| Status | |
| Owner | The person responsible for driving this decision and documenting it. Type @ to mention people by name |
| Stakeholders | The business stakeholders involved in making, reviewing, and endorsing this decision. Type @ to mention people by name |
In Syensqo all the companies are created as company codes in the ECC system irrespective of whether the company code is operational or not. This added to the complexity of configuring the system and month-end / year-end closures.
A company is a structure within S4 HANA used to identify intercompany relationships and facilitate legal and management consolidation within the consolidations system and a company code is an organisational unit used in financial accounting representing an organisation’s independent legal entity. In Syensqo, all companies are set up as company codes in the ECC system, regardless of whether they are operational or not. This approach has led to increased complexity in system configuration and has made month-end and year-end closures more challenging. The presence of non-operational company codes adds unnecessary layers to financial processes, complicating the overall system management and potentially leading to inefficiencies during critical financial reporting periods.
Following are the options proposed for the issue
Option A: Follow the As-Is Structure
Option B: Create Company for all the entities and company code only for the operational entities
Clearly describe the underlying assumptions which informed or limited the choices available, or impacted the decision: cost, schedule, regulatory requirements, business drivers, country footprint, technology, etc. Include links as necessary. This section is important because a future change in circumstances might invalidate some key assumptions, which then prompts a decision to be revisited.
Capture any constraints or limitations inherent to the recommended option. This could be aspects which, if changed or removed in future, could cause the decision to be revisited or invalidated. For example, a constraint might be that a new product has significant gaps in important functionality, which caused an older alternative to be recommended. If those gaps are closed in future, this might cause the decision to be invalidated.
Describe the impact of the decision on other aspects such as other processes, infrastructure, other SAP modules or systems, data cleansing and migration, developments, automations, interfaces, in-flight projects, etc.
The decision may translate into business rules which enforce the decision and will require configuration. List these business rules here. For example, "An Outline Agreement cannot be created via the RFQ process. An awarded RFQ can only result in a Purchase Order".
List the options (viable options or alternatives) you considered. These often require a longer explanation with diagrams, or references to other documents (links are best, but attachments are also possible). Use enough detail to adequately explain what you considered so that a project or business stakeholder reviewing this decision will not come back and ask "did you think about...?"; this leads to loss of credibility and questioning of other decisions. This section also helps ensure that you considered enough suitable alternatives rather than just copy/pasting SAP's recommendations.
Describe the option in sufficient detail for a reader familiar with the subject matter to understand it properly
Describe the option in sufficient detail for a reader familiar with the subject matter to understand it properly
Describe the option in sufficient detail for a reader familiar with the subject matter to understand it properly
Describe the option in sufficient detail for a reader familiar with the subject matter to understand it properly
Outline why you selected a position. The best format could be a pro/con table (sample below), but is up to you as the author. You must consider complexity, feasibility, cost/effort to implement, but also ongoing operational impact and cost. You must consider the program principles and explain any deviations in detail. This is probably as important as the decision itself.
Option A | Option B | Option C | Option D | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Criterion 1 |
|
|
|
|
| Criterion 2 |
|
|
| |
| Criterion 3 |
Insert links and references to other documents which are relevant when trying to understand this decision and its implications. Other decisions are often impacted, so it's good to list them here with links. Attachments are also possible but dangerous as they are static documents and not updated by their authors.
