Neler Yeni
Hoş Geldiniz,

SAPOfis Türkiye üzerinde yer alan içeriklere erişim sağlayabilmek, projelerinizde karşılaştığınız sorunlara birlikte çözüm üretebilmek adına üye olunuz. Unutmayalım ki, bilgi paylaşıldıkça değer kazanır.

SAP BLOG SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA

SAP Blog

Kayıtlı Üye
Katılım
22 Ara 2017
Mesajlar
317
Beğeniler
3
Puanları
6
#1
Let’s learn on new changes in SAP Controlling module, from ECC to S/4 HANA.

General

  1. In ECC, any CO-related postings were updated in both the line item table (COEP) and total tables (COSP for primary/COSS for secondary).

In ECC

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


With SAP S/4HANA Finance and Controlling, the totals tables are no longer required because data can be aggregated from the line item table, which is also used for reporting. This avoids data redundancy. All actuals data continue to be stored in the line item table COEP.

Two new tables—COSP_BAK and COSS_BAK—have been created to store planned data related to primary and secondary costs, respectively.

In S/4 HANA

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA
SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


2. Actual data of COEP (WRTTP = ‘04’) is now stored in ACDOCA. Actual statistical data of COEP (WRTTP = ‘11’) is stored in ACDOCA using additional columns for the statistical account assignments and in COEP for compatibility access. Actual data needed for long-term orders/projects from COSP_BAK, COSS_BAK is stored in table ACDOCA.

This ensures for primary postings that there is a single source of truth, such that all general ledger items with an assignment to cost centers, orders, WBS elements, business processes, or CO-PA characteristics are treated as one data record which is enriched with the relevant profit center, functional area, segment, and so on.

For secondary postings this ensures that all sender-receiver relationships that are triggered by allocations, settlement, and so on are captured in the universal journal along with the partner profit centers, functional areas, and so on that are affected by the allocation.

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


CO-CEA ( Cost Element Accounting )

  1. Cost elements are no longer required in SAP S/4HANA Finance because they are created as G/L accounts using Transaction FS00 now they are part of the chart of accounts. A new field for the cost element category has been introduced in the G/L master record. Cost elements can no longer be maintained in a time-dependent manner.

In ECC

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


In S/4 HANA

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


  • New reports such as the trial balance will display all postings (primary and secondary) by account.

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA




2. The default account assignment is maintained using Transaction OKB9 and not in the traditional cost element master data.

In ECC

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


In S/4 HANA

Only allow the option of OKB9 assignment.

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


3. G/L account mapping of CO real-time integration with the new G/L is now obsolete. Secondary cost elements are now created as G/L accounts and are part of the chart of accounts. On the configuration side, document types that you want to use for posting in CO need to be defined and require the indicator G/L to be set. These document types need to be linked to the CO business transaction via a variant. The fiscal year variants of all controlling areas used by an organization and their assigned company codes must be the same.

In ECC

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


In S/4 HANA

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


CO-CCA / CO-OM ( Cost center Accounting / Internal Order Management )



  1. CO-OM planning, P&L planning, and profit center planning are now covered by SAP BPC for S/4HANA Finance (known as Integrated Business Planning) (SAP Note 2081400).

If the business does not want to use SAP BPC for S/4HANA but need to use classic FI-GL and CO-OM planning functions instead, can continue to use the classic planning transactions.

  • FI-GL Planning – SAP Note 2253067 describes how to reactivate
  • Profit Center Planning (classic) – SAP Note 2345118 and 2313341 describe how to reactivate
  • Cost Center Planning by Cost Element – no longer in the menu but can be used in – KP06
  • Order Planning by Cost Element – no longer in the menu but can be used in SAP S/4 HANA
  • Project Planning by Cost Element – no longer in the menu but can be used in SAP S/4 HANA
  • Project Planning Overall – no longer in the menu but can be used in SAP S/4 HANA
  • Note that it is also possible to run the two solutions in parallel. SAP Note 2061419 describes how to retract data from SAP BPC for S/4HANA Finance
  • Transaction KEPM (Profitability Planning) supports both account-based CO-PA within the universal journal and costing-based CO-PA and is still on the menu.

