"Posted By" user in Document Parking Workflow

[Mike Pokraka]

Hello Lee,
Yes it should be perfectly acceptable to auditors, otherwise they need
educating.

It is also sensible: one reason for implementing WF is the audit trail
that it provides. Forget the posted by field. Some companies are a bit
wary, but the fact of the matter is that the WF log provides far more
information than 'posted by'.

It also provides better security and tighter controls: The authoriser
needn't have any security auth to post a document. i.e. they can ONLY
'post' what workflow sends them by means of the decision.

If you really need a userID (some companies sadly still insist), you can
create a copy of the method/task and flag it as 'dialog', advance in
dialog after a decision will then post it under the authoriser's ID. Be
aware that you now have to give posting auth to anyone who authorises....

Hope that makes sense.
Cheers,
Mike


>
> Hi All
> In the standard document parking workflow (WS10000051), once the document
> is released, the FI document header has a field that reads "Posted By:
> WF_Batch".  Are you aware of any solutions to change this so that it gives
> the name of the approver ?   I am unsure as to whether this relates more
> to
> FI customising in the document header, or if there might be a solution
> relating to the container items.
>
> It seems hard to believe that WF-Batch is acceptable by auditors. Do
> people
> have any experience or comments on this?
>
> Thanks
>
> Lee Hassett
> UK
>
>
> ***********************************************************************************************************************
>
> _______________________________________________
> SAP-WUG mailing list
> SAP-WUG at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
>