Suitable strategy

Dear Gurus
My client wants that he will club the sales orders and form a single planned order over a period of time say a week but he also wants the stocks to be maintained at sales order level i.e make to order scenario, (no PIRs are being generated) prodn fully depends upon sales order is there any strategy to suite both his requirement
regards
Sandip Sarkar
SAP PP CONSULTANT

Sandip,
Assuming that you have accurately repeated what the client has told you, then yes, there is a strategy. The strategy is, you bill the client by the hour, and make no commitments as to when he will get his solution.
I hope you have not begun the requirements gathering phase yet. What you have outlined so far are not 'requirements', but bits and pieces of various solutions. For instance, 'stocks to be maintained at sales order level' is not a requirement, it is a solution. If a client actually says those words, a consultant needs to ask him 'What are the business requirements that make you want stocks maintained at a sales order level?'. And so on. Again and again and again and again. The answers he gives you will eventually reveal a viable solution that you can offer to him.
Regards,
DB49

Similar Messages

Warehouse strategy

Dear Friends,
My client has a warehouse of a finished product that contains two sections, one for the Dairy products and one for the Juices and in every section there are high racks that is divided by rows and every row has one number such as A21 or A22 but in every row I can put more than one material from the same type or different type so I can use the options of mixed storage and add to existing stock, but I want to know the suitable strategy to use whether it will be open storage, bulk storage or to make it manual.
Best Regards,
Mohamed Hosny

Hi Mohamed,
If it is a Rack structure and movement of stock is in pallet then it is advisable to go for L-next empty bin.
For maximum utilization you can plan to go for mixed storage or addition to existing stock however in my opinion there are some
Cons of mixed storage / addition to existing stock
Since it is a high rack (assuming that vertically it goes upto one or two level) if you want to mix stock on the same pallet it will be a time consuming process and increase your overall putaway time
also during picking if you have to pick 2 unit from a rack which is on 4th high then bring the pallet down take out 2 unit and then put back the pallet on the same position or another (as per config) which is going to increase your overall picking time

Auto batches in case of backflush

Hi MM gurus,
Pl.tell me why i am not getting batches in CO11N IN prodn..
Actually component require 30 qty. and i have 3 batches of 10 nos.but it is not coming automatically in goods movement screen in co11n.
I already maintained in OPJ2 stock and batch determination for goods movement for plant and order type .
Pl.tell me what else i need to define in spro
urgent pl,thanks

Hi,
Pl ensure that batch determination coifig for IM is correct.
Then maintain the material to be covered during batch deter. in mBC1
Ensure that all matl are having classification view in matl amster.
inmbc1 select teh suitable strategy type which u assigned for batch search procedure
pl reply if ur issue is solved
and reward
guru

Urgent :-PIR Saving w.r.t multiple Production version/Month wise

Hi,
1) Please let me know whether It is possible to enter Planned independent requirement saving in MD61 Txn code month wise & with respect to three Production version..
i.e. in detail,
I am having 3 alternative BOMs of the same finish material. I want save the Independent Requirement in a particular month with respect to 3 BOMs /3 Production Version wise in the same month.
After that I want to run MRP multilevel planning which will create planned orders of Finish Products & Dependent materials exploding corresponding BOM with respect to the particular Production Versions.
2) Please let me know the best suitable strategy which will not consider present stock & Production/Planned orders in hand , will only create planned orders from the PIR saved in the Demand Management.
Please sugggest the best way to do. I am in pressure from the client.
Regards

Hi
PIRs cannot be created for 3 production versions.
In MRP documentation, check for quota arrangement. Planned orders can be assigned to three different production versions in equal quantities by the quota arrangement.
MRp run reads the quota file MEQ1 when it has to distribute planned orders across three production versions.
Regards
Pragnesh

In MTO VC scenario, how to deliver subassemblies separately from a sales order

Finished good has two sub-assemblies for the main assembly. The main assembly is not an assembly actually but Customer orders it as Assembled component of Subassembly 1 And Sub assembly 2. There are cases where Sub assemblies can be shipped separately which are then assembled at the Customer Site.
Main FG product and sub-assemblies are both Configurable materials.
In the above scenario which MRP strategy is more suitable and how to dispatch individual subassemblies separately.
Also there should be option to produce subassembly separately if the need arises.
Ex: Box assembly is made of Lid & Pan. All the 3 materials are configurable as per Customer requirement.
Customers order for Box assembly in the sales order
Need to know which is most suitable strategy which can satisfy below req's
1. Box can be produced as assembly and dispactched
2. Lid and Cover can be produced separately and can be assembled at Customer site
3. Delivery of individual LId and cover can be made separately
4. Production order creation should be possible for Box, Lid or Pan separately

