WF best practice for multiple approvers in seperate WI's ?

[Jim Sauceman]

David,
 
We make heavy use of the dynamic parallel processing feature. In my =
humble
opinion, this technique has a tremendous advantage over a serial =
approach in
the overall elapsed time it takes to get a transaction fully approved. =
With
parallel processing, the transaction is fully approved in [only] the =
time it
takes for the last (i.e. slowest to respond) approver to complete =
his/her
work item. If serial or sequential approval is used, one has to add the =
time
it takes for each approver to the elapsed time. Let me know if you have =
any
specific questions or need further clarification.
 
Good luck!
=20
Jim Sauceman ...................... sauceman at tennessee.edu
The University of Tennessee
 
-----Original Message-----
From: SAP Workflow [mailto:Owner-SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU] On Behalf Of
weston at clockwork.ca
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2004 9:56 AM
To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Subject: WF best practice for multiple approvers in seperate WI's ?
 
Hi folks,
 
We are developing a new wf template for approving budgets in projects,
transaction CJ02 triggered by status management. As part of the wf =
process
one
of the activity steps has to be approved by n (not known until runtime)
number
of approvers, each with a seperate work item in their inbox. The =
workflow
process cannot continue until all the approvers have approved all the
seperate
work items.
 
I have thought about using forks, dynamic parallel processing elements =
etc.
 
Was wondering how other people have achieved this, and what is the best
practice
?
 
Cheers
David Weston