Reassign workitem to different agent

[Michael Pokraka]

Hi Abby,
I was in fact referring to modelled deadline monitoring. I'm just
curious if there's something simple I may have overlooked. Your
suggestion is nevertheless a bit simpler than using loops & agent
container elements - sometimes we overlook the obvious :)
 
I'm working on a flow involving many tasks that go to various people.
For the whole process, we have an administrator who should receive any
tasks past their due date. It just becomes messy when each task needs
to be turned into a 2-branch/ 4-step process, but I guess I'll live with
it.
 
Thanks for your input,
Cheers
Mike
 
On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 12:54:59PM -0500, Dywan, Abigail wrote:
> Have you tried using deadline monitoring instead of just the simple deadline notification?  It will automatically set your current task to obsolete and then you can in the next step use the same task and a different agent...
>
> Hope that helps!
> Abby  :)
>
> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Michael Pokraka [mailto:workflow at quirky.me.uk]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 12:08 PM
> To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Subject: Reassign workitem to different agent
>
>
> Greetings all,
> I've a simple enough requirement which seems to pop up everywhere:
> When deadline expires, send workitem to someone else.
>
> Now, to do this I can create a loop, evaluate agents, put them into an
> container element, do task, check deadline expiration, if expired,
> assign new agents and loop again. Not a major thing, but it does seem
> overly complicated and will start to look pretty ugly if you have 12
> tasks in a workflow which require this sort of construct.
>
> My question thus: is there a 'cleaner' way of doing it? I was pondering
> various alternatives, setting container flags to pass to a
> responsibility (still needs a loop), or writing some ABAP to change it
> to error status and perform a restart - this should reevaluate
> the agents, but I'm not overly happy with the future comatibility of
> that type of approach.
>
> Any thoughts on this appreciated,
> Cheers
> Mike