SM_CRM Partner copied to a different partner

[robynhosby]

Hello experts!

We are in the middle of cutover preparation to implement 7.1 ChaRM.  We have a 2-system SolMan landscape. Validation testing was performed in the development system and was successful.  We are performing a mock cutover using the sandbox system to confirm cutover steps.
Transports were imported from the development system to sandbox to test the cutover steps. Mock cutover took place in the sandbox, however processing is not as expected.  

In tcode SM_CRM, in the Details assignment block, when creating a new Request for Change, business partner Change Manager is being copied to the business partner "Approver (Security only)" and then the business partner Change Manager is set to blank.

This did not occur in development system during validation testing.

I did open a issue with SAP, however I'm hoping one of the experts out there can answer before they can!

Steps to Recreate Problem

Entering the partners with no Categorization updated yet...

Selecting SAVE. Partner “Approver (only Security)” is still blank and is correct….

Then, I enter Category 1 (Business Area) and Leave other Categories blank. I do not SAVE yet.

Partner “Approver (only Security)” is filled with Partner Change Manager’s value and Partner Change Manager is set to blank….

Analysis

Trying to thinking of what questions you may have about the config, here is what I can think of so far....

Access Sequence - Partner "Approverl (only Security)" is assigned to partner function SMSO0001. It has no Access Sequence assigned.

BRFplus Rules -  There are rules assigned to determine partner SMSO0001 (Approver). However, the rules only determine when Category 2 (Scenario) is set, not when Category 1 (Business Area) is set.   The error takes place right after the Category 1 is filled in, so it makes me think this is the issue, but the BRF rules are not set to check for that category code. 

There is no value set when the Category is not one of these values. That worked when testing in the dev system, so I do not think that is the issue.

Partner UI Definitiions

In the UI, partner Change Manager is defined as Partner 3 and partner "Approver (only Security)" is assigned to Partner 4.

Those match the values in “Specify Partner Function Display in Transactions”...

Rule Policy for Approval Management

This rule does exist to set partner SMSO0001, but only when Category 2 is set to Emergency. When recreating the problem, Category 2 is not set yet. Only Category 1 is.

How Imports were done from Development System to Sandbox for Mock Cutover

In case it matters, here is how I imported some of the changes from Development system to the test system.

Categorization -  I enabled Schema Imports via RFC in IMG. Then, used the Import button in UI to import. Then re-activated.

Approval Procedure Rule Policy - The Approval Procedure Determination was transported from development to sandbox using tcode CRMD_ERMS_TRANS_RULE.   The resulting Transport of Copies was imported to sandbox.

I hope one of you can help me resolve this quickly! Let me know if you need more details on the config!!

[robynhosby · Accepted solution]

Well, I found out what is causing this issue! It doesn't make sense and sounds wacky to me, but it is due to the Parties Involved Assignment Block being Direct. It does not occur when that block is Lazy or Hidden!   Direct was causing the BRFplus rules to be overriden and was clearing the Change Manager field after copying it to the Sold To Party.  Why would a Direct AB impact that and Lazy and Hidden not impact it?!    Anyways,if this occurs in production after cutover, I will set that AB to lazy first to correct. I was not able to find an OSS note for this. I provided SAP with detailed screen shots and requested an OSS note.   Weird!

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Robyn,

thanks for coming back with the solution, interesting read.

If an assignmentblock is lazy or hidden, its code ist not performed (for example the DO_PREPARE_OUTPUT and ON_NEW_FOCUS methods).

I can only guess that they do something that results in the problem you mentioned.

Best Regards,

Christoph

[robynhosby · Accepted solution]

Hi Christoph,

Interesting.  Well, SAP is looking into since it shouldn't cause the issue I have. If they provide a permanent resolution or an OSS note, I'll post it here.

