substitute is not display in the approver preview..

[Former Member]

Hello Friends,

After add substitute by approver.. substitute is not display in the approver preview..

How the substitute is working when approver made substitute..

thanks,

john.

[Former Member]

Hi

<u>Please Try this -></u>

I guess, that the workflow conditions are not properly configured or this might be due to some OSS note missing in the system. If the workflow is not working as expected, see SAP Note 322526 Analysis for workflow problems.

<u>Some related OSS notes: -</u>

Note 1015198 - Ad hoc approvers are not transferred to BBPSC07

1010079 Inserted approvers disappear for WF line item

979803 Changed/inserted approvers disappear during goods receipt

731637 Consulting: How can the item-based approval be used?

Note 417547 - Testing the approval preview

Note 361643 - Problems with workflow/history display (applet)

Note 999528 - Adding Ad Hoc Approver fails due to comit error

Note 984582 - Problems with Posting Container Data (ad Hoc agents etc.)

Regards

- Atul

[Former Member]

Hello Atul,

My start condition is very simple one for n-step workflow.. the condition trigger the workflow value is more than $1..

is it making problem?

[Former Member]

Hi

Since i don't have your system access, it is quite difficult to find out the exact cause ?

Anyways, Have you raised any OSS message with SAP on this yet ?

If you are sure that Workflow start conditions are properly maintained, kindly re-confirm them once.

Regards

- Atul

[Former Member]

Hi,

Which SRM version are you working on?

Please see if the foll notes help:

903917

824614

824194

997204

BR,

Disha.

Pls reward points for useful answers.

[Former Member]

Hello Disha,

I am in SRM 5.5 server..

Thanks,

john .

[Former Member]

Hello Disha,

sorry to tell you that i am in SP06..

I have gone through all the OSS notes.. I am not sure does these notes help after i read all the notes.. anyway let me implement all the notes.. if you find something else please let me know..

thanks,

john.