Awaiting Approval for RFx.Issue Implementing 1697416

[Former Member]

Hi Everyone,

I have implemented the 1697416. I have activated the business functionality and have implemented the note. But still the issue is not resolved. It is still in Awaiting approval. Can you please help us if we have to do any additional points along with the Note application.

Thank you in advance.

Regards,

Anupam

[laurent_burtaire]

Hello,

you said "the issue is not resolved".

Is this for documents already created (the ones which were with "Awaiting approval" status) or for new ones (created after note implementation)?

Regards.

Laurent.

[Former Member]

Hello Laurent,

The issue is not resolved for both the documents, the one created before and one created after implementing it.

Please let me know if any additional things need to be done.

Regards,

Anupam

[laurent_burtaire]

Hello,

On one hand, to release RFx status, use SWO1 transaction (method SETRELEASED).

On the other hand, once customizing is done, it should work for new documents. If not, check KBA 2127407 - Documents have still "Awaiting approval" status after the workflow process already finishe...

Regards.

Laurent.

[Former Member]

Thank you Laurent for your reply, but in the note 2127407 troubleshooting is leading me to the same note 1697416.

Actually we are using process controlled workflows and the document is in "Awaiting Approval" status and the workflow status is already completed.

The Business functionality activation of SRM_APF_IMPR_1 has been implemented.

[laurent_burtaire]

Hello,

it does not seem you have read carefully the KBA, otherwise, you should have found KBA 1625513 - Workflow without approval is Awaiting approval status

Regards.

Laurent.

[Former Member]

Hello,

For the bids for us the workflow has been completed and as of note 1625513 it is for the workflows in error state. So I think this note is not applicable

One more thing I need to confirm is
the prerequisites mentioned for the activation is Software solution as SRM_SERVER 701 but we have SRM_SERVER 702. Can this be an issue?

Regards,

Anupam