44 only post the accrual entry. However from 2nd month onwards, system posts accrual entry as well as adjustment entry for all previous accruals.
You can further use FAGL_FC_VAL in FI to evaluate P&L and BS items using different exchange rate type. For example, BS items using spot rate and P&L items using average rate.
Thanks and regards,
Abhinav Sethi

Unable to run time evaluation for the entire year...

hi experts,
I'am unable to run time evaluation for the entire year, even though mentioned the date as Force calculation as of : 01.01.2010
and evaluation upto date : 31.12.2010. when time evaluation is run , the log is only run for Jan 2010.
Maintained IT2011 from 01.01.2010 to 31.12.2010
IT0050 from 01.01.2010 to 31.12.9999
IT0003 : PDC recalculation : 01.01.2010
Kindly advise.
Regards
Pammi

Check if Time Management status is 1 or 9....
If it is 1 then it would not run for the entire year..It would run only till today. If it is 9, then the TE runs for future also...also check if in the schema it is activated for future runs or not...

Classic report - Condition evaluated for every row

APEX 4.2.2
I am seeing something strange in a classic report region. A report started to fail at run-time with a strange error about bad syntax. When I run the page in debug mode, I see the following
print column headings
rows loop: 30 row(s)
...Execute Statement: begin wwv_flow.g_boolean := '' is not null;
end;
......Result = false
...Execute Statement: begin wwv_flow.g_boolean := '' is not null;
end;
......Result = false
...Execute Statement: begin wwv_flow.g_boolean := 'string with a embedded ' single quote' is not null;
end;
......Result = true
Looks like the APEX engine is evaluating a boolean expression after rendering and each and every row in the report. And for some strange reason, it is using a piece of data from my query's resultset and failing because of the bad syntax introduced due to the single-quote in the string.
I have never seen this before. Any idea what is going on?
Thanks

Howdy Paul, sorry should have provided all the details. No, this is a standard generic column template. Ah, you are right, drat I should have looked closer. The template has use a condition to show either a highlighted row or normal one. Sorry for the false alarm, I can take it from here. Enjoy your flight :-)

Help with evaluation for Solaris x86

Hello,
I would like to evaluate Oracle Identity Manager and Access Manager products at the latest version possible -- the host system(s) are Solaris x86 (SunOS .5.10) Unfortunately, I am having a bit of trouble compiling the list of packages/versions to achieve this for this platform. For instance, on the downloads page it appears that OIM is not available for Solaris x86, not even in older versions(?)
Thank you in advance,
Scott

Hi Scott,
I'm pretty sure that x86 Solaris is not yet certified to run the Identity Management suite. I've been involved in an evaluation process and we ran it all on RedHat Enterprise Server Release 4 Update 5, without too many problems.
cheers,
James

Cross Day work issue in Time Evaluation for positive recording.

Dear Experts,
We would like to know whether anyone else has faced the below described issue before or has any suggestions for the same.
Issue Background: We are uploading time events from the clocking recording system into SAP using an interface program. The clocking events are loaded without indicator 'M' and based on whether they belong to current day then assignment is '=' and '<' for previous day assignment.
Issue Description: Some operational staff have planned daily shifts from 00:00 - 08:30. Hence they can clock-in before 00:00 on the previous day and since there is no 'Next Day Indicator' in SAP, we split the time events so that if the clock-in is at 23:00 previous day then the time pairs are formed as
23:00 - 24:00 Current Day with Day assignment '='
00:00 - 08:30 Next Day with Day assignment '='
When we run the time evaluation, the day assignment for Next day pair 00:00 - 08:30 is automatically changed to '<'. This makes the Next day without any events and the time evaluation throws error in the next day.
Now instead of automatic upload, if we manually upload the same time events, the records are as follows:
23:00 - 24:00 Current Day with Day Assignment '+' and Origin Indicator 'M'
00:00 - 08:30 Next Day with Day Assignment '+' and Origin Indicator 'M'
Now if we execute time evaluation, the behaviour is as per expected and the time evaluation doesn't change the day assignment for any records.
Work Around Proposed: Keep atleast 1 sec difference between the time events say the above records can be uploaded as follows:
23:00 - 23:59 Current Day with Day assignment '='
00:00 - 08:30 Next Day with Day assignment '='
But we would like to avoid this if possible.
Summary: In brief we would like to know whether why time evaluation has different processing for Origin indicator 'M' and SPACE.
Many thanks for your inputs in advance, thanks.
Regards,
Roshan.

Hi,
see thread
Time evaluation -early clockin for shifts starting at midnight ?
maybe of interest
bg
Edited by: bg on Sep 16, 2010 9:26 AM

Maintaining key in vendor evaluation for porg

how do i maintain weighting key for p org in vendor evaluation?? when i am trying to run vendor evaln for a vendor and porg...i get this msg saying no weighting ke assigned to this porg...plzz telll me abt the settings

thnx i already found it, but thanx for the prompt reply...could u plzz help me further by confirming if by default the weighting keys assigned is 02.??
regards

Smoothing factors for Vendor Evaluation for Services

Hi Team,
How to apply smoothing factors for Quality and Timeliness of services in External Services. Any help is appreciated.
Thanks
ANita.

