Agreements are now at the origin of a long-term structured procurement process. But what about individual buying on the concrete basis of an agreement? We are also talking about call-offs. These are specific specific markets, in reference to the framework agreement. How you can determine these searches by analyzing the data, the tables in which they are recorded, and whether the information about goods and invoices is relevant or relevant in this context – this is something for the next post in the series. We are in the process of creating change BDCs in which we do not get the table in which the data is stored. In this blog, I would like to give you an overview of the framework agreements in SAP® in the purchase module. In addition to the design of the concept itself, I give you an overview of its assignment from the point of view of data analysis, that is, SAP® tables and field levels. So if we add types of documents to our table above, the situation is this (this time I omitted the categories of documents and the types of documents that are not relevant to the contract: now that we`ve discovered where the framework agreements are data – in tables where you really think you are standard orders – and how to identify them – depending on the document category and the type of document – let`s look at some aspects of the process. Fig. 4 – Shared order document for a quantity contract in the EKAB table A the exit order is an order (or order request from which an order is generated) with a reference to a framework agreement. This is important because it is good to know that at least for SAP`s marketing authorization statistics® subsequent transactions, such as inflows of goods and invoices, play no role in the first step. In the statistics (i.e. in the view of the booking and also in the view of the data), a quantity or value is displayed as a shared order once the order is placed.
Even if there is no delivery (and/or receipt) or receipt of the invoice, this transfer order documentation initially shows a reduction in the remaining/residual value. This is also shown in the EKAB table, as it contains only the quantity and net value of the order as fields, but no information about receiving or receiving the goods. In value contracts, the quantity of items is often secondary, since the total value of the contract counts. For example, a “facility management” contract of 1,000,000 euros could be concluded with a supplier. This includes the three building cleaning, repair and disposal items. In this case, individual quantities can be attributed in a much less concrete way and an overall structure is more judicious. Another example would be office equipment (pens, post-it notebooks), too “singular” in individual articles to be punished in a framework agreement. The above voucher categories are assigned as attributes to each purchase proof in the EKKO head data table (field: EKKO_BSTYP). This means that the document category allows us to distinguish delivery plans from other contracts.
But how do you distinguish value contracts from volume contracts? This is where the storm table described above comes in: in the standard, the type of contract “MK” is for volume contracts and “WK” for value contracts. However, both types of documents have the same category of “K” document. While document categories are primarily used for categorization, document types are often used to customize, i.e. attributes are assigned to document types, which are then used to organize the process/control process in a system. You can also be in the EKKO table, the field name is EKKO_BSART. I hope that you have enjoyed addressing the issue of framework agreements and that we will soon meet again for the second part of the “Call Agreements”. It`s a little more technical, but here, for the sake of completeness, a screenshot of the document type table with customizing settings in SAP® if they are needed for data analysis purposes.