Dear SAPers,
SAP delivered a dedicated component called Dispute Management within FSCM module to manage the differences (i.e., disputes) that arise during clearing of incoming payments & customer invoices. Dispute Management uses the component Case Management as a technical basis to process the dispute cases. The purpose of this post is to explore the enhancement options behind the BADI SCMG_CHNG_BFR_STR_C. This post will focus mainly on the use of this BAdI for management of dispute cases. I’ll provide some recommendations on the architecture of the enhancements and some useful tips how to use the interface of this BAdI efficiently.
This BAdI uses the interface IF_EX_SCMG_CHNG_BFR_STR_C with one method CHANGE. The screenshot below shows the method’s signature:
This BAdI is a generic BAdI within case management framework and it is used in many processes. However, this BAdI can be implemented only once i.e., only one active implementation can exist at a time. The interface uses an importing parameter FLT_VAL to distinguish between various processes that call this BAdI. Typical filter values are:
Screenshot below shows the implementation of this BAdI:
If you want to use this BAdI for implementation of custom logic, I’d recommend using the implementing class for this BAdI only as a controller, whereas the main logic should be implemented in separate global classes. Let me clarify what I mean.
BAdI implementing class ZCL_IM_SCMG_CHNG_BFR_ST as is shown below serves only one purpose: it checks the value of the filter and routes the execution to two other global classes: ZCL_IM_SCMG_CHNG_BFR_ST_DC & ZCL_IM_SCMG_CHNG_BFR_ST_DCD. The first class implements custom logic for dispute cases, the second one for documented credit decisions.
What are the benefits of this approach? Main benefit in my opinion is that the enhancement logic is split into separate classes. Each class follows the single responsibility principle and knows how to handle the objects of one type only. This architecture ensures smaller regression impact and means lower maintenance cost in the long run: if you need to adjust the logic for one component (e.g., dispute cases), you can be sure that other functionalities will not be impacted by these changes.
Screenshots below show how new class for dispute cases was implemented:
If you’re a functional consultant and you analyze the interface of this BAdI for the first time, you might be confused a bit: the method has only one importing parameter IM_CASE and normally you cannot change the parameters of this type. Besides, even if you put a breakpoint in the code and will check the variable IM_CASE in debug mode, you’ll not find a lot of useful details. Screenshot below shows how this parameter looks like during debugging.
The explanation is simple: this method receives an instance of the dispute case. Each dispute case as an instance has certain attributes (i.e., values associated with it) and methods (i.e., actions you can perform in relation to the instance). Let’s see how to access these attributes and what are some useful methods you can use to get / set the values of certain attributes.
If you want to check a value of some attribute, you can use the method GET_SINGLE_ATTRIBUTE_VALUE. It will retrieve the current value of the attribute e.g., who is coordinator of the dispute case. Similarly, you can use another method GET_SINGLE_OLD_ATTR_VALUE to retrieve the value of the attribute before it was changed. See two examples below:
The list of fields for these methods is essentially limited by the list of fields in the following two tables:
(1) Generic case attributes i.e., table SCMG_T_CASE_ATTR.
(2) Application specific case attributes: UDMCASEATTR00 – attributes of dispute cases, UKM_DCD_ATTR – attributes of document credit decision etc.
The first table stores common attributes e.g., case type, external reference, administrative details (who created, who changed and when etc.). The second table stores attributes that are specific to a given case type (e.g., dispute case).
Technically speaking, application specific table depends on the settings of the attribute profile associated with your case. You can check out the configuration in the transaction S_SE3_50000032 or maintenance view SCMGVC_ATTRPROF (SM34).
When you are referencing these variables in the code, you can use different approaches. Depending on your project’s rules: you can reference the variable name directly (e.g., RESPONSIBLE); you can use a constant from the interface IF_SCMG_CASE or you can use the case attribute directly.
You can review the list of available constants in the interface IF_SCMG_CASE via transaction SE24:
There are a few other standard methods to get certain attributes. For example, there are predefined methods to get case type, creating user, creating date, case GUID, last changing date / user. These methods are useful shortcuts and you do not need to re-invent the logic from scratch.
