| Status | |
| Owner | |
| Stakeholders | The business stakeholders involved in making, reviewing, and endorsing this decision. Type @ to mention people by name |
Issue
The purpose of this document is to describe the Delegation of Authority (DOA) feature as it exists across the following platforms: SAP SuccessFactors, SAP Ariba, Salesforce, and Icertis. It outlines how each system implements DOA, including its core functionality, configuration options, limitations, and use cases.