Hi ,
I will try to explain with one example
Actually in vendor evaluation , we are going to get only one percentage say for a material A for example Qty reliability - smoothing factor is 0.20
Material A is ordered by so many purchase orders and many goods receipts are done in many times. Goods receipt is done 6 times till now and the score is 80% . Now GR is done for 7th time . If the qty reliability is 100 % for this GR
the score is calculated in the following way
80%0.8+100%0.2 --- this the score after the 7th goods receipt....
Hope now u understand .... If u still have queries please post your feedback...
If u are satisfied , please reward points
Regrads
Mani

Capacity evaluation for internal and external workers in one work center

Hi ,
Normally in all Industries you have internal manpower to execute work. Say I have a work center named "Mechanical" , I will have 5 people working 8 Hrs for 5 days in a week. We usually configure this in capacity tab of work center for capacity category "002-Labour". In scheduling tab we configure sceduling data for a capacity category "002-labour"
In many industries , depending on load, many time, external labours are hired to give assistance to internal workers. Technically it is like adding one more capacity category "PER-Person" and adding number external labours there and in scheduling tab adding required configuration for "PER" capacity category
Total capacity for any given day would be available capacity in capacity category -002 + available capacity in PER capacity category.
However in scheduling Tab , scheduling basis can be either 002/PER.
How can we add more scheduling basis to refer to more than one capacity category ?
Any other alternative to above problem statement?

let us say, you have a work "Pump repair" which is done partly by internal workers say 2 people and 1 external labour. Let us assume the number of people in 002-labour is 2 (internal ) and capacity in capacity category (PER) which is external work center is 3 (Total 5 ).
Now if I I leave scheduling basis as blank, then system will calculate scheduling based on 002 capacity category as it is "Major" . But I want system to consider both 002 and +PER .
You are suggesting two line items "Pump Repair internal" and give 2 numbers and duration as 8 control key PM01 . Create another operation "Pump repair External" use control key PM02 (where in scheduling is enabled) where 1 number - 8 Hrs duration is maintained with another work center.
If I maintain 2 different work centers and two different operations, this will work. But for customer this is just one work and capacity evaluation should be based on capacity category 002 and PER .
How to solve this by maintaining one work center , two capacity categories in same work center and maintaining one control key PM01 in operation?

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,
-Murali

S0003562672 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

Time Evaluation for work schedule during midnight

Dear all SAP HR Expert,
We have question regarding time evaluation.
Our scenario is:
Shift 1 00:00 - 07:00
Shift 2 07:00 - 16:00
Shift 3 16:00 - 24:00
His work schedule:
06.08.2010: Shift 2
07.08.2010: Day Off (Free)
08.08.2010: Shift 1
09.08.2010: Shift 1
10.08.2010: Shift 1, but he took one day annual leave on this day
Actual data (in IT2011 and IT2001):
clock in 06:30 of 06.08.2010
clock out 16:30 of 06.08.2010
clock in 23:30 of 07.08.2010 (come earlier)
clock out 07:30 of 08.08.2010
clock in 00:35 of 09.08.2010 (late)
clock out 07:15 of 09.08.2010
leave record: start date: 10.08.2010, edn date: 10.08.2010
Base on SAP documentation that said we can never assign a time event before midnight to the next day, we have rearranged SAP configuration (DWS and PWS) to:
DWS:
Shift 1: 23:59 - 06:59 with tolerance 23:59 - 00:00 and 06:59 - 07:00
PWS:
For Shift 1, always set 1 day earlier than actual schedule.
Thus, work schedule rule will indicate:
06.08.2010: Shift 2
07.08.2010: Shift 1 23:59 - 06:59
08.08.2010: Shift 1 23:59 - 06:59
09.08.2010: Shift 1 23:59 - 06:59
It works!!
Our problem is, time eval can not find clock in - clock out record for date 09.08.2010 (because record in IT2011 with date 09.08.2010 belongs to 08.08.2010) and can not match it with leave record (because leave data has start date 10.08.2010).
Thus, time eval will generate warning message "Employee not at work".
I hope you can give me input on how to solve this problem.
Best Regrads,
Achmad

Hi,
see thread
Time evaluation -early clockin for shifts starting at midnight ?
maybe of interest
bg
Edited by: bg on Sep 16, 2010 9:26 AM

Petition (Evaluation) for bringing old FF interface etc. back. Without mentioning TFFx.

Since there is no way, of creating a poll, please all that want the old GUI back, post "me too". The reason behind it is, that people should not be forced to create a social media account to do so and that this is the only way developers get a feeling of what is wanted.
This is not meant as a demand towards the developers, it is just a means of evaluation to help considering decisions.
Why, do I do this? Because, "classic theme restorer" add on isn't really reversing it.
Others that had that problem and a crippled solution:
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1018434?esab=a&as=aaq
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1032824?esab=a&as=aaq
solution: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/how-to-make-new-firefox-look-like-old-firefox
Someone did put it down very nice elsewhere: "it is a shame that people actually HAVE to create an addon for it".

''locking this thread for the same reasons as as mentioned here - https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1034426''
Off-topic for this forum.
Basically a 3 year old topic, as far as Mac 10.4, and a 7 month old topic that has been discussed at length, repeatedly with regards to the Australis UI.

Re Evaluation for deployments - on logon?

Hi,
We need to reduce the Schedule for re evaluating deployments.
Mainly because we need failed applications to retry quicker than every 7 days, and I'm not really in favour of changing from the default of 7 days.
I seen something that suggested that re-evaluation also occurs on logon? Is this correct?

Those are two different things, maybe even three.
A retry happens after a failed installation happens after 2 hours (and will retry 10 times), depending of the error code (see for a list:
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/sreekarm/archive/2013/05/28/application-failure-retry-behavior-in-sccm-2012.aspx).
A deployment re-evaluation is more meant to check if a application is still installed (and will install if it's not detected) and not for failed installations.
Policy evaluation of the user is just to see if there are new policies available for the user, which might include an application installation. This does not trigger a deployment re-evaluation.
Also, as far as I know a restart does not trigger a application re-evaluation.
My Blog: http://www.petervanderwoude.nl/
Follow me on twitter: pvanderwoude

Evaluations for PS

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for