Please note: if you open the dispute case via Fiori App F0702A “Manage Dispute Case” in processing mode, do not change anything and save it once more - it will not trigger the BADI. If you change only dispute case notes and save the case without changing other parameters, it will also not trigger the BADI. I've raised an OSS-incident on this matter and was notified that this is a standard behavior.
There is also a setter method that allows you to change the value of case attributes. You can use the method SET_SINGLE_ATTRIBUTE_VALUE to change the value of the case attribute. Source code below shows how to update the value of the case title:
Big advantage of using this BAdI is that you can update many different attributes within the same enhancement. FSCM module provides a lot of different BAdIs that can be used to update only one specific attribute (e.g., case priority, external references, processor etc.). The screenshot below shows the list of these BAdI in the configuration menu. In my opinion, it is better to use one enhancement to manage custom logic for dispute cases vs. many enhancements that update just one attribute. With one central enhancement you save time around administration / documentation of the WRICEFs and have better visibility / control over the enhancement logic.
Each dispute case has links to a range of disputed objects including but not limited to a business partner, residual item & customer invoice. See the screenshot below:
These links are stored in the table FDM_DCOBJ. See the screenshot below with sample content of the table:
If you need additional information about disputed object for your enhancement logic, you can implement a utility method within BAdI implementing class that will select the object key and parse it into the accounting document line item. Sample source code for this method is provided below.
FDMCO_DISP_RESIDUAL – is a global constant defined by SAP for field FDM_DCOBJ-CLASSIFICATION, which is used to denote the residual item. Type group FDMCO stores the whole list of these global constants that can be used in your enhancement:
I’m mentioning this aspect about disputed objects on purpose here. There is one big limitation with regards to this BAdI. When it is executed in creation mode, the GUID of the dispute case is already assigned, but the table FDM_DCOBJ is not filled yet. Therefore, you cannot access these objects during creation of the dispute case, you can access them only in change mode. If you need to access the attributes from the disputed objects during creation of the dispute case, I’d recommend using BAdI FDM_AR_DISP_COMPLETE. This BAdI is execute before SCMG_CHNG_BFR_STR_C and offers many enhancement options. The method COMPLETE_DISPUTE of the BAdI FDM_AR_DISP_COMPLETE has a parameter T_OBJECTS, which stores the list of disputed objects.
Apart from case attributes & disputed objects you might also need to access the case long texts. Before accessing long texts, you need to know the text ID. You can check-out the settings of the text profile associated with the dispute case in the transaction S_SE3_50000056 (or maintenance view SCMGVC_TEXTPROF, SM34). If you do not know which text profile is being used, check out the customizing of the dispute case type in the transaction S_SE3_50000059 (or maintenance view SCMGV_CTYPE_PPF, SM30). See the screenshot of sample text profile below:
You can re-use the FM BDM_DISPUTE_NOTES_GET to fetch the text associated with dispute case. See the sample source code below:
Text data is stored in the table LT_NOTES. The first line from the text should be skipped. This is automatically generated caption for the text.
Note: there is slight difference in the formatting of the caption line if you’re using S4 HANA system and the Fiori App F0702A “Manage Dispute Case” to maintain long texts. The comparison is in the screenshot highlighted above.
I hope you do net regret the time you spent if you reached the end of this post and you learnt something useful. I’m looking forward to your comments and remarks.
Regards,
Bohdan
SAP delivered a dedicated component called Dispute Management within FSCM module to manage the differences (i.e., disputes) that arise during clearing of incoming payments & customer invoices. Dispute Management uses the component Case Management as a technical basis to process the dispute cases. The purpose of this post is to explore the enhancement options behind the BADI SCMG_CHNG_BFR_STR_C. This post will focus mainly on the use of this BAdI for management of dispute cases. I’ll provide some recommendations on the architecture of the enhancements and some useful tips how to use the interface of this BAdI efficiently.
Overview of the BAdI interface
This BAdI uses the interface IF_EX_SCMG_CHNG_BFR_STR_C with one method CHANGE. The screenshot below shows the method’s signature:
This BAdI is a generic BAdI within case management framework and it is used in many processes. However, this BAdI can be implemented only once i.e., only one active implementation can exist at a time. The interface uses an importing parameter FLT_VAL to distinguish between various processes that call this BAdI. Typical filter values are:
- F_DM – for dispute cases.
