Agents of Rejected SC Cart - RESOLVED

[Susan R. Keohan]

All,

This issue has been resolved.

For whatever reason, the web transaction BBPSC08 (Employee inbox) will not allow just anyone to 
process the rejected Shopping Cart in SRM 5.0.  I believe, under the covers, that it calls BBPSC04 
(Check Status) and this transaction prohibits changes to a cart by anyone except for the Shopper, or 
the person they bought on behalf of.

In our scenarios, sometimes a rejected cart should be routed back to a previous level of approvers 
for corrections.  I corrected the issue by creating a new task which calls the web transaction 
BBPSC07 (Typically an 'Approve' transaction) and ensuring that the workitem text indicated Rejection 
instead of approval.

We have also implemented BBP_WFL_SECUR_BADI to determine what BBP_WFL_SECURITY level should be, 
based on the classification of the task (Approval or Rejection) and the 'role' of the agents.

For example, LEVEL1 approvers can change a cart when it comes to them for approval.  This is passed 
into the task container and when the BADI is called, it looks at this container element, and sets 
the BBP_WFL_SECURITY to 4 (changes allowed).  However, LEVEL2 approvers should *not* be allowed to 
change the cart; they must just approver or reject it.  The BADI sets the BBP_WFL_SECURITY to 1 in 
this case.

In the case of rejection, the BADI sets the security level to 4 so that the recipients of this task 
(calling BBPSC07 now) can change and resubmit the cart.

Phew.  I hope this saves somebody needless heartache.

BTW.  I did turn on that BBP_WFL_EMPL_WI_BADI (which had the code:   overwrite_syst_behaviour = 'X') 
and it didn't appear to do anything.  So I still wonder what it does.

Happy WF-ing,
Sue

Susan R. Keohan wrote:

> This is a custom role, just for me.  You can get friendly with your Basis folks to develop on for 
> you, Kjetil.
> 
> Seriously though, has anybody tried to route the Rejected SC task to anyone other than the SC 
> creator in SRM ?   Has anyone had issues with this ?  SRM  is very sneaky in that many things are 
> coded as constants and contained in includes, and this controls the way the screens look and act.
> 
> Any help is, as always, greatly appreciated.
> Sue
> 
> Kjetil Kilhavn wrote:
> 
> 
>>>I have SAP_ALL, SAP_NEW, SAP_WF_GODDESS
>>
>>
>>Susan, I can't find this role in our system. 
>>What version are you on?
>>
>>Is there a corresponding SAP_WF_GOD role, or are we seeing some gender
>>discrimination here :-)
> 
> 

-- 
Susan R. Keohan
SAP Workflow Developer
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
244 Wood Street
LI-200
Lexington, MA. 02420
781-981-3561
keohan at ll.mit.edu