Repeating answer since Q is duplicated in two forums:
Hi There,
are you sure that your Item A is a genuine Pick To Order? - I would think that a PTO would result in exploding the OM Line to separate lines for the components and when they are ATO's they individually would result in WIP Jobs.
Anyway once the toplevel Item is resulting in a WIP job the only mechanism for creating the remaining component jobs are via an MRP breakdown done by the classical MRP or ASCP planning run.
To tie the different jobs together (hard-pegging) you would have to look at Project MFG (PJM) e.g. in the simple version of SEIBANs.
/Niels LM

Migration using File System Utility

Dear Hyperion Experts
We have EPM foundation services installed on a stand alone Development Enviroment.
We have to migrate the application to another instance. I am looking for suggestions on suitable strategy to achieve this objective essentially using file system deployment.
What all components would we require to move to the new instance.

Hi,
You didn't need to try and reconfigure, it is possible to try and recover the ldap database, though it had to work in the first place to recover it.
I am not sure of the state of your environment so it may be that you have to drop the database and start again, it is not easy to diagnose the problem from the information given.
Cheers
John
http://john-goodwin.blogspot.con/

No suitable replenishment strategy

Hi,
While creating control cycle for kanban i am getting this error,
No suitable replenishment strategy.
strategy has been assign to plant .

What is the replenishment strategy that you are using? Some of the external procurement strategies (without MRP) require storage location to be excluded from MRP.
This can be done by maintaining 1 in the SLoc MRP Indicator field (MRP4 view of Material master for the storage level you are using)
KANBAN Without MRP - PP KANBAN - SAP Library
Anoop

Selection of suitable planning strategy

Hello All
Here is a requirement for deciding the planning strategy of the material, material is produced when the actual order arrives for it, but procurement of sub assemblies can be done beforehand, to this material belongs 5 subassemblies, out of which 4 are procured before sales order arrival & 1 is procured after sales order arrival, this is so because the assembly which is procured after sales order arrival depends upon the order, i.e. the specification for this assembly depends upon the order itself. I decided strategy 52 for the material but in case of this strategy all the downlevel assemblies are procured before sales order arrival, but in my case one of the assemblies is procured after sales order arrival and remainng procured before. Kindlysuggest the suitable stratey for the material. Expecting your positive & prompt response.
Regards,
J K Tharwani

Hello Pradeep
Thanks for replying to my query, Individual/Collective requirement indicator dosnt work because it only passes the requirement of header material individually or collectively depending upon the setting done in the material master of component, if we have set it to 1 then it passes the header level material requirements individually i.e. for each requirement of header material planned order will be created for component immaterial of the sales order arrival, and if we set it to 2 the requiremets of header level material are clubbed into one requirment and only one planned order is generated for the component.to. Shall look forward to your valuable input.
Regards,
J K Tharwani

Fields suitable for PO release strategy

Hi,
I had worked with the PO release strategy in which a characteristic is created with the fields BSART ( Order type ), WERKS ( Plant ), Value ( GNETW ), EKORG ( Purchasing group )
Other than these fields what are the list of fields over which we can have a control through the release strategy.
Pl expedite.
RD

Hello,
Please check the documentation for the activity 'Edit Characteristic' in the IMG:
[...] Requirements
In communication structure CEKKO you will find all the fields that can be used as characteristics for a release condition (e.g. BSART for the order type and GNETW for the total order value).
Check which fields you wish to use as characteristics for your release strategy. To do so, choose Tools -> ABAP Workbench -> Development -> Dictionary, enter CEKKO in the field Database table, and choose "Display".
Note
If you wish to define a separate release strategy for the various document categories (PO, RFQ, etc.), you must create a characteristic for each relevant document category.
So theoretically one can use any field from CEKKO.
For the workflow, customisation is linked to release strategies and codes, not directly with the classification fields.
Regards,
Michal

