Create Settlement rule for L2 WBS via CJB1/2

[Former Member]

Hi Everyone

In the past we have settled WBS elements to either PSG/CCtr/AUC. We now want to have WBS hierarchies where the lower level WBS element will settle up to the superior (Level 1) WBS element.

I have configured the following items in EEC 6.0:

Created new Allocation Structure (Z4), this is a copy of WBS settlement to PSG, changed the reciever catergory to WBS element

Created new settlement profile (Z00005) with allocation Structure Z4

In the settlement strategy have added the new settlement profile with the following settings:

Account assignment element - Active

Settlement Profile - Z00005

AAt Assugn Cat.- 5 (Superior WBS element)

N:1 SD-PS - Active

I also have the existing setting to the PSG with RA key populated.

When I execute CJB2, it states that three two records processed, no errors. However when I look at the master data, only rule is created on Level 1 WBS and not lower level.

Can anyone help?

Gurprit

[former_member230675]

Hi,

Please check your settlement strategy. there you might be using the settlement profile do not settle for lower level wbses.

Normally for customer project only the root level wbse will be settled and SETC will create only for that.

wbs settlement strategy..

spro >> ps >> Costs >> Automatic and Periodic Allocations >> Settlement >> Settlement Rule for Work Breakdown Structure Element >> Determine Strategy for Settlement Rule

please also make sure the required settlement strategy has maintained in the project profile (OPSA)

thanks

abdul.

[Former Member]

Hi

The settlement strategy that I am using was one that was in place for the creation of the rules from L1 WBS to PSG. Now under the same strategy I have added the new settlement profile.

Without the config, I was getting an error message that the settlement strategy had not been updated - the strategy is then linked to each of the project profiles.

Gurprit

[former_member230675]

Hi
> The settlement strategy that I am using was one that was in place for the creation of the rules from L1 WBS to PSG. Now under the same strategy I have added the new settlement profile. 

please create a new project and try. hope you are try to settle the project which was created before updating the configuration (settlement strategy).

[Former Member]

Hi Abdul

Created a new one - only the L1 was updated with a SETC. Log from CJB1 shows the following:

Project Object Strategy Bill Acct Org.c SProf. AcctAsgnCt N:1 RA Key Recipient AA fld

E0108003040000 E0108003040001 Z6 X Z00003 Profitability s X Z00006 PrfSeg assigned Old

E0108003040000 E0108003040002 Z6 X Z00005 X 0

E0108003040000 E0108003040003 Z6 X Z00005 X 0

Any thoughts?

[former_member230675]

please upload screen shot of your settlement profile and settlement strategy in some file sharing site and post the link here so that we can check and let you know the correction / problem.

[Former Member]

Hi Abdul

Have sent you screen shots to your gmail account.

If you would have a look and let us know if I have set something incorrectly.

Gurprit

[former_member230675]

i have uploaded for others to check..

http://www.mediafire.com/?5qqks6eda78hrqp

since you are using RA and settling to PSG your settlement profile Z0005 should be not for settlement.

let us also expect other expert advises..

[Former Member]

Hi Abdul

I think that the issue may be with using the Account Assignment Category '5' which has been implemented by a new OSS note.

If I user Category '4' - copy rule from superior - this will create the settlement rule on the L2 WBSE.

I think I may have to raise an OSS in this case?

Gurprit

[former_member230675]

for your scenario no need to have SETC on lower level WBSE, because you are using RA and settling to PSG.

RA will take care what you are looking for.

Category "5" normally used for capex project to handle one AuC and roll up cost from lower WBSEs (no RA in this case).

[Former Member]

Unfortunately RA does not resolve the issue.

I tried by removing the config for Z0005 from the strategy Z6.

When running CJB2, I get errors on the lower level because there is no entry in Z6, and RA does not select the data.

[former_member230675]

why you need SETC to be set for all lower level WBSEs (other than billing element).

*******

as I explained earlier since you are settling to PSG and running RA it is not required SETC for lower level WBSEs system will automatically settle all the cost from all lower level wbses. please read sap help on RA.

please make the settlement profile for lower level WBSEs as I suggested (not for settlement) and strategy blank. run RA and settlement and check with your FI/CO consultants whether any issues are there or not.

[Former Member]

What we have is the following set-up:

NWA -> L2 WBS -> L1 WBS -> PSG.

The business want to see the settlement progress through teh hierarchy - so in consolidation they will have a single WBS element.

[former_member230675]

Settlement profiles should be as follows..

NWA - Do not Settle / Not for settlement

L2 / ALL WBSE (except L1) - Do not Settle / Not for settlement

L1 WBSE / Billing Element - Settle to PSG.

RA key - for L1 WBSE.

Now run RA and do settlement.

System will settle as business required. If you find any discrepancy please check your RA settings.

The Line ID and PA structure should be set as per the requirement of management how they want to see the reports / results.

[Former Member]

The issue was that a subsequest OSS note had not been applied - after applying the settlement rules are generated automatically via CJB1/2

[Former Member]

Hi Gurprit,

Pls let us know what are the subsequent notes you applied to resolve this issue.

[Former Member]

Hi Everyone

As I mentioned in my post, I have assigned the Account Assignment Catergory 5 - which is what has been documented under 211324.

The OSS note did not refer to anything else - was thinking that there is update routine or something.

Cheers

Gurprit

[Former Member]

Did you refer the link i posted in my previous post? The link explains clearly as to what needs to be done to achieve this. Try it out once and revert. It should definitely help.

[Former Member]

I had seen the link earlier and is what we have already set in the system - OSS note has been applied and the setting '5' is available for selection as per the note.

[former_member230675]

did you try with a new project..?

[Former Member]

This message was moderated.

[Former Member]

Hi,

do you have the account assignment check box active for the lower wbse?

regards

[Former Member]

Hi

Yes the flag is active on the lower level codes.

Should I not have this assignment?

Gurprit

[Former Member]

Hi,

You should have that check box active only ( as per the design of your settlement strategy). Whats the status of your superior WBSE, by the way?

regards

[Former Member]

The L1 WBSE has the statuses REL/SETC only.

The WBS is an external project type.

Gurprit

[Former Member]

Hi Ravi

I have run it several different ways:

At the Project level with the Hierarchy flag selected

At the L1 and L2 WBS.

Executed in test and live - no settlement rule created on the lower level but only on L1?

I get no error messages in CJB2.

Cheers

Gurprit

[Former Member]

Did you selected with hierarchy check box?