In ECC planning

G/L Planning: GP12N / GP12NA

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


Project Overall Planning: CJ40 / CJ42

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


Cost Center Planning: KP06/KP07

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


Project planning: CJR2/CJR3

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


Order Planning: KPF6/KPF7

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


Profit centre Planning: 7KEP/ 7KE1-6

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


Profitability Planning: KEPM

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


CO-PCC ( Product Costing Controlling )

  1. In ECC used base planning objects to store cost estimates that can be included in cost estimates for projects, sales orders and so on as items of type B (base planning object). The creation of cost estimates with reference to base planning objects is no longer supported in SAP S/4HANA.

Instead, it is recommended to use transaction CKECP to prepare ad-hoc cost estimates and CKUC to prepare multilevel material.

In ECC

KKE1

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


In S/4 HANA

CKECP

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


2. Activation of Material Ledger is a mandatory requirement with SAP S/4HANA. And activation of Actual costing is optional in S/4 HANA.

SPRO –> Controlling –> Product cost controlling –> Actual Costing / Material Ledger à Activate Material ledger for valuation area.

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA




Execute OMX3

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


Then to production start-up, execute Transaction code: CKMSTART

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


  • Separate currency customizing of Material Ledger (transactions OMX2 / OMX3)

Is required, Material Ledger is acting on a subset of the currencies

defined for Financials. There is no default Material Ledger Type ‘0000’ anymore.

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA




  • It is not allowed to use an ML Type that references to currency settings defined in

FI or CO (flags ‘Currency Types from FI’ resp. ‘Currency Types from CO’). Instead, the user has to define explicitly the currency and valuation types that are relevant for Material Ledger.

Material Price Analysis (Transaction CKM3):

  • Plan/Actual Comparison is removed in new CKM3

In S/4 HANA

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


  1. Cost of goods sold (COGS) postings is captured at the time of the goods issue from the warehouse. New functions are available to split the COGS posting to multiple accounts in accordance with the relative weight of the assigned cost components. Functions to support the matching principle between revenues and COGS are planned.

In ECC

At PGI posting FI Posting based on the accounts defined in OBYC setting as per Valuation Class of the Material.

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


In S/4 HANA

Financial Accounting (New) –> General Ledger Accounting (New) –> Periodic Processing

–> Integration –> Materials Management –> Define Accounts for Splitting the Cost of Goods Sold

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA




4. Production order variances can be split to multiple accounts to separate scrap, price variances, quantity variances, and so on.

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


CO-COPA ( Profitability Analysis )

  1. In ECC it was advised to use costing-based CO-PA rather than, account-based CO-PA. The main reason for this was:
  • To generate the contribution-margin report with a breakdown of their cost-of-sales down to the cost components level for each cost bucket
  • To get a production variance report by variance categories
  • To get the breakdown of the individual cost buckets beyond the total value that was posted to the general ledger.
  • This functionality was not available in COPA account base before and therefore companies used Cost Base COPA.

The biggest issue with Cost based was the reconciliation effort because cost base COPA did not use a direct alignment to the general ledger accounts.

With SAP HANA primary database it aligns COPA structure with the general ledger. Due to this, it is now advised companies to use account-based CO-PA and not costing-based CO-PA.

In ECC

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


In S/4 HANA

SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


SAP Controlling (CO) Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA


CO-ABC (Account Based Costing)

ABC using delta versions is not supported in SAP S/4HANA (for more details see note 2270408 – Activity-Based Costing).



Reference: Simplification List for SAP S/4HANA 1709 Initial Shipment Stack, Document Version: 1.01 – 2017-09-19

Other Related Blogs :

SAP Finance Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA | SAP Blogs : SAP Finance Sub modules comparison from ECC to S/4 HANA

Okumaya devam et...
 
Üst