variable number of required digital signatures

[david_deeg]

Hi,

I have following problem: I have a document type wich requires a variable type of digital signatures bevore it is released. Who has to check the document depends on its content.

1st Question: Is there a way to define wich user has to sign the document (at moment we just define that one user with the right authorization has to sign, but not exactly who).

2nd Question: Is there a way to define a status wich requires defined signatures (more than one) before it switches to the next status?

The signature process should look like this: After the document is created the creator defines who has tho check it. Then he sets it to status "to be checked". As long as not all of the required users has signed it stays in this status. When all rewuired users have signed status changes to "released".

Every answer is helpfull.

[Former Member]

For question 1, we normally have a classification field with the approver listed in it (used for workflow as well). When the user attempts to execute a digital signature we normally add an enhancement to check that its the same user listed in the approver field.

For question 2, there are a couple of alternatives, but we normally handle this with workflow or abap for multiple approvers. We make the approver field in classification a multiple entry field and then use either workflow or abap to kick the document back to the previous status so that if there is more than one approver, each approver has the ability to set the same status. The enhancement also keeps tabs on who has signed the document and once all the approvers have signed we kick it over to the final status.

This same process can be used for multiple entries on both a reviewer and approver field (if you require review and approver otherwise you can just use approval) and allows you to use this process for both review and approval. For example, you could use a status network that goes:

In Work - For Review - Reviewed - For Approval - Approved - Released.

In the process of approval, the approver would set the "approved" status whilst the system would reset it back to "for approval" and only once the last person had approved it would automatically set the released status. The trick using this method is to ensure that the work items are not regenerated every time it sets it back to "for approval" so there is some logic required for your workflow consultant.

The review process would be exactly the same with the exception that the system would automatically kick it over from "reviewed" to "for approval" or whatever you next status might be.

Message was edited by:

Athol Hill

[david_deeg]

no idea?