Substitution questions

[Dart, Jocelyn]

Hi Partha,
1) Yes you cannot chain substitutes - this is *not* missing =
functionality - this is for financial delegation/audit/security reasons. =
I.e. If I substitute my work to someone else, this does *not* in any way =
imply that I am ok with them sending it on to a 3rd person.
 
2) No - trouble is that its very difficult if not impossible to know in =
advance what authorisations they are going to need for the underlying =
transactions/routines that may be called by workflow.  Better approach =
is to consider who will be substitutes up front in your design, so that =
either they are peers with similar authorisations, or you build your =
workflow to cater for possible action by a substitute, e.g. use user =
decisions (which don't require extra authorisation) and then perform =
updates in background.
 
Rgds,
Jocelyn
 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: SAP Workflow [mailto:Owner-SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU] On Behalf Of =
Chatterjee, Partha (US - San Ramon)
Sent: Wednesday,8 September 2004 11:23 AM
To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Subject: Substitution questions
 
Hi All,
 
I have looked at the WUG archives and still have a few questions on SAP =
Inbox substitution functionality:
 
1) Is it still true that chaining substitutes is not recognized ( i.e. A =
is substitututed to B then B is substituted to C --> however C will not =
see A's stuff?)  -- The last answer on this subject in the archives was =
in 2001.
 
2) When someone delegates is there any functionality which will allow =
authority checks.  For example, I substitute a subordinate for my =
workitems.  For some of these workitems, the subordinate does not have =
the underlying authority to execute this transaction even though I =
intended him to temporarily have such authority.  My understanding is =
that there is no such check since one cannot know intent and SAP feels =
the security process is separate.  It would be nice if there were =
something that informed the mgr during substitution that some of his =
workitems could not be executed by his subordinate so he could choose =
someone else or call security etc.  Has anyone else dealt with this =
issue?
 
Best regards,
Partha
 
 
 
This message (including any attachments) contains confidential =
information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is =
protected by law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you should =
delete this message.  Any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this =
message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly =
prohibited.