![]() ![]() Default logic get’s executed every time data is loaded or entered into the system. Group Reporting has functionality to include a Badi as one of the process steps in the data or consolidation monitor but there is no such thing in as BPC’s default logic. Group Reporting has the ability to include more than 2 dimensions in a validation wh 4. We’ll get back to this on the reporting part. BPC does have far better functionality to build validations reports in the EPM add in. Both have functionality to break down the validations further by movement type and or functional area. Validations and controls don’t differ that much between the two products. This is really a limitation once you are in a more complex environment. Creation of new attributes is not supported. Group Reporting delivered content comes with predefined FS item attributes. One could think of doing management consolidation and management reporting out of the group reporting. Having this far more granular data is a big benefit of Group Reporting. Group Reporting does not seem to have any issues with having 40+ dimensions, where with a standard BPC Consolidation implementation normally you would not go beyond 12. So Reporting Rules, Global Hierarchies, Validations, FS Items etc all need to be manually replicated in all systems. This goes for all configuration that is done in Fiori Apps. The downside is that the master data that is not sourced from S/4 (FS Item, Reporting Item, Movement Type, Functional Area, Posting Level, Document type etc.), Need to be manually replicated across the DTAP landscape. This goes as well for any hierarchies that these dimensions could have. This goes for instance for Profit Center, Cost Center, GL account, WBS element, Customer, Material Number, Vendor etc. Group reporting has the benefit that some master data Items can be sourced from the S4 systems and therefore don’t need dual maintenance or replication. One member in the source can be mapped to an other one in BPC potentially also with the use of “if” formulas. Setting these up is a bit more complex compared to how it’s done in group reporting as you have to manage separate files/worksheets for each conversion. In BPC one has to manage data manager packages that point to transformation and conversion files. Input schedules can be created to Collect data similar to the EPM add in in BPC. The extension ledger also provides additional functionality by means of a single entity being able to post to multiple consolidation units and This is especially relevant for organisations that do not have all of their company codes running on S4 HANA operational accounting. Alternatively the GRDC (group reporting data collection) licence can be purchased to have additional functionality for collecting and reclassifying data. For any data that is not available in an underlying S4 system one has to use a flat file upload or journal upload. On loading the data there is a clear overview of the amount of records loaded and load errors are indicated. The system indicates any unmapped items as a means of pre validation. Standard mapping tables are available in FIORI apps to map GL accounts to FS (Financial Statement) items. There is standard functionality in the data monitor to import the data from S4 (ACDOCA). Group Reporting seamlessly integrates with S4 accounting. Ownership and Consolidation of Investments.In this article I’ll try to compare the functionalities of BPC Standard (as this is the mostly used version) compared to what has so far been develop in Group Reporting version 2022 on premise by taking into account some of the main aspects of the consolidation process. Several versions of BPC have been around since its first release Standard, Embedded, optimized and a Microsoft version. BPC has been around since 2007 since it was bought from Outlooksoft. ![]() SAP group reporting is now 6 years old after its first release in may 2017. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |