Workflow Review and Ad Hoc Anchor Step

Thu Jun 30 04:24:37 EDT 2005

Hi Miguel, 

Yes it's a more complicated technique to learn but in the EBP case where
it is used....

1. We absolutely want everything in the same workflow log - so that the
user can see the complete approval history
2. The adhoc anchor step is replaced by the subflow in the workflow
instance - it's not nested, so the log is a lot easier to read.
3. We don't always want to use the subflow - only on request. 
4. We can use another ad hoc anchor within the subflow itself, so we can
indefinitely add more subflows depending on what the user wants. 
5. It makes the original workflow and the workflow logs a lot simpler
than trying to do the same thing with subflows. 
6. In R/3 you can have mutliple subflows and let someone choose which
subflow to start (in EBP we do it programmatically and only use one
subflow per workflow). 

It's a cool feature but I agree that it's not something you'd use all
that often if at all in R/3 at the moment.

Hope that helps. 
Regards,
Jocelyn Dart
Senior Consultant
SAP Australia Pty Ltd.
Level 1/168 Walker St.
North Sydney 
NSW, 2060
Australia
T   +61 412 390 267
M   + 61 412 390 267
E   jocelyn.dart at sap.com
http://www.sap.com

The information contained in or attached to this electronic transmission
is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended only for
the person or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any distribution,
copying, review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of this
electronic transmission or the information contained in it is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error,
please immediately contact the sender to arrange for the return of the
original documents. 
Electronic transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure and
accordingly, the sender does not accept liability for any such data
corruption, interception, unauthorized amendment, viruses, delays or the
consequences thereof.
Any views expressed in this electronic transmission are those of the
individual sender, except where the message states otherwise and the
sender is authorized to state them to be the views of SAP AG or any of
its subsidiaries. SAP AG, its subsidiaries, and their directors,
officers and employees make no representation nor accept any liability
for the accuracy or completeness of the views or information contained
herein. Please be aware that the furnishing of any pricing information/
business proposal herein is indicative only, is subject to change and
shall not be construed as an offer or as constituting a binding
agreement on the part of SAP AG or any of its subsidiaries to enter into
any relationship, unless otherwise expressly stated. 

-----Original Message-----
From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On Behalf
Of Adao-Cruz, Miguel
Sent: Thursday, 30 June 2005 5:40 AM
To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
Subject: RE: Workflow Review and Ad Hoc Anchor Step

Hello Mark,

I understand the purpose of the ad-hoc workflows but what is not clear
is
why not using sub-workflows (after a condition check) or even events to
start another workflow (if you don't mind about the logs being
separated).
In my point of view using ad-hoc workflows is more complicated and there
are
limitations (I think that both workflows need to have the elements in
the
container), you cannot (I think!) start an ad-hoc workflow for every
line of
multi-line element (possible with sub-workflows). In one word, what's
the
benefit of using it?

Cheers.

________________________________________________________________________
___
Miguel Adao-Cruz | Capgemini | Woking
Technology Services
T.+44-870-238-2927 | Int.700 2927 | www.capgemini.com

Join the Collaborative Business Experience
________________________________________________________________________
___

-----Original Message-----
From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On Behalf
Of
Mark Pyc
Sent: 29 June 2005 16:36
To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
Subject: Re: Workflow Review and Ad Hoc Anchor Step

The idea of a Review WF is that if an agent feels a particular process
is unusual and needs to be brought to the attention of some key users
or mgmt they can start a review WF (if it is set up). This review WF
then sends a WI to whichever agents are defined and allows them to see
the logs of the original flow. You would need to have a fairly complex
process and some very savy users to justify the development.

The ad-hoc anchor step is used heavily in EBP but is now also possible
in a normal backend system. The idea is that at certain points extra
steps can be included on the fly (at the request of a user). In EBP
this is for the addition of extra approval steps, for example an
approver may feel that the particular shopping basket contains a
specialist purchase and needs additional approval by a given expert
(I've seen it used in the case of large IT purchases). In reality you
can add in any extra logic at these points in a backend defined WF.

In both cases I feel the interface is so clunky/ugly that they're not
really usable in a backend R/3 system.

Have fun,
Mark

On 6/29/05, Maorriyan <maorriyan_santoso at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm wondering actually what is the purpose of "Review
> Workflow" in reviewer tab on the workflow builder? And
> what's the purpose and how we used it in reality?
>
> Actually I've same question the purpose (in reality)
> of ad hoc anchor step type?
>
>
>
> Maorriyan
>
> Send instant messages to your online friends
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> 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

This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential
and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the
person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient,
you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate,
distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this
message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all
copies of this message.

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