- FDCD – for documented credit decision.
Screenshot below shows the implementation of this BAdI:
High-level architecture of the BAdI implementation
If you want to use this BAdI for implementation of custom logic, I’d recommend using the implementing class for this BAdI only as a controller, whereas the main logic should be implemented in separate global classes. Let me clarify what I mean.
BAdI implementing class ZCL_IM_SCMG_CHNG_BFR_ST as is shown below serves only one purpose: it checks the value of the filter and routes the execution to two other global classes: ZCL_IM_SCMG_CHNG_BFR_ST_DC & ZCL_IM_SCMG_CHNG_BFR_ST_DCD. The first class implements custom logic for dispute cases, the second one for documented credit decisions.
What are the benefits of this approach? Main benefit in my opinion is that the enhancement logic is split into separate classes. Each class follows the single responsibility principle and knows how to handle the objects of one type only. This architecture ensures smaller regression impact and means lower maintenance cost in the long run: if you need to adjust the logic for one component (e.g., dispute cases), you can be sure that other functionalities will not be impacted by these changes.
class zcl_im_scmg_chng_bfr_st definition
public
final
create public .
public section.
interfaces if_ex_scmg_chng_bfr_str_c .
protected section.
private section.
endclass.
class zcl_im_scmg_chng_bfr_st implementation.
* <SIGNATURE>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
* | Instance Public Method ZCL_IM_SCMG_CHNG_BFR_ST->IF_EX_SCMG_CHNG_BFR_STR_C~CHANGE
* +-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
* | [--->] IM_CASE TYPE REF TO IF_SCMG_CASE
* | [--->] FLT_VAL TYPE SCMGPROCESS
* | [!CX!] CX_SCMG_CASE_BADI
* +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</SIGNATURE>
method if_ex_scmg_chng_bfr_str_c~change.
constants:
begin of lc_filter,
dispute_case type scmgprocess value 'F_DM',
doc_cred_decision type scmgprocess value 'FDCD',
end of lc_filter.
case flt_val.
when lc_filter-dispute_case.
zcl_im_scmg_chng_bfr_st_dc=>change_dc( im_case ).
when lc_filter-doc_cred_decision.
zcl_im_scmg_chng_bfr_st_dcd=>change_dcd( im_case ).
when others.
return.
endcase.
endmethod.
endclass.Screenshots below show how new class for dispute cases was implemented:
Instance of the case as method parameter
If you’re a functional consultant and you analyze the interface of this BAdI for the first time, you might be confused a bit: the method has only one importing parameter IM_CASE and normally you cannot change the parameters of this type. Besides, even if you put a breakpoint in the code and will check the variable IM_CASE in debug mode, you’ll not find a lot of useful details. Screenshot below shows how this parameter looks like during debugging.
The explanation is simple: this method receives an instance of the dispute case. Each dispute case as an instance has certain attributes (i.e., values associated with it) and methods (i.e., actions you can perform in relation to the instance). Let’s see how to access these attributes and what are some useful methods you can use to get / set the values of certain attributes.
Overview of Getter Methods
If you want to check a value of some attribute, you can use the method GET_SINGLE_ATTRIBUTE_VALUE. It will retrieve the current value of the attribute e.g., who is coordinator of the dispute case. Similarly, you can use another method GET_SINGLE_OLD_ATTR_VALUE to retrieve the value of the attribute before it was changed. See two examples below:
try.
data lv_coordinator type udmcaseattr00-fin_coordinator.
lv_coordinator = im_case->get_single_attribute_value( 'FIN_COORDINATOR' ).
catch cx_srm_framework .
catch cx_scmg_case_attribute .
endtry.
try.
data lv_previous_coordinator type udmcaseattr00-fin_coordinator.
lv_previous_coordinator = im_case->get_single_old_attr_value( 'FIN_COORDINATOR' ).
catch cx_srm_framework .
catch cx_scmg_case_attribute .
endtry.The list of fields for these methods is essentially limited by the list of fields in the following two tables:
(1) Generic case attributes i.e., table SCMG_T_CASE_ATTR.
