Skip to Content

SAP BPC 10.1 NW - how to handle changing Account structure

Dear all,

I have a client having this requirement: they have an Account structure which frequentely changes across different years. Basically they reclassify their leaf accounts under different nodes. Therefore they want to be able to run their reports with the historical structure (e.g. balance sheet for 2016 should reflect 2016 hierarchy etc.).

Given that they don't want to create new Accounts every year, I was thinking about different options:

  1. Time dependant hierarchy: it might be an option to save historical versions of the hiararchy, but what happens when I run a comparison report (year n and year n-1). Can I choose a different version of the hiearchy for n-1 or would I see the same structure for both periods?
  2. Making a copy of the current H1 and create H2 for the year n-1. But I guess I will have the same issue in comparison reports (it can work either with H1 or H2)

Have you ever faced this requirement? do you have any other suggestions?

We are working on BPC 10.1 NW

Thanks in advance for your valuable suggestions

Best regards

Francesco

Add comment
10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

  • Get RSS Feed

2 Answers

  • Best Answer
    Feb 23 at 05:19 PM

    TDH - for report you can have only single keydate. To compare you will have to use multiple reports.

    Multiple hierarchies is a disaster in maintenance :)

    Add comment
    10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

    • Hi Vladim,

      thanks for your reply. I agree on multiple hiearchies.

      TDH then is not a solution that will cover 100% my requirements: you can run a balance sheet on one period, but you cannot effectively run comparison report (anyway it's better than nothing)

      I have been thinking about other options.

      1-I could create a separate dimension for leaf level accounts. Account dimension will contain only the reporting level accounts. Leaf accounts will be plugged into reporting accounts through a mapping. if next year mapping changes, reporing accounts will be fed differently. The cons is that I will loose the hierarchical structure of account (and drill down in reports) and I will need an additional mapping

      2-I could create a dummy element under each account node. At the end of the process, I could copy my data in a final version, from the original accounts into the dummies. the cons is that maintaining Account dimension will be harder


      Would anyone see any other options? have you ever been facing this kind of issue?

      Thanks a lot

      Rgds

      Francesco

  • Feb 26 at 08:54 AM

    "they have an Account structure which frequentely changes across different years" - there is something wrong with finance organization :)

    I don't know a real business requirements to frequently change accounts structure! In the real life you add accounts, create new nodes etc... But not moving accounts between nodes! If you compare nodes with different leaf members across years - looks like "creative accounting"!

    Add comment
    10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

    • Vadim Kalinin Francesco Gavarini

      "the final report will not show leaf level accounts. If some auditors ask them to justify one figure, then it's up to them..." - that's a key question! Reclass is fine based on transaction with some supporting document...

      "they will argue that BPC is not the right tool to produce their financial statements" - not the tool to produce strange statements :)