S_ALR_87013558 Actual values does not match with CJI3

[Former Member]

Hi All,

Actual values in report S_ALR_87013558 for particular WBSE does not match with values in Actual Cost Line Item report CJI3.

As far as I am aware actual values in S_ALR_87013558 is calculated based on GRN(P/Q)+Direct FI postings. When I use this as reference and check the MIRO documents & FI postings these values does not match with actual values in standard report S_ALR_87013558.

Please correct me if I am wrong & also let me know if there is any other way to make sure actuals in standard report 558 is correct.

And Commitment values in report S_ALR_87013558 are perfectly matching with Commitment line report CJI5 for particular WBSE.

Thanks & Regards,

Kumar

[MTerence]

Hi,

Are you able to identify the missing cost from 558* and CJI3 report ?

Regards

Terence

[Former Member]

Hi Terence,

Nope , how I can as its showing different values in CJI3 & *558.

Regards,

Kumar

[MTerence]

Hi,

You need to find out the which type of cost is missing, like Labour / Material etc. Compare based on period / amount etc

Then it will be easy to trace down back.

558* has lot of issues and lot of fixes with SAP, so before we search for a fix, we need to make sure, what type of cost is missing.

This analysis will help, whether its an issue with Form, standard SAP or any other

Regards

Terence

[Former Member]

Hi Terence,

Yes there are lot of issues in 558* RPSCO table. There are so many transactions in WBS in question & also user is not aware which actual(PO value or FI posting is missing)so which is the best way to find missing value in Actuals in *558 report.

Regards,

Kumar

[MTerence]

Hi,

You need to find out the difference like WBS element, next is year, next is period

Regards

Terence

[Former Member]

Hi Terence,

I have identified the WBSE, Year & period but still how can we find the difference as there are multiple Business transaction in CJI3-COIN only.

Regards,

Kumar

[kenmelching]

Check your Value Category configuration, make sure something is not set to Suppress in the Cost Element to Value Category assignment.  This will prevent those cost elements from being sent to RPSCO.

[Former Member]

Hi Ken,

I checked the OPI2 value category none of them is having Suppress checkbox ticked X. SO this is also fine, then what might be the reason which is toping values flow to RPSCO.

Regards,

Kumar

[sunil_yadav2]

Hi Kumar,

you can search SCN for same type of issues exist and very well replied by SCN members.

S_ALR_87013558 & CJI3 not matching | SCN

cji3 and s_alr_87013558 not match | SCN

https://scn.sap.com/thread/1555500

and many more.

thanks

Sunil

[Former Member]

Hi Sunil,

Thanks for your response, I have checked the above mentioned threads but for the issue I am facing these are not helping.

I have checked the cost element for which actuals are posted via CJI3 & then checked for value category assignment in FS00->edit cost element there I can see correct value category 1(primary cost) & 11(revenues) respectively.

So please let me know if there is any other customization for value category to cost element.

Thanks & Regards,

Kumar