Workflow complexity

Thu Aug 29 02:40:53 EDT 2002

Another trick you can try is to push out some of the workflow logic into
customizing. I've done that for a massive workflow for master data
completion -- altogether ~600 tasks if they were coded "the standard way" in
different workflow/subworkflow definitions. In this particular case we'd
have ~15 process variants depending on some input paramters. Each of these
variants would have to work for a number of organizational routes, so
altogether that would correspond to ~100-150 routing definitions for the
start. And we're sure that the process will change a couple of times...

The process in question is that of material master completion. Instead of
all the branches and subworkflows, the workflow handling it is basically the
following:

- create a worklist of outstanding views based on the process variant
- loop until all required views are created
---- determine views that need to be completed now
---- complete these views

whereas the "worklist of outstanding views" is taken from customizing. In
other words -- we're simulating a worklfow engine within the workflow, with
process definition maintained in a simple customizing table. And the trick
is that each customizing entry here corresponds to a separate workflow task
in a conventional design. Instead of modifying the workflow definition each
time requirements change, we modify customizing. Easier to test, easier to
transport, don't care about bindings, dependencies, generation etc. You just
need to think a bit about the agent determination for the data completion
task.

Of course this works as long as you have a pretty uniform process (i.e.
mostly the same tasks, e.g. completions or approvals). Still if you look at
some other processes you can probably try to implement a similar logic. I
haven't seen this in production yet -- but at least it worked absolutely
great in testing, when the process changed a couple of times :-)

Kind regards,
Tomasz

-----Original Message-----
From: Dart, Jocelyn [mailto:jocelyn.dart at sap.com]
Sent: Thursday,29. August 2002 03:22
To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Subject: Re: Workflow complexity

Hi Michael,
As well as the other great suggestions sent to you so far:

Where you have plant or country-specific scenarios, one tactic is to create
separate workflows for those scenarios and use start conditions to decide
which workflow will be started based on country/plant.

This would make each individual workflow simpler, and you could still
use subworkflows and single-step tasks in multiple workflows where you
need commonality.

Regards,
        Jocelyn Dart
Consultant (SRM, EBP, Workflow)
and co-author of the book
"Practical Workflow for SAP"
SAP Australia
email: jocelyn.dart at sap.com
phone: +61 412 390 267
fax:   +61 2 9935 4880

-----Original Message-----
From: Pokraka, Michael [mailto:michael.pokraka at kcc.com]
Sent: Thursday, 29 August 2002 4:59 AM
To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Subject: Workflow complexity

Greetings all,
We are on the way to building what I've affectionately dubbed 'the workflow
from hell'. It is quite complex and involves around 35 or so different
departments (some are plant or country-specific, thus actually even
multiplying those step by no. of plants). We're still planning, but I can
already foresee a monster with steps numbering in the 100's once we start
adding background tasks, deadline monitoring etc.

My request for info on this list: I'd appreciate anyone who could provide
some feedback with making huge workflows, specifically any pitfalls,
stability issues etc. I know it will be a maintenance monster (and so does
the client, but the client is always right :-)
Sub-workflows will be used wherever possible, but some of the branching
logic forces most of the steps into the master W/F.

Thanks
Michael

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
This e-mail is intended for the use of the addressee(s) only and may contain
privileged, confidential, or proprietary information that is exempt from
disclosure under law.  If you have received this message in error, please
inform us promptly by reply e-mail, then delete the e-mail and destroy any
printed copy.   Thank you.

 ===========================================================================
==