Actual cost mismatch in CJI3

[Former Member]

Hello friends,

I have a network activity on which I have an actual of 1000 INR (when I am checking in CJI3, specific to a Cost Element, XX). When I am checking the actual cost for same activity including another Cost Element (YY), the actual cost is showing ZERO in CJI3 report.

Again, when I am checking the costs on this Activity from CJ20N, it is showing ZERO.

Why it is so? Also, is there any other report, where I can see the Accurate Actual cost on the Activity? Please let me know.

Thanks,

Regards,

Sumanth

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Sumanth,

Adding further for the above discussion thread

Please check the table for the actual cost posted to indentify the cost element & Business transaction associated with that actual posting. 

Check COSS/COSP table for value type  for internal activity/ general cost activity.

If you are trying to excute CJI3 report specific to cost element then if it doesn't ties with table value then also you may get the incorrect actual.

Regards,

Vadiraj K

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hello All,

Thanks for your inputs.

Yes, the costs have been already settled. That is the reason CJI3 is showing 1000 INR when selected a cost element XX and ZERO when I select  both cost elements XX & YY.

Yes, values are settled to WBS and total actual on that WBS is ZERO.

But,wWhen I check std reports liken CN41/N, and S_ALR reports, they show actual cost as 1000 INR.

I even checked tables COSS/P, but there the sum of all the actual values if calculated showing ZERO.

Really confused on how to decide on the actual cost of my NWA.

Regards,

Sumanth

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

That's what settlement does, it makes the balance on the NWA = 0.  It is difficult to use CJI3 because it shows everything.  You have to filter selectively to get what you want.

Adding that what Tushar said, when you look at CJI3 display the "business transaction" field as well.  There you will see the settlement postings and the original actual postings.

CN41 and CN41N looks at the business transaction and doesn't show settlement.  These transactions show where the actual cost was incurred.  

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi,

CJI3 display actual cost line item and also settled values. Where as CN41N or CN41 are of structure hierarchial reports and it shows actuals where it was incurred/posted and not settled values. These are the two basic differences exists between these two reports and select what you wanted to see.

As Ken rightly pointed out what you wanted to see in CJI3 and do the filtering of CEs.

Thanks,

Sudhakar

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hello All,

Ok... I would have agreed 100%, if I would have not seen all postings in one of our Z transaction.

I mean, there are 4 postings (line items) in CJI3 which makes a total of 1000 INR. But, we have a Z transaction (used for reposting of actual cost from one NWA to other WBS etc). There, when I am entering my NWA, I m getting 2 line items (out of 4 from CJI3) ready for re-posting. How this is possible? When it’s all settled? Also, why other 2 line items are not appearing?

Any clues on this please.

Regards,

Sumanth

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Now you have introduced a non-standard Z transaction.  It all depends on what type of posting the Z transaction is making.  You have to know what the Z transaction is doing and how it is selecting costs.  It is built on a set of assumptions that you have to know.  What cost elements is it looking for, what business transactions is it looking for, what value types is it looing for, etc?

CJI3 will show everything, actual postings, your Z transaction posting, and the settlement postings. 

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Sumanth,

Its really surprising to note your question on Z transaction. First you read the FDS (Functional Development specs) before positng. It will let you know the assumptions/logic to display the cost on output. Did you prepare FDS for this report or some one else.

Discuss with your ABAPer if you have problem.

Thanks,

Sudhakar

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Thanks all for your inputs. Im closing this request.

Regards,

Sumanth

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Were you able to decifer the line items?  Is it clearer now?

I always warn users about using CJI3 and other line item reports, they get very confusing.  Good luck.

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Ken,

Yes.. its all clear now. True, we should be careful with CJI3 when comparing with other structured /line item reports.

Thanks for your inputs,

Regards,

Sumanth

[Former Member]

Hello Sumanth,

Agree with Ken. Cost would have been probably settled.

Would also suggest you to check Business transaction for the cost that has been posted.

You many refer additional reports like S_ALR_87013542,S_ALR_87013558.

Regards,

Tushar

[Former Member]

The costs have probably been settled.  Settlement is a CO clearing of costs from a sender CO object to a receiver CO object by making  a posting using a settlement cost element.  NWA costs usually settle to its assigned WBS element.  So the settlement will post a CR to the NWA and a DR to the WBS.

Use report CN41N ot CN41 to view the costs where thay actually occured.  When you run these transactions SAP make temporary postings that are called Elimination of Internal Business Processes.  The transaction shows the object where the original cost was posted.

Only use Cost element reports when you are very familiar with the use of all cost elements.