Integration of material ledger with FM

[former_member217621]

Hi everybody.

We have activated FM and ML. When executed CKMLCP ,we got message FI640 Funds center _/_ does not exist, we correct it creating a funds center hierarchy, however, I was reviewing the FI documents and I found that ML documents only use the first fund center of the hierarchy, I thought that automatically it will use the same fund center of original post, but I saw that it does not happend.

We have to chage customizing in FMDERIVE or we have to do something else in FM customizing?

Thanks.

[ArturoSenosain · Accepted solution]

Hi Oscar.

Just for clarification, do you identify what Transaction (BSX, GBB-VBR, PRD.. AUI) is the problem? Some time ago i have a problem with the GBB-AUI (the clearing account for activities) in the ML close, and spend lot of time, because the trace in the derive dont give the full info of the problem, so i need to debug the derive in ML close.

Im 99% sure ML close dont post with the original fund center of the original post so you need to create a specific rule. But im just guessing, because i coundt see your FMDerive rules.

Arturo.

[former_member217621 · Accepted solution]

Hola Arturo, como siempre tus respuestas con ML son correctas.

He estado revisando las contabilizaciones y hasta el momento he detectado que toma el primer centro gestor de la jerarquia en las operaciones COC, GBB, KDM, KDV, PRV, PRY, UMB, pero supongo que hay más, además vi que no siempre pone ese centro gestor, según vi sucede solo en los que derivan a un objeto PA, o que no tienen otro objeto que considere una derivación de un cege.

La afectación se da en la cuentas de variación y en las cuentas de costos de ventas, sin embargo, en estas cuentas realmente no controlamos el presupuesto, pero no me gusta como se ve todo en un centro gestor de una sola compañia, yo no sé mucho de FM y por eso es mi duda de si deberia hacer alguna configuración especial o simplemente con realizar una derivación en la FMDERIVE para que estas cuentas siempre utilicen determinados centros gestores.

Gracias y saludos.

[ArturoSenosain · Accepted solution]

Hi Oscar. Im afraid i could t fully help,I also don't know to much abut FM, just analyze the derivation process (if you plan to work with FM, its a good idea cos FM sometimes is a headache).  If you want to analyze a specific case you can do the following

1. Activate the trace (666322 - Derivation tool in the FM: Trace function)

2. do the close for just 1 material in CKMI. Here, you see the trace and can identify the rule that trigger this stuff. I guess this give you an Idea.

Additional ideas:

+ I think COGS accounts and ML Accounts (pry, prv, prd, COC, kdm, UMB, )  must not be relevant to FM (you dont control budget for this stuff, its not logical). Maybe one of our friends could give us un Idea:

I want to know if we can define a specific account be not relevant to FM? In resume, ML close trigger some account post that must not control budget, but if they are asking for a Fund or doing derivations, is because there is a config that trigger this stuff. I really appreciate if you clarify this idea.

Also, Oscar say this stuff looks related with CO-PA, i mean the FM post is trigger if the account post to PA.

+ Oscar, if you don't want to worry create a derivation for this accounts and set a dummy  fund center (i dont like this solution)

Wish someone clarify your question Oscar, Im also interested!

Arturo.

[ajaycwa1981 · Accepted solution]

Hi Arturo

I think we can define a Commitment Item (Non Check item) for a GL account that does not check budget

Our Big Bro will  be the right person to answer this

Br. Ajay M

[iklovski · Accepted solution]

Hello,

ML documents (and ML as such) are not integrated in FM module. Material ledger documents store no information about FM objects, as their creation/modification has no impact on FM.

If you receive messages for FM, it is linked to the creation of FI (or CO documents) triggered by the operations you perform in ML. All relevant derivations of FM objects for these documents could be controlled through FMDERIVE. It is impossible to exclude a document from writing to FM, but it is certainly possible to derive commitment item, whose nature is not triggering any budget control. It could be a statistical commitment item or a commitment item for relevant financial transaction (40, 50, etc.)

Regards,

Eli

[former_member217621 · Accepted solution]

Hi, thanks for your help.

In this case I made the FM trace and I got that in all Material Ledger post is taken the same commitment item that is used by GR/IR accounts and not the commintment item of the original G/L Account, however we don´t have any derivation in FMDERIVE that made that change, also, if I delete the GR/IR commintment item (in the trace of course) and try the derivation again it will takes the original G/L Account commintment item.

So, I don't understand why the commintment item change, also it impacts in other derivation strategy that depends of the original commintment item.

I hope, that you could understand....

[iklovski · Accepted solution]

Hi,

First of all, let's clarify what are your needs in FM. Which commitment item you want to 'touch', when a document triggered by an action in ML is generated? You are talking of commitment item of GR/IR account: normally, this commitment item should be defined with financial transaction '60', which makes it irrelevant for AVC. Also, what is your definition of 'original G/L account'? Anyway, if you want this commitment item to be derived during ML action, it could be easily arranged with a derivation rule in FMDERIVE. You will have to set this rule with 'overwriting' option, of course, as apparently commitment item of GR/IR has priority in your actual derivation process.

Regards,

Eli