Workflow Substitution Report

[Koti Tummuru]

We had the similar problem auditors wanted to track all the changes made
to the org. chart and substitutions for workflow.  if we delete the
entries of the assignments in PPOMW, entry from HRP1001 is missing and
was not able to track any changes.  after a long research I figured out
that there is a table DBTABLOG which keeps track of all the changes made
to update the logs.  if you are designing something for the auditing
reporting you can refer to this table to get most of the information.   
 
If we BYPASS the workflow functionality I don't know if the system would
automatically terminate the workflow's if it does then we have the log
of it also.   
 
Hope this helps. 
 
 
Regards, 
 
Koti, 
PPC Rockwall DTC, 
*:  972-290-2624
 

	-----Original Message-----
	From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu]
On Behalf Of Gregory Utley
	Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 4:00 PM
	To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
	Subject: RE: Workflow Substitution Report
	
	

	...very nice, accurate summary.  The application is the only
reliable source for auditable information, not workflow.  Workflow logs
are transitory and not guaranteed to be the source of the update.  T&E
is another application where an approver can (and sometimes does)
approve directly in PR05, bypassing workflow altogether.

	 

	Greg

	 

	
________________________________


	From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu]
On Behalf Of Trant, David
	Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 4:16 PM
	To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
	Subject: RE: Workflow Substitution Report

	 

	Will that definitely show who did the actual approval, though?
This issue has been in the back of my mind for some time now.  We wrote
some reports that go directly against some workflow log tables ... a big
no-no since they probably won't work whenever we upgrade from 4.6C.  Two
years ago, SAP brought this subject up in an ASUG meeting.  At that
time, customers really weren't using the workflow information system and
due to this lack of interest, SAP made no plans to replace it in BW.
Since SOX came along, I've suspect this issue will start to get more
visibility.  It goes beyond the mere technical ability to properly read
workflow logs, which of course may be archived long before audit reports
require their data.  Since theoretically workflow merely connects the
dots of existing processes, it's always possible for someone to take
action outside the workflow.  Without application-level tracking, we
could never be certain who did what.  For example, if a purchase order
approval workflow uses release strategy, or a sales order approval
workflow uses the status network to block and unblock orders, someone
could conceivably go directly into the PO release transaction or the
sales order change transaction and modify the release level or the
status.  If I'm writing a report, should I look at the workflow log or
the change log?  For sales orders, I'm not sure it's even possible to
track status changes (JEST) via the change log (CDHDR/CDPOS), but that's
another topic.

	 

	Bottom line, if you want to report on who actually did something
rather than who had the capability of doing something, my thinking at
the present is that it is safest to always go all the way back to the
application.  Of course, many applications don't support digital
signatures, change tracking, or other mechanisms for storing this data,
so in those cases it's simply not possible.

	 

	Best of luck,

	David

	 

	
________________________________


	From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu]
On Behalf Of Toledo, Joe (NBC Universal)
	Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 12:53 PM
	To: 'SAP Workflow Users' Group'
	Subject: RE: Workflow Substitution Report

	 

	Hi there Bob.

	 

	I've used table HR_USD2 to generate a report to show active
substitutions.

	 

	I hope this helps.

	 

	-----Original Message-----
	From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu]
On Behalf Of Schmidt, Bob
	Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 10:00 AM
	To: sap-wug at mit.edu
	Subject: Workflow Substitution Report

	 

	We are allowing users to create substitution rules in their
workflow inboxes usually a manager delegating to their admin. The issue
we are having is that auditors are requesting a report of workitems
processed by each user and additionally if a substitution rule was
involved and whom it was performed on behalf of.
	
	Has anyone encountered similar requirements and how was it
satisfied?
	
	Regards,
	Bob Schmidt 

	
	
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------
	This message is for the designated recipient only and may
	contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private
information. 
	If you have received it in error, please notify the sender
	immediately and delete the original. Any unauthorized use of
	this email is prohibited.
	
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------
	[mf2]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20050908/8670c697/attachment.htm