Suitable pln strategy

hi all,
wha is the prompt planning strategy for the bike manufacturing company.
here the planning is taken care by the MPS /MRP
FERT MATRL -MPS
OTHER COMPONENTS - MRP
what is the step to run the planning run
whether i want to run first MRP for the COMPONENT
then i proceed with THE MPS or fert material
here how the sales order requirment trigger in the planning
i need ur inputs
with regards
vbakyaraj

so when will the scenario come as like SAP STANDARD run the MPS first and then the MRP run.
one mor doubt that if i run the mps it will plann for the level 1 materils
suppose i want to plan the fert of 100 qty. if i run mps then it will give the plnned order as 100 for fert and its sub-assemblies.
after whether it will consider the sub-assembly components in to plan
or we have o run mrp separately
why i ask is, how the requirment is come from the fert (mps run) to the
sub-assembly components(mrp run)
i maintain sub -assemblies as a bom
pls explain
rajv

SAP Strategy Management implementation :BOOK

Dear Gurus,
I have searched SAP Press and Amazon but didn't find a suitable book for SAP Strategy management implementation.
Could you please mentioned a cook book or ISBN number or any help is appericiatble.
I am looking for Business as well as technical detail.
Thanks & Regards
Arif.

Qureshi,
As previously mentioned, there isn't any books about Strategy Management implementation. There are three areas that seem to get the most attention, but as SSM is changing in features, functionality and connectivity, it's moving faster than anything that could be published. The best documentation on implementation of SSM is the guides available on the Service Marketplace. These are regularly updated, so you always have access to the latest information.
1) PAS - You build your multi-dimensional models in PAS. PAS has some amazing flexibility, especially how it handles time. Understanding how to use PAS seems to be a big challenge - as you can tell by the many questions on the Forum regarding models. There is no published book on PAS that I know of and even the PAS training in the SAP Education class is aimed as an overview. My suggestion here is at the very least try to take a SAP Education class on SSM that includes PAS training.
2) Connectivity with SAP BW - Because of some fundamental differences between how PAS and BW deal with data, there is a tool - called the BICA - that SSM uses to harmonize BW and SSM data. There is a paper available on the EPM BPX on best practices with BICA.
3) Wrangling KPIs - Strategy Management is about focusing on the essential areas of a business. Since this is YOUR business, your strategic objectives will be necessarily different - how else can you differentiate your products or services if you are doing everything the same as your competitors? This is not a situation of seeming how many more measures you can include, it's is trying to focus on doing those things that really are going to be game-changers for your organization.
This business side aspect of Strategy Management is actually the area that will show the most success - and ROI - in the organization, although the typical focus is on the technical aspects of the application. Strategy Management continues to change the application to help address the different ways that people construct their organizational strategy and how they communicate it as well as monitor it. Do not underestimate the importance of the business side of this application.
All three of these areas really strongly recommend Consulting Services. There are both SAP and 3rd Party consultants available for these areas. Why should you spend the money on a consultant?
A) You will get implemented and running more quickly - less delays, less problems, more success. I have witnessed several projects where the organization wanted to DIY and faltered because there was no expertise on the team. Projects these days HAVE to be successful -right out of the gate - so get experienced help.
B) Knowledge Transfer - There aren't any books and your boss isn't going to pay for a 5 day offsite training course. Bring in a consultant and work with them to learn what they do, how they do it, so you can become self-sufficient. It's much easier to build a consultant into a project budget than training. Although training is essential, I just never understand why executives neglect this important area.
C) Personalized Help - The needs you have for your implementation and successful operation are going to be unique because it's going to revolve around your current technical architectural, your company's practices, as well as the structure of your organization. Having a consultant allows you to better use your time and the project's time by focusing on the needed areas and getting through the typical bumps that always accompany a new program's rollout.
I am NOT a consultant, so I have no alterior motives. I DO want organizations to be successful with SSM implementations and from what I have witnessed the difference between success and merely muddling through is how willing the organization is to bring in either a SAP consultant or work with a knowledgable 3rd party consultant.

