Report at lower level

[former_member241136]

Hi All,

I have one query on Posting level 20.

We had a below scenario for our company.

Consoliadation hierarchy A

Consolidation Group A (top level)

A. Consolidation group B(aluminium)

a. Consolidation Group A

Consolidation unit C

Consolidation unit D

B .Consolidation group C(Steel)

b. Consolidation group B

Consolidation uniit E

Consoliation Unit F

Now when a manual posting is between Consolidation unit C(conunit) and Consolidation E(parner conunit) for interunit elimination which are under different groups with PL20, the report is showing results under consoliation group A(top level) and not under congroup B and when the same posting is done under Conunit C and D or conunit E or F it shows under aluminum or Steel.

Same is case of total records when the report is run in standard mode.

But when the total records report is run at NONE level in UCWB it shows report at both the levels i.e at top level as well as lower level.

Please provide your suggestions...

Thanks and Regards,

VM

Edited by: VM2727 on Feb 5, 2012 7:00 AM

[former_member241136]

Hi Dan,

Thanks for your prompt reply and now i understood that it cannot be viewed at lower level.

Regards,

VM

[Former Member]

Hi

[http://help.sap.com/saphelp_erp60_sp/helpdata/en/62/f7e73ac6e7ec28e10000000a114084/frameset.htm]

Best regards,

anka

[dan_sullivan]

The results you mention are correct.

With standard mode, and in the query, the consolidation logic of the BCS virtual cube is determining correctly that there is no interunit elimination (PL20) for cons group B or C and that only for cons group A are the eliminations relevant.

In the totals with reporting mode NONE, the logic is not considered and raw data of the eliminations records regardless of their relevancy is provided.

There is nothing to correct in this case unless the hierarchy is not correct.

[Former Member]

Dear VM2727,

Do you use model consolidation: company / profit center?.

If you use this model we must use a charateristisc 0BCS_CGPCTR with Variable Top Group 0N_CGPR7 and characteristisc 0SEM_CGCOMP with variable 0N_CG_10 in the filters in Query.

If you use only model company (without profit center) we must use only 0SEM_CGCOMP with variable 0N_CG_10 in the filters in Query.

Ciao

Anka

Edited by: Anka on Feb 6, 2012 12:05 PM

Edited by: Anka on Feb 6, 2012 12:06 PM

[former_member241136]

Hi Dan,

Thanks for your prompt reply.

So is it not possible to have report visible at CONgroup B or Congroup C level?

The report is run via BEX analyzer and we are having restriction of group account and subitem in that row.

Please provide your suggestions.

Thanks and Regards,

VM

Edited by: VM2727 on Feb 7, 2012 4:16 AM

[dan_sullivan]

It is possible to report at cons group B and cons group c levels but only the eliminations for that group will be includede in the report unless you choose the reporting mode of NONE. In other words the consolidated results for cons group B will only include eliminations between cons units C and D. This is typical consolidations accounting and therefore the correct results. If not, then the cons groups should be changed or a new cons group created with the cons units C and E so that the eliminations are included.

If you are more specific as to what you would like to see, better suggestions may be provided.

Edited by: Dan Sullivan on Feb 7, 2012 8:03 AM

[former_member241136]

Hi Dan,

Thanks!!

I mean to say the query on which report is based is having some restrictions for Row in which results are to be seen at lower level for interunit elimination(PL 20).

We can see the results at Con group A(top level) for conunit D with all the entries i.e PL00,PL10 and PL20 but when the same report is run with parameters to Congroup level B (conunit D is under congroup B) we cannot see PL20 entries at congroupB level ,they are blank.

The 'None" reporting mode issue comes in Total records in UCWB.

When we run total records at Congroup level A or B it shows all the entries at both the levels when run with NONE reporting mode but when we run at reporting Mode "standard" we are not able to see the results at Congroup B for that PL 20 entries.

Hope it clarifies.

Thanks and Regards,

VM

[dan_sullivan]

There is nothing wrong with the results you are getting and this is how it should be.

The eliminations for cons unit D are not included in the report for cons group B because the trading partner is not within cons group B and therefore it is not considered to be interunit relationship until the higher level, cons group A, where all cons groups are included.