(2) Application specific case attributes: UDMCASEATTR00 – attributes of dispute cases, UKM_DCD_ATTR – attributes of document credit decision etc.
The first table stores common attributes e.g., case type, external reference, administrative details (who created, who changed and when etc.). The second table stores attributes that are specific to a given case type (e.g., dispute case).
Technically speaking, application specific table depends on the settings of the attribute profile associated with your case. You can check out the configuration in the transaction S_SE3_50000032 or maintenance view SCMGVC_ATTRPROF (SM34).
When you are referencing these variables in the code, you can use different approaches. Depending on your project’s rules: you can reference the variable name directly (e.g., RESPONSIBLE); you can use a constant from the interface IF_SCMG_CASE or you can use the case attribute directly.
data lv_responsible type scmg_t_case_attr-responsible.
lv_responsible = im_case->get_single_attribute_value( 'RESPONSIBLE' ).
lv_responsible = im_case->get_single_attribute_value( if_scmg_case=>if_scmg_case_read~responsible ).
lv_responsible = im_case->get_single_attribute_value( im_case->responsible ).You can review the list of available constants in the interface IF_SCMG_CASE via transaction SE24:
There are a few other standard methods to get certain attributes. For example, there are predefined methods to get case type, creating user, creating date, case GUID, last changing date / user. These methods are useful shortcuts and you do not need to re-invent the logic from scratch.
" We already have a Case GUID at this point, but no entries in DB
data lv_guid type udmcaseattr00-case_guid.
lv_guid = im_case->get_guid( ).
data lv_case_type type scmg_t_case_attr-case_type.
select single case_type
from scmg_t_case_attr
into lv_case_type
where case_guid = lv_guid.
if sy-subrc <> 0.
" BAdI is executed in creation mode.
endif.Please note: if you open the dispute case via Fiori App F0702A “Manage Dispute Case” in processing mode, do not change anything and save it once more - it will not trigger the BADI. If you change only dispute case notes and save the case without changing other parameters, it will also not trigger the BADI. I've raised an OSS-incident on this matter and was notified that this is a standard behavior.
" Method definition
class-methods is_changed
importing
im_case type ref to if_scmg_case
returning
value(rv_yes) type abap_bool.
" Method implementation
method is_changed.
try.
if im_case->is_changed( ) = abap_true.
rv_yes = abap_true.
endif.
catch cx_srm_framework .
endtry.
endmethod.
" Use of the check in the main method
method change_dc.
" Check if dispute case was changed
if is_changed( im_case ) = abap_false.
return.
endif.
endmethod.Overview of Setter Methods
There is also a setter method that allows you to change the value of case attributes. You can use the method SET_SINGLE_ATTRIBUTE_VALUE to change the value of the case attribute. Source code below shows how to update the value of the case title:
try.
im_case->set_single_attribute_value(
im_srmadid = im_case->case_title
im_value = 'Case Title: New Value' ).
catch cx_srm_framework .
catch cx_scmg_case_attribute .
endtry.Big advantage of using this BAdI is that you can update many different attributes within the same enhancement. FSCM module provides a lot of different BAdIs that can be used to update only one specific attribute (e.g., case priority, external references, processor etc.). The screenshot below shows the list of these BAdI in the configuration menu. In my opinion, it is better to use one enhancement to manage custom logic for dispute cases vs. many enhancements that update just one attribute. With one central enhancement you save time around administration / documentation of the WRICEFs and have better visibility / control over the enhancement logic.
Links to Disputed Objects
Each dispute case has links to a range of disputed objects including but not limited to a business partner, residual item & customer invoice. See the screenshot below:
These links are stored in the table FDM_DCOBJ. See the screenshot below with sample content of the table:
If you need additional information about disputed object for your enhancement logic, you can implement a utility method within BAdI implementing class that will select the object key and parse it into the accounting document line item. Sample source code for this method is provided below.
" Definition of the global type
types:
begin of ty_fidoc_key,
belnr type belnr_d,
bukrs type bukrs,
gjahr type gjahr,
buzei type buzei,
end of ty_fidoc_key.
" Definition of utility method
class-methods get_related_doc_key
importing
im_case type ref to if_scmg_case
iv_classification type fdm_classification
returning
value(rs_fidoc) type ty_fidoc_key.
