In my company we have a scenario where one purchasing org serving 2 co.code. This has been set up nicely in ECC, and we suppose to have the same scenario in SRM as well.
First, I do this:
a. Create company A and company B
b. Create org unit below A which is linked to central purchasing org X in backend,
c. Making sure that attribute BUK (Co.code) A, B assigned to purchasing org X.
d. Create org unit below purch org X, and linked to purchasing group Y in backend,
e. Create person Z below purchasing group Y, the attribute BUK of A, B is inherited to him.
Using user id Z I make a test, create PO using cost center in co.code B, and it works well, the PO created passed to backend using purch org X, co.code B
When testing creating PO using cost center in co.code A, it fail. It seems that somehow co.code B is defaulted in PO, and it trigger error saying cross-company purchasing not allowed (I think because I'm using PO with co.code B to charge Cost center in A).
At first I hope that setting BOTH co.code for the purchaser will lead SAP to use location to derive the co.code, but I was wrong. SAP still take the FIRST co.code it found in the attribute.
Then, I plan to use BADI for document change; and to my suprise there is no way to change the co.code in the BADI. So I'm stuck in here as well.
Lastly, I did this:
a. Moving purch org X (and all below, including purch group Y and person Z) to the root,
b. I remove the attribute BUK in the purchasing org
With this I hope that SAP cannot find the co.code from attribute and for the last resort derive the co.code from the location.
Then when creating the PO, I got error message that SAP cannot derive co.code, and cannot continue 😔
Then I'm in dead end now. Is it really NOT possible to have central purchasing in SRM? This seems to be wrong. I mean as SRM is targeted to make procurement simple and regulated, it sure SHOULD think about central purchasing. Even in ECC we can have a central procurement serving 2 company codes.
Or is there any other way? Appreciate if someone can shed some light on this.