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

[weston@clockwork.ca]

Thanks John, that will solve the issue....just makes the design a bit more
complex.
 
Dave
 
Quoting "Cooper, John M" <John.Cooper at kcc.com>:
 
> Put it in a subworkflow.
>
> -----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 12:52 PM
> To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Subject: Re: WF best practice for multiple approvers in seperate WI's ?
>
>
> Thanks Stephan, Jim....do you know if this dynamic processing
> functionality is
> available with a user decision step ? Just tried this and that section
> of the
> Others tab is blank !! is there a way to enable this functionality for a
> user
> decision ?
>
> Cheers
> Dave
>
>
> Quoting Jim Sauceman <sauceman at tennessee.edu>:
>
> > 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!
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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.
>
 =============================================================================
>
>
>