Workflow & Substitution

["Per-Bjørn Pedersen"]

At Statoil we have been using substitutes for peple that are approving =
of time
sheets, travel forms, invoices, purchase orders e.a. Yes, both the appr=
over and
his/her substitutes will have the WF-jobs in question sent to them. The=
 one that
first grabs the job and reserve it will be accouted for as executing ag=
ent. Of
course any substitute should be given sufficient access right to perfor=
m
transactions that are submitted to them through WF. If that should not =
take
place it will not be a real case of a "substitute" either.
 
With Statoil we are not too happy about extensive use of substitutes. A=
 
substitute has to be able technically to act completely like the "prima=
ry"
receiver. That means that his/her own time sheets, own travel forms etc=
. will
pop up for approval, and clear routines have to be in place how to hand=
le this
outside built in functionality.
 
We see a multitude of possibilities to have WF-jobs sent to groups of p=
eople.
You may use org. structure, job, work centers, enteties of you own an s=
o forth.
Statoil maintains a "task" strudture to maintain a matrix organisation =
and a
split in responsibilities between (mainly) economical responsibilities =
(task)
and line responsibilities (org. ). In addition we do grouping withe Wor=
k
Centers, and we try to restrict "substitution" as much as we can, but i=
t has a
tendency to grow wild. So don't be to free here.
 
Regards
 
p-b
 
 
 
 
From:  "Jackson, Sarah A" <Sarah.Jackson at let-it-be-thus.com>@MITVMA.MIT=
.EDU> on
       16.11.2000 12:34
 
Please respond to "SAP Workflow Users' Group" <SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
 
Sent by:  SAP Workflow <Owner-SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
 
 
To:    SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
cc:     (bcc: Per-Bj=F8rn Pedersen)
 
Subject:  Workflow & Substitution
 
 
=
 
-------------- next part --------------
Hi all,
 
I have set up a number of workflows that require approval of the relevant
Manager (chief position).  However, we have an issue in that Managers will
often delegate their tasks to their Personal Assistants. Since Personal
Assistants currently have access to all the Manager's information, initially
it was thought that managers would simply get their Personal Assistants to
log on using their ID and complete tasks for them. However, as well as other
issues, this has business implications in that it would be impossible to
tell whether a Manager or their PA had approved e.g. a salary increase. In
theory, you  could get a Personal Administrator approving their own
increase.
 
I see that it is possible to maintain  substitutes for a position. My
question is this - if you maintain a substitute, does that substitute's name
get attached to the workflow - so would you be able to see that the Personal
Administrator approved something as opposed to the Manager?
This also raises the issue that Personal Administrators would have to be
given the same level of authorisations as managers. Is there any other way
of setting up substitutions? I notice that in Org management, one of the
relationships is 'substitutes for'. Is this just the same thing as the
manager setting up a position substitute from the business workplace?
 
Does anyone else have any advice on this matter? Has anyone found any ways
of dealing with these issues?
Regards,
 
Sarah
 
 
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Statoil: The information contained in this message may be CONFIDENTIAL and is
intended for the addressee only. Any unauthorised use, dissemination of the
information or copying of this message is prohibited. If you are not the
addressee, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete this
message.
Thank you.