Skip to Content

Actual Costing/Material Ledger Alternate Price Strategy

Hi experts!

We currently use the material ledger for period end closing and I am new to this process as I just took over closing.  Currently, we when we run multi level settlement we get quite a few negative rates and to fix the issue we do an MR22 to the material and rerun multi level settlement.  I noticed SAP has an automatic error correction for negative rates and will use the fallback strategy.  I'm aware of the steps in the strategy, but was more curious as to what experienced users think about using this check.

I know that these differences go into the Not Distributed line and are not considered in the price calculation.  We have tested running with the automatic error correction on and in some cases it did what we would normally to get the price close to actual with the MR22, but in some cases we were surprised with the results.

Do you recommend checking this or continuing to correct negative rate errors manually?

Thanks in advance!

Add comment
10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

  • Get RSS Feed

3 Answers

  • Best Answer
    Jan 13, 2015 at 01:34 AM

    Hello,

    Regarding fallback strategy, notes 908776 and 579216 are relevant.

    MR22 is only a workaround and it should not be the first choice.

    You should consider to find out the reason for the negative receipt. Whether it's a reverse GR or a incorrectly used movement type.

    Since the system can't handle negative PUP, it can only use fallback strategies.

    I think you should prevent the negative PUP in the first place from business view.

    Thanks & Best Regards,

    Owen

    Add comment
    10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

  • avatar image
    Former Member
    Jan 13, 2015 at 05:18 AM

    Hi

    CKMLCP  multilevel is itself a complex process so before you start this process you must ensure that.....

    Orders are settled correctly

    Goods receipts are not missing

      Goods issues carried out in all orders

    In order to perform multilevel price determination successfully, the following prerequisites must

    be satisfied:

      The materials are not locked.

      Single-level price determination was performed.

    Errors During Material Price Determination

    Even if these prerequisites have been met, you may still experience the following errors during

    multilevel price determination:

    1. The cumulated quantity of a material in the period is zero, which prevents an actual price

    from being calculated.

    2. The actual BOM contains a cycle that is not converged and therefore does not allow price

    determination.

    3. The price for the material is negative.

    4. The price calculated in multilevel price determination for a material exceeds the threshold

    you set.

    5. The sum of the multilevel price differences that would subsequently be debited to the

    material exceeds the threshold you set.

    These errors can be divided into three categories:

      Error 1 is corrected automatically by the system. No action is required on the part of the user.

    The system calculates with an alternative price that is found through a strategy.

      Errors 2 and 3 can also be corrected through special strategies in order to enable price

    determination. When you maintain the parameters for multilevel price determination, you can

    specify the strategy that is to be used under Show Postprocessing Options.

      Errors 4 and 5 occur as a result of the error thresholds you set. These error thresholds must

    be set to enable the errors to be corrected automatically using strategies under Show

    Postprocessing Options.

    So.... best practice is always correct the reasons for anomalies causing this errors and not MR22

    Add comment
    10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

  • Jan 13, 2015 at 01:36 PM

    I understand the best method is to prevent these in the first place, however, we are a large global manufacturing company and several checks are already performed before closing begins and we cannot catch every error ahead of time. We just use the MR22 to get the price close to standard so we can finish closing and have the responsible parties correct the mistake for the next period.

    My main inquiry was instead of having to do an MR22, as it can sometimes be complicated to analyze the data while we are in the middle of closing, if using the automatic error correction is a good process.  I would want to first run it without this error correction to identify the negative rates, and then run again with the error correction to fix the issues and proceed with closing in a timely manner. 

    Add comment
    10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded