SAP Higher Education and Research User Group 1998 Meeting at University of Cape Town
Report on developments requested at 1997 meeting
Jürgen Hollberg, Elvira Wallis
SAP AG
Cape Town, 26.02.1998
1: Research Grants
Overview of current status
l There are two pilot customers:
n University of Toronto
n University of Cape Town
n Workshop took place with both pilots
l Development will be based on the new update functionality (release 4.0C)
l General availability in release 4.0E
l Pilot customers will receive functionality in advance on a project basis
Aspects of the solution
l Fiscal year variant for each fund
l Recording of data based on the fund fiscal year
l Reporting calculates the universities view on fund data
l Year end processing at fund fiscal year end
Master data: With 'grant year'
Master data: Summary
l To achieve the essential function, only
n fiscal year variant
n validity date
needs to be added to fund master
l Master record creation and maintenance is considered a central function
l Further settings will be added via profiles
Budget maintenance
Budgeting: Summary
l Budget is maintained per fund (no change)
l Fiscal year is entered or determined from system date (CPU)
(no change)
l Budget is valid for entire fiscal year (no change)
l Availability check still works on an annual or overall basis, not on a periodic basis (no change)
è Periodic release of budgets is not solved with this function
l Period budgeting is no longer needed to reflect fund fiscal year (change)
Update
Update: Summary
l Information provided by fiscal year variant per fund automatically determines grant year and period
l Postings that affect past periods might now affect past fiscal years. Also, one FI or MM document can create documents in multiple fiscal years in FM. Apart from system features, this requires
n analysis of desired procedure (done, no issue at UofT)
n double check with university accounting (FI) regarding
w reversal (no change for UofT)
w reconciliation (no change for UofT)
Year end activities: Summary
l At each month end, system determines which funds have reached their fiscal year end and proposes them for carryforward run
l All funds are subject to year end processing at their respective year end (same procedure as in operating fund)
l A tool will be created to
n mass select funds according to
w customer number
w Fiscal year variant
n mass maintain carryforward rules
Reporting: Researchers perspective
l Reporting for one fund works like today
l Reporting for several funds with the same fiscal year setting works like today
l Reports will provide selection and display by calendar months
è For reporting across more than one fiscal year variant a total of all funds is meaningless
Reporting: Financial statement perspective
l Reporting on total annual budget will not be a standard feature (but could be achieved by proration)
l As all funds are carried forward, annual reporting of free balance is independent of funding sources (i.e. like Operating Fund)
l For financial statement purposes, the fiscal periods are selected according to the university's fiscal year
Conversion
Conversion could be done
l by creating new funds master records for all active funds, leaving the old ones as they have been before
l by converting historic data for all funds as of a given date
Conversion should take care of
l future budgets already entered into the system
Next steps
! Workshops have been given to pilot sites
! Presentation at HER conference Cape Town 2/98
è Final draft should be available by March 1998 for verification by pilot customers
è Development will start after sign off of final draft
l Workshop in Walldorf for first test of solution (June/August 1998) with users from both customers.
Attempt to coordinate with similar HR workshop.
l Presentation at SAPPHIRE USA (in September !)
2: Carry-forward rules and procedures
Carry-forward: Functionality
l Carry-forward when budget is 0
n There was a bug in the cf programs that caused the procedure to ignore situations without any budget. Solved with 3.1H
n In case of a calculated negative remainder (credit balance for expenditure), the budget concept needs to be explored further. There currently is only a hidden flag to allow this processing
l Manual carry-forward process is required
n Manual transfer of budget is possible
n Open items are currently transfered automatically if referenced in new fiscal year. This might be blocked with new update functionality
è What is the exact nature of the requirement ?
è Is it an authorization issue ?
Carry-forward: Handling
l Select budgets to be carried forward by classification
n With the new fiscal year dependency of funds, the system will propose those funds for carry-forward that have reached their fiscal year end.
n Use of classification will remain a multi-step procedure not ideally suited for automatic processing
è SAP will start analysis of information commonly stored in classification
l Performance of procedures
n Bottleneck currently is the master data hierarchy. Revision is under way as time dependent master data is developed (not 4.0C)
3: Reporting issues
Reporting: Tools available
l Summary reports - Drill down reporting
n Allows summarization by any of the three master data objects
n Allows custom built layouts, using any number of columns
n Allows link to other (proprietary) reports
n Inludes classification (from 3.1H on)
n A training class is available
l Line item reports - Logical database plus
ABAP List viewer
n List viewer displays a customizable selection of all available fields
n Creates totals according to customizing
n Full functionality available with 4.0
Reporting: Known deficiencies
There are several deficiencies that have their roots in the way data is stored. The only remedy is a change of that design
l Budget
n Budget and reports on budget are based on anual totals. Reporting on changes of the budget thus must be based on line item informa-tion. Due to resource constraints, new budget documents will not be implemented in standard in 1998.
l Open items / actuals
n The new update functionality (4.0C) will improve the situation. Please refer to the material on 4.0 development news
4: Position management
5: Multiple Assignments
6: other items from the 1997 list
Other 1997 requirements (1)
l Exception reports (#3)
! Master data reports allow selection by all master data fields
! Reconciliation reports are available with new update functionality, based on what is reconcilable from SAP's point of view
n for further reconciliation, ample customizing would be required to state the relation between modules
n Status management and availability control require 'test' run of a transaction to determine result and do not provide sufficient information for a trace
Other 1997 requirements (2)
l Financial position at end of period (#4)
! Period budgeting is standard from 4.0A on
! New update functionality will allow 'account statement' view with movements showing individually on the date posted
n Intention and use of CO do not allow a customizing option fotr the update of open items
n Marking reconciled documents is 'against SAP's philosophy'
(would need to convince board level)
Other 1997 requirements (3)
l Master data maintenance (#6)
n
earliest possibility is redesign for time dependencyl Consistency checks in budgeting (#7)
n "hash total" or 'Control total' function is tied to new budget document type (because all items are added up)
n even with period budgeting, only anual values are relevant for SAP. Thus, you cannot budget in a fiscal year where the fund is not valid for at least one day. The periods itself are not checked.
Other 1997 requirements (4)
l Reconstruct of assigned values (#8)
n SAP assumes that it is a rare exception to run this program. Detailed analysis is needed to determine why it is necessary to run this program frequently
n As the system does not have any information on how long it would take to run this program, it is left to the user to determine when it fits in best.
Other 1997 requirements (5)
l Period budgeting (#10)
! Period budgeting is supported from 4.0A on. It is a parameter in the budget profile. All budgeting transactions allow you to either
w determine the affected period manually
w or have the system decide, based on system date and distribution parameter
! Reporting period budgets is also available from 4.0A on.
Other 1997 requirements (6)
l Maintenance of year dependent objects (#12)
n with the commitment items and funds centers becoming time dependent themselfs, a simple copy function will not do the job: The master data object then has to exist in the 'copy to' year as well.
n We will try to include some functions in the Grant year solution
Other 1997 requirements (7)
l FM hierarchy changes (#13)
n An unofficial program was developed by UofT
n More detail is needed to influence SAP's time dependent master data development