" Implementation of utility method
method get_related_doc_key.
data lv_guid type udmcaseattr00-case_guid.
lv_guid = im_case->get_guid( ).
data lv_obj_key type fdm_dcobj-obj_key.
" Get object key of related payment documlent
select single obj_key
from fdm_dcobj
into lv_obj_key
where case_guid_loc = lv_guid
and obj_type = 'BSEG'
and classification = iv_classification.
" Parse object key into FI document key
if sy-subrc = 0 and strlen( lv_obj_key ) = 21.
rs_fidoc-bukrs = lv_obj_key(4).
rs_fidoc-belnr = lv_obj_key+4(10).
rs_fidoc-gjahr = lv_obj_key+14(4).
rs_fidoc-buzei = lv_obj_key+18(3).
endif.
endmethod.
" Use of utility method in the main method
method change_dc.
" Get the link to linked case object
data ls_fidoc_key type ty_fidoc_key.
ls_fidoc_key = get_related_doc_key(
im_case = im_case
iv_classification = fdmco_disp_residual ).
endmethod.FDMCO_DISP_RESIDUAL – is a global constant defined by SAP for field FDM_DCOBJ-CLASSIFICATION, which is used to denote the residual item. Type group FDMCO stores the whole list of these global constants that can be used in your enhancement:
I’m mentioning this aspect about disputed objects on purpose here. There is one big limitation with regards to this BAdI. When it is executed in creation mode, the GUID of the dispute case is already assigned, but the table FDM_DCOBJ is not filled yet. Therefore, you cannot access these objects during creation of the dispute case, you can access them only in change mode. If you need to access the attributes from the disputed objects during creation of the dispute case, I’d recommend using BAdI FDM_AR_DISP_COMPLETE. This BAdI is execute before SCMG_CHNG_BFR_STR_C and offers many enhancement options. The method COMPLETE_DISPUTE of the BAdI FDM_AR_DISP_COMPLETE has a parameter T_OBJECTS, which stores the list of disputed objects.
Reading of Case Long Texts
Apart from case attributes & disputed objects you might also need to access the case long texts. Before accessing long texts, you need to know the text ID. You can check-out the settings of the text profile associated with the dispute case in the transaction S_SE3_50000056 (or maintenance view SCMGVC_TEXTPROF, SM34). If you do not know which text profile is being used, check out the customizing of the dispute case type in the transaction S_SE3_50000059 (or maintenance view SCMGV_CTYPE_PPF, SM30). See the screenshot of sample text profile below:
You can re-use the FM BDM_DISPUTE_NOTES_GET to fetch the text associated with dispute case. See the sample source code below:
" Get the value of case notes
data ls_return type bapiret2.
data lt_notes type bdm_t_notes.
call function 'BDM_DISPUTE_NOTES_GET'
exporting
im_guid = lv_guid
importing
es_return = ls_return
et_notes = lt_notes .
if lines( lt_notes ) = 0.
return.
endif.
data lv_text type string.
field-symbols <i> like line of lt_notes.
loop at lt_notes assigning <i> where tdobject = 'SCMG_CASE' and tdid = '0001'. " 0001 is a text ID
" Skip the first line
if sy-tabix = 1.
continue.
endif.
" Contcatenate the lines
if <i>-tdline = '' or <i>-tdline na sy-abcde.
continue.
else.
lv_text = <i>-tdline && lv_text.
endif.
endloop.
Text data is stored in the table LT_NOTES. The first line from the text should be skipped. This is automatically generated caption for the text.
Note: there is slight difference in the formatting of the caption line if you’re using S4 HANA system and the Fiori App F0702A “Manage Dispute Case” to maintain long texts. The comparison is in the screenshot highlighted above.
I hope you do net regret the time you spent if you reached the end of this post and you learnt something useful. I’m looking forward to your comments and remarks.
Regards,
Bohdan
- SAP Managed Tags:
15 Comments
| User | Count |
|---|---|
| 5 | |
| 5 | |
| 3 | |
| 2 | |
| 2 | |
| 1 | |
| 1 | |
| 1 | |
| 1 | |
| 1 |