Reschedule strategy plan based on last actual order completion date

Dear all,
Hope you can help me with this one.
We use strategybased maintenance plans. We want to achieve that the next scheduled call date is calculated taking into account the actual completion date of the last (previous) call.
For example :
strategy = 1 maintenance order every 52 weeks.
start of cycle = 01.01.2009
First call created a mainenance order for 01.01.2010
This order did however only get actually completed on 20.02.2010 (so actual completion date of last call = 20.02.2010 ).
Now we want that the next call is rescheduled to 20.02.2011 ( so the last actual date + the 52 weeks from the strategy)
This we can achieve for one maintenance plan at a time by using transaction IP10 and than the funtion "start in cycle' .
However we want to achieve this for a mass selection of maintenance plans in one go.We cannot find a suitable transaction that does do this.
For example IP30 simply keeps rescheduling using the "startdate of the cycle" instead of the "last actual date".
Does anyone have a suggestion how we can solve this?
Many thanks in advance!
Kind Regards,
Arjan

Hi,
Please follow as suggsted by BroermanG . In Addition to that please ensure that the positive & Negative Tolarance is maintained as zero value in the Scheduling Paramters of the Plan.
Then the system will take care of your requirements. You need not use IP10 and reschedule to get the desired schedule.
You can run the IP30 normally.
Regards,
MLN Prasad

Go Live Strategy for CO/MM

Hi,
Please suggest the Go Live strategy for CO / MM especially from Product costing point of view.
I have an issue, whether material prices of FG and SFG should be uploaded along with the quantity?
1.Whether, these prices are to be maintained in material master before executing the standard cost estimate?
2.What would happen if std prices are maintained (based on legacy stock valuation) and thereafter std cost is run. Whether the differential would be recorded as material revaluation?
3.Suppose Go live is on 1st.. the stock valuation of 31st would be available only on 3rd.. then in such cases, I would have to execute the std cost.. to ensure production/despatches are not stopped on 1st and 2nd. In such case how would the FG/SFG value as per initial upload match with Material master.
Please suggest the implications as well as the best practice.
Regards

Hi Swapnik,
Your understanding is correct. Pls go through the following...
But, there are two strategies for this...
1. Which I explained previously...in this case, you need to explaine the Core Team to estimate the expected PDiff in SAP and make suitable JV and neutralise the balances at the time of upload itself. See, literally when you released the Cost Estimate for the Products and Inventory Qty balances are available in Excel (or legacy) you would definitely come to know what is going to be the difference between legacy Inventory Value and SAP Inventory Value. Even the Business will have an option to reconsider their Quantity Structure and other things.
This would be suggestible to Core Team when they have very systematic data and approach available with them about the Standard Costs of the Products.
2. The second one is your strategy...
Upload the Inventory with Values, then run the Std Cost Estimate. In this method, you should be sure of how much PDiff is going to hit your P&L. You can even change the sequence of steps you mentioned as follows...
1. You upload Material (inputs) Qty and value
2. Stock of FG and SFG with value is uploaded - This would tally with GL balance upload
3. Std cost of SFG and FG would be run and released. Difference is posted in material revaluation account.
The decision whether you have to follow method 1 or 2, you are the best person to choose depending on your client. It is an open secret that there would be lot of manipulations to be done in data by them so that they would not face any problem they get into SAP. Method 1 will be more suitable for such instances....
Hope you got it...revert back for futher explanation...
Srikanth Munnaluri
Edited by: Srikanth Munnaluri on Apr 18, 2009 12:16 AM

What is your strategy for form validation when using MVC pattern?

This is more of a general discussion topic and will not necessarily have a correct answer. I'm using some of the Flex validator components in order to do form validation, but it seems I'm always coming back to the same issue, which is that in the world of Flex, validation needs to be put in the view components since in order to show error messages you need to set the source property of the validator to an instance of a view component. This again in my case seems to lead to me duplicating the code for setting up my Validators into several views. But, in terms of the MVC pattern, I always thought that data validation should happen in the model, since whether or not a piece of data is valid might be depending on business rules, which again should be stored in the model. Also, this way you'd only need to write the validation rules once for all fields that contain the same type of information in your application.
So my question is, what strategies do you use when validating data and using an MVC framework? Do you create all the validators in the views and just duplicate the validator if the exact same rules are needed in some other view, or do you store the validators in the model and somehow reference them from the views, changing the source properties as needed? Or do you use some completely different strategy for validating forms and showing error messages to the user?

