Reversal Goods Movement with HU and WM from Usage Decision

[Former Member]

Hi Experts,

Please help me to give solution for my case below:

My company create PO for material with HU + WM. After GR PO, inspection lot created and quantity receipt with stock type Q. Using usage decision, we transfer from quality stock to unrestricted stock (this step done successful). But the problem came, when we want to cancel material document of stock transfer from quality stock to unrest stock due to some mistake in PO data. I already searching for SAPNOTE 175842: Inspection lot: Reversal of goods movements from usage decision, but this SAPNOTE not working for inspection lot for Handling Unit.

My requirement, i just want to cancel Goods Movement that already executed for that PO.

Could you help me to find another SAPNOTE to reverse this Goods Movement or Give me some suggestion, so i can cancel this document.

Thanks and Regards,

Subandi Widjaya

[former_member42743]

Sorry.  Not supported.  Reversal is not possible using that note when using HU's.  As a result, once the material is posted to UR via the usage decision it is done.  There is no going back.

You have to write off the material and create a new PO.

There is no additional SAP note to the best of my knowledge.  I would suggest you contact SAP and at elast make them aware of the desire for this ability.  The more people that complain, the more likely SAP will do something someday.

Craig

[former_member183155]

Hi Craig S,

Is there any solution to this problem these days ? We encounter similiar problem when we cancellation of usage decision with HU.

What is your recommend related with this issue ?

Regards.

M.Ozgur Unal

[former_member42743]

Don't use HU's?    I hate working with them anyway!

In all honesty, the need to fully reverse an inspection lot should really be a rarity.  An ongoing issue with having to do this is a clear sign of other, probably more severe issues.  There can be a multitude of underlying root causes.  I'd say if this need arises more than twice a year in any given plant, there is an issue.

Some examples:  improper training, lack of attention to detail, improper work aids, poor supervision and oversight, failure to implement best practices, lack of control of physical paperwork, failure to automate and add technology such as RF technology and RF guns, overworked staff, use of temps, underpaid employees who don't care, etc. etc. etc..  Usually it's not just one thing but a number of these and probably many others. 

It's one reason that I don't think SAP considers this a high priority since it really shouldn't happen to begin with.   I suspect the only reason you have the one note with a program to do this anyway is becasue a very influential customer of SAP ran into a particular problem years ago and either SAP or a consulting partner wrote that program for that one instance and client.  It was never meant for widespread use or to be readily available to users.   It has pretty much been untouched ever since it was created.  It kind of goes against what SAP is meant to do.  I almost believe their concept is to make corrections painful so no one wants to repeat them and corrective actions are made. .

Now I know there are exceptions with auto UD's and at-risk materials, etc.etc.. but when you really think about it, at the point of the UD the following steps should have been performed:

- shipment or production paperwork reviewed by receviers or production personnel

- someone pulled samples to be reviewed or has produced paperwork to be reviewed.

- someone tested samples or reviewed paperwork

- some type of decision was made to accept.. etiher testing was recorded or COA's reviewed, or production paperwork was reviewed, etc..

- Finally a UD was made by someone, or an Auto UD.

If all those things happenned, and THEN you had to reverse a UD and start over?   Probably several people screwed up.

So yes.. to fix it, you need to unpack it, write it off or make manual transfers and start over again basically.  Do that enough times and somebody will probably start to get ticked off.   But writing a program to reverse it, will never fix the actual problem.

Craig