[robynhosby · Accepted solution]

Found out the issue was happening in hidden/direct because of the custom partner determination had two partner functions that were assigned to the partner function category 0008 (Person Responsible):  00000014 Employee Responsible and SDCR0002 Change Manager.   Only one partner function for partner function category 0008 is permitted per transaction, but it doesn't give you an error when you configure it. I removed the 00000014 partner function from the partner determination procedure and it works now.

[robynhosby]

Hello! More investigating lead me to find that the reference partner function (ref_partner_fct) is not being determined correctly in ZSOLMANPRO.  It works  in ZSOLMANREQU though.  Does anyone know what determines that?

Thanks!!!!

[robynhosby]

I was able to get ZSOLMANREQU working this weekend, however ZSOLMANPRO still isn't. I have compared the UI fields and the business role config. I haven't found any differences yet.  Does anyone happen to know what tables and assocated tables are used in the business roles so I can compare them at the table level? Hoping to save some analysis time.

[robynhosby]

Still working on this issue.   Looks like the issue is the reference partner function (REF_PARTNER_FCT) is being determined incorrectly in the sandbox (mock cutover). The working system (Dev) uses Employee Responsible (partner 00000014), but sandbox finds Change Manager. 

What would cause this difference? What determines the reference partner?

[robynhosby]

The Sold To Party is still being overwritten with the Change Manager and the Change Manager field is being cleared.

I compared the the sandbox system and the dev system in debug. In Sandbox, the Sold To Party starts it's determination based on the Change Manager and the determination starts much soon than in Dev system. It is processed when the Categorization 2 field is processed. 

However, in Dev, where the scenario works successfully, the Sold To Party starts it's determination based on the Employee Responsible (partner 00000014) and the determination starts on the Save, not on the categorization processing.

Again, I compared the partner determination settings and other relevant configuration. I have found no differences so far to explain the differences in processing.

Any thoughts out there???

[robynhosby]

I still working with our Basis team to get WTS access for SAP to debug the UI.  In the meantime, does anyone have any thoughts on what else I should check?

[artemzhegalin]

Hi, Robyn.

Does this error appear only with "testing Change Manager" user?

BR,

Artem

[robynhosby]

Hi Artem,

No.  It occurs with other users in the Change Manager businuess partner.  It also occurs with other values are selected in the Catorization fields.   The Sold To Party is overwritten with the Change Manager and the Change Manager field is cleared.

[artemzhegalin]

Have you checked UI configuration to be confident about fields with change manager BP?

In your case Change Manager field should be HEADER_FCT_03

BR,

Artem

[robynhosby]

Hi Artem,

Yes. Change Manager is set to //BTPARTNERSET//AICRM/HEADER_FCT_03.

[rishav54]

Hi

Can you try to use partner function SDCR0003 which is meant for the change advisory board.

Also see the Abbr for Approver and Change advisory board with the relation.

Can you make in sync of that, please recheck your development system once if these are same.

Regards

Rishav

[robynhosby]

Hi Rishav

Everything worked correctly through Validation testing. I have compared the partner config in dev and in the sandbox (used for the mock cutover). So far, I have found no differences. I checked the time stamps on the transports to confirm everthing imported to sandbox in the right order. Things look correct so far.

I reactivated the BRFplus and Approval rule policies. No sure I changed, but now the Sold To Party (not the Approver partner) is being updated with the Change Manager. There is no Access Sequence for the Sold To. The BRFplus rules populate the Sold To.  The Change Manager is cleared after it is copied to the Sold To.  I set a breakpoint in the BSP method that sets the Sold To partner, but it is not executed.

I'm still debugging but am very puzzled.  Anyone have any thoughts on what else I should check?

[Former Member]

Hello Robyn,

AS far i understood is ...even if you have created user called Approver. untill unless you assign roles of change manager, you will not be able to see complete approval procedure getting assigned to Approver(security only).

regards

Anand

[robynhosby]

Hi Anand,

It's not role related. For some reason, the partners are being copied to different partners in the UI.