cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Help configuring Automatic Generation of Settlement Rule for WBS

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello Experts,

I an new to the PS module so please bare with me.

So we have customer projects, and we only want the higher Level WBS to be settled to COPA, and all lower levels WBSs should settle on the higher one.

The thing is, we can have lower level WBS that can be billing elements, so this is why I am confused about creating a strategy.

From what i understand, this strategy says, that any billing elements (lower or higher levels in my case) will use Settlement profile 30 and settle to profitability analysis (AcctAssCat : 1)

which is fine for a higher level WBs, but what should I do about the lower level WBSs to get them to settle to higher level WBS.??

P.s. i considered using substitution rule, to set settlement rule as WBs or PSG but realized that the field reads from a CO table.

Accepted Solutions (1)

Accepted Solutions (1)

sammar81
Employee
Employee
0 Kudos

Hi Israa,

The settlement for the cost from lower level WBS to superior levels is not a straight forward configuration. It requires implementation of the SAP Note 211324. Implement the steps mentioned in this note and this will allow the settlement of WBS form lower to higher level. You may need help from your technical team to implement this note.

Why you want to keep multiple billing elements? Is there a business case for this? Usually All lower level WBSes are Account Assigned and Top Level is Billing.

If there is no business requirement to keep all the lower level wbs as billing element, I would suggest to keep the L1 as Billing element and anything below that as Account Assigned only. This way all your costs get booked at lower level WBS which can then be rolled up and settled to higher level and from there to PSG or COPA using the settlement strategy.

hope it helps.

Cheers

Sammar

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello,

I asked my technical team, they said that this note can't be applied for some reason.

Unfortunately, it is a business requirement for lower level to be billing items in some cases.

So, If i add the settlement rules for the lower WBSs manually, and also add the PSG settlement rule for the higher level WBS, how will this settle the costs and revenues? Is it by using CJ88 only? will that settle costs and revenues according to the settlement rules?

sammar81
Employee
Employee
0 Kudos

Hi Israa,

I am not sure why your tech team has said so, as it is standard practice to use the sol. provided in the note to settle cost and revenues to higher level WBS.  I have done it in various projects.

Now because you have a business case wherein the lower level wbs also can be a billing as well as an Account assigned element. You can definitely set Settlement rule manually.

To settle the costs and revenues which is accumulated within a project we use CJ88, KO88 is used by CO guys to settle internal orders or Production orders.

CJ88 is for individual processing of projects, you can use CJ8G for collective processing. The amount will be settled as per the settlement receiver defined in the object.

You can do a test run of settlement by putting the values in.

Cheers

Sammar

Former Member
0 Kudos

As far as i remember, ofcourse by going through SAP Help and by my experience, SAP does not recommend having multi level settlement in case of Customer Projects. Its true that if a solution is provided by way of an SAP note, it can be implemented.

As a suggestion, it would be great if you could once again validate the requirement of having multiple billing elements in a project structure. Always, its ideal to have the top level WBS element as the billing element and all the others lower down the structure as Account assignment elements.

Furthermore, automatic generation of settlement rules can be configured using Strategies that you specify based on the operative indicators of the WBS elements. Try to go through SAP Help once.

Hope it helps.

Former Member
0 Kudos

With the RA, we run it for each WBS billing element, so in my case, when we run it for the higher level WBS before settlement, will it aggregate the results for all lower level WBSs or what will happen?

sammar81
Employee
Employee
0 Kudos

This would require prototyping and currently i don't have a system to do that.. My assumption would be that the RA will aggregate the values at each level. Not sum it up at the top level..

You can test that in your sandbox if you have one.. What's the RA Method you guys are using?

Let  me know how it goes..

Former Member
0 Kudos

They want to use the Cost based!

Answers (2)

Answers (2)

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Israa,

You can try adding manually the settlement rules for the lower WBS elements (Consider the higher WBSe as the receiver in this case) and then settle the values posted on the higher WBSe onto COPA. Use cj88 in this case.

Please try this approach and let me know if there are still any concerns.

Regards

Varun

Former Member
0 Kudos

With the RA, we run it for each WBS billing element, so in my case, when we run it for the higher level WBS before settlement, will it aggregate the results for all lower level WBSs or what will happen?

Former Member
0 Kudos

I would suggest you to try that once in your test system and check the report for Project results.

That will give you the clear picture.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Israa,

As you are settling the costs that are incurred on the higher WBSe to COPA, this would mean that you would consider this as an account assignment element and not a billing element. Please use the settlement profile at this level.

The lower WBS elements would however not have the account assignment element tickmarked. Instead the lower WBS elements shall only have the billing elements tickmarked against them.

Regards

Varun

Former Member
0 Kudos

Basically the requirement is all costs and revenues on lower WBSs to get settled to higher WBSs, then the higher level WBS gets settled to COPA.

How can I settle costs and revenues, is it by cj88? does it settle everything?