Thanks for your answer, JoshBeall. Just to clarify, you would basically create a subclass of e.g. TextInput and add the validation rules to that? Then you'd use your subclass when you need a textinput with validation?
Anyway, I ended up building sort of my own validation framework. Because the other issue I had with the standard validation was that it relies on inheritance instead of composition. Say I needed a TextInput to both check that it doesn't contain an empty string or just space characters, is between 4 and 100 characters long, and follows a certain pattern (e.g. allows only alphanumerical characters). With the Flex built in validators I would have to create a subclass or my own validator in order to meet all the requirements and if at some point I need another configuration (say just a length and pattern restriction) I would have to create another subclass which duplicates most of the rules, or I would have to build a lot of flags and conditional statements into that one subclass. With the framework I created I can just string together different rules using composition, and the filter classes themselves can be kept very simple since they only need to handle a single condition (check the string length for instance). E.g. below is the rule for my username:
library["user_name"] = new EmptyStringFilter( new StringLengthFilter(4,255, new RegExpFilter(/^[a-z0-9\-@\._]+$/i) ) );
<code>library</code> is a Dictionary that contains all my validation rules, and which resides in the model in a ValidationManager class. The framework calls a method <code>validate</code> on the stored filter references which goes through all the filters, the first filter to fail returns an error message and the validation fails:
(library["user_name"] as IValidationFilter).validate("testuser");
I only need to setup the rule once for each property I want to validate, regardless where in the app the validation needs to happen. The biggest plus of course that I can be sure the same rules are applied every time I need to validate e.g. a username.
The second part of the framework basically relies on Chris Callendar's great ErrorTipManager class and a custom subclass of spark.components.Panel (in my case it seemed like the reasonable place to put the code needed, although perhaps extending Form would be even better). ErrorTipManager allows you to force open a error tooltip on a target component easily. The subclass I've created basically allows me to just extend the class whenever I need a form and pass in an array of inputs that I want to validate in the creationComplete handler:
validatableInputs = [{source:productName, validateAs:"product_name"},
                     {source:unitWeight, validateAs:"unit_weight", dataField:"value"},
               {source:unitsPerBox, validateAs:"units_per_box", dataField:"value"},
                    {source:producer, validateAs:"producer"}];
The final step is to add a focusOut handler on the inputs that I want to validate if I want the validation to happen right away. The handler just calls a validateForm method, which in turn iterates through each of the inputs in the validatableInputs array, passing a reference of the input to a suitable validation rule in the model (a reference to the model has been injected into the view for this).
Having written this down I could probably improve the View side of things a bit, remove the dependency on the Panel component and make the API easier (have the framework wire up more of the boilerplate like adding listeners etc). But for now the code does what it needs to.

Release strategy of contract disappeared after using of MEMASSCONTRACT

Hi All,
May be some one can help me?
I have next problem it tr. MEMASSCONTRACT(ECC6)
Release strategy of contract disappeared after using of tr. MEMASSCONTRACT. I know why it happened, but I don't know how to correct it. Some time ago IN ECC5 we added a field to a table EKKO and used this field as one of characteristics in the release strategy of contracts. In order to transfer value of this field to field CEKKO-USRC1 we used User Exit EXIT_SAPLEBND_002. This User Exit is suitable only for online transactions (ME31K, ME32K). How can I feel field CEKKO-USRC1 in transaction MEMASSCONTRACT?
Regards, Liza

Thank you. Probably I didn't explain my problem clearly. It's section of code from User Exit EXIT_SAPLEBND_002:
ATA: reference(20) TYPE c VALUE '(SAPMM06E)EKKO'.
DATA: it_ekko TYPE ekko.
FIELD-SYMBOLS: <ymm_icl> TYPE ANY.
e_cekko = i_cekko.
*THE "ICL Contract" FIELD IS ONLY RELEVENT IN THESE TRANSACTIONS
IF sy-tcode EQ 'ME31K' OR sy-tcode EQ 'ME32K'
OR sy-tcode EQ 'ME33K' .
ASSIGN (reference) TO <ymm_icl>.
it_ekko = <ymm_icl>.
e_cekko-usrc1 = it_ekko-ymm_icl.
ENDIF.
Program SAPMM06E can only be reffered while using online transactions. Mass transactions does not use these program and it is completely class based. So, may be someone know how can i do the same , but for tr. MASS in ECC6.

Suitable strategy

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for