Skip to Content

Archived discussions are read-only. Learn more about SAP Q&A

Add more fields in Order Mass Change IW38/IW37N - Structures IWOS_MASSCHG*

Greetings Experts, Gurus and SAP Sages!

I am looking into a particular requirement of adding an additional field (Person Responsible i.e. the PARNR Partner Function in the Order header) to be available for mass change.

Initially, my idea was that a Z-solution would have to be developed as an enhancement to IW38 / IW37N t-codes, possibly utilizing the FM BAPI_ALM_ORDER_MAINTAIN & structure BAPI_ALM_ORDER_PARTN_MUL_UP - of course, leading to all sorts of interesting questions, such as the authorization checks on I_MASS,  search help, input checks, error handling etc., the alternative being to leverage the standard Mass Change functionality available through the EA-PLM extension.

I have not found relevant Notes, but an investigation of this and other angles on SCN revealed these pieces of information:

http://scn.sap.com/thread/3197554

http://scn.sap.com/thread/1514434
http://scn.sap.com/thread/3577958

Mr @Pete Atkin mentioned that they have also had to develop a solution, Mr Former Member revealed that his had been the subject of a SAP customer connection case, and Mr @Paul Meehan stated that there are certain structures that can be extended to make the mass change of additional fields possible.

I have looked up these structures and some seem to have been updated recently in our system (we're on EHP7):

IWOS_MASSCHG_HEADER Last changed on/by     SAP          24.05.2015

IWOS_MASSCHG_CONTROL Last changed on/by     SAP          15.06.2005

IWOS_MASSCHG_LOCATION Last changed on/by     SAP          14.10.2014

IWOS_MASSCHG_ADDATA Last changed on/by     SAP          26.11.2008

IWOS_MASSCHG_PMSDO Last changed on/by     SAP          20.09.2006

All of those structures are in the "Cannot be enhanced" category. Some structures seem to have been updated recently, and may be updated in the future. Changing these structures would be a divergence from the standard and cause issues during later upgrades.

So what is the latest on this?

Is it going to be part of a future standard after upgrade?

Have you had similar solutions developed?

Or do you have some experience to share with changing these structures and supporting such a modification throughout the upgrades?

Do you at all condone such modification, or would rather go with a customization?

Tags:
Not what you were looking for? View more on this topic or Ask a question