A WF design question from a new guy

[Loren Huffman]

Hello Mark,
 
Thank you very much for your reply. I was in such a hurry to dig a trench through the forest that I didn't take a look at the big picture. I'll do as you have suggested and use the two start conditions - a very good tip. I'll also be mindful in the future not to use my 'check step and terminate' bad design model. Thanks again!
 
 
Cheers
 
Loren

Mark Pyc <markpyc at hotmail.com> wrote:
G'day Loren,

You're right, WF is fun!

You may want to consider having two versions of the Workflow and using Start 
Conditions.

Cond 1.
If amount is <=10000 and doc type = B3 start Workflow A
Cond 2.
If amount is >10000 and doc type = B3 start Workflow B

This allows you to have a very simple design in each Workflow. In WF A you 
have a single approval step. In WF B you'll have three steps, 1 for each of 
the approval levels.

This also gets rid of the 'check step' you mentioned which terminates the WF 
- a big no-no in terms of design. Every WF that triggers writes multiple 
entries to the DB all of which are pointless if you throw the process away 
as soon as it starts.

The logic of where the approval process is up to is normally held in the WF 
rather than in the rule. I don't think you'll need a programmed rule to 
handle the situation you describe.

Have fun,
Mark



From: Loren Huffman 
Reply-To: "SAP Workflow Users' Group" 
To: sap-wug at mit.edu
Subject: A WF design question from a new guy
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 10:47:56 -0800 (PST)


Hello everyone,

I am new to this and would appreciate any and all responses. We are on 4.7 
and don't use the HR module but I can create org structures. I have been 
asked to do a Credit Memo Request WF for document type B3.

This is my second WF and the first to go into production. I found the 
template (copied it and the subworkflow) and added a step to check for doc 
type B3 and if it is not then cancel the workflow, this seems to work fine. 
The next hurdle is to get the approval sequence setup. They want person A to 
approve up to $1,000. For amounts up to $10,000, they want person A to first 
approve and then person B. Any amount over $10,000 would be approved by 
person A, then person B and then person C. I thought that I would try a 
responsibility rule but I don't think that would check if the workflow had 
been approved in sequence.

It looks like the responsibility rule would route it to just one user based 
on amount. Should I ask the ABAP programmer to help me build a function 
module to somehow check amount and if it had been approved and then either 
move to next user or complete the workflow, and would I place the fm in the 
subworkflow task in the Methods Before workitem execution? Agent 
determination is a bit confusing to me still.

I took BC601 over three years ago and have been the EDI guy ever since, and 
now they want to do a bunch of workflow projects. Workflow seems like it 
will be lots of fun but I'm having a bit of a struggle getting up to speed 
in the short time they have allowed. I currently have myself (user) 
hardcoded in each task with the responsible agent variable in the main 
workflow as the subworkflow number -WS20000019. I did this to show a demo of 
what I've done. They did not like being forced to view the actual document 
once I executed the item in my inbox. I told them that I didn't know how to 
not do that. I was thinking that if they don't review the document then why 
have an approval process. Anyway I would like to thank you in advance for 
your suggestions.

Cheers

Loren



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
_______________________________________________
SAP-WUG mailing list
SAP-WUG at mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug


_______________________________________________
SAP-WUG mailing list
SAP-WUG at mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug

		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
 Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20050121/af445d0e/attachment.htm