Update PO data with those of POR by vendor from SUS

[former_member252154]

Ladies and gentlemen,

Le Radis will be delighted to give you 10 points or more if you explain how we can replace in a standard way or with a bespoke the Purchase Order data with those of the Purchase Order Response data created by the vendor in SUS.

We do not need any approval from the purchasing side.

We are running SRM4 with SUS 3 in a stand alone scenario.

Many thanks in advance.

Le Radis

[former_member544585]

Le Radis: you can use Workflow "Auto transfer of POR data to PO" (WS14500001). For more info, see the following help.sap document:

<a href="http://help.sap.com/saphelp_srm40/helpdata/en/45/87a34098022a54e10000000a1550b0/frameset.htm">Workflows for Purchase Order Responses</a>

Adjust the start conditions if you want to deviate from the described standard start criteria (if you change the start conditions, make sure you adjust same for other POR workflows accordingly).

One pre-requisite of course is that PORs flow from SUS to EBP without any problems.

Cheers,

Serguei

[former_member252154]

Hello Serguei,

Thank you for your help. I had checked those WF. The pb is that we have got a pb related to the terms of payment from SUS. Each time the vendor creates a POR in SUS we have a variance related to terms of payment at header level. Therefore we can not use WF 14500001.

Any idea to correct this?

[former_member544585]

Le Radis: Your variance problem sounds like a bug to me. Have you reported it to SAP? As a <b>temporary</b> workaround, you can try adjusting the start conditions of WF 14500001 to ignore the change in terms of payment (plus adjust other POR workflows accordingly). But do push SAP to solve your variance problem.

Cheers,

Serguei

[Former Member]

Hi

I am also facing the same issue. Whenever a SUS vendor's user gives a PO response the payment terms in EBP are changed.

Please let me know if you could resolve this problem. If yes, I will appreciate, if you share the solution for the same.

Did you report it to SAP if it is a bug? Has it been included in any of the recent packs? Please let me know.

Thanks

Amol

[Former Member]

Hi,

We are also facing the same problem in SRM 5.0 - SUS 3.0.

Did any of you found a solution for this problem?

Kind regards,

Martijn Kruisinga

[former_member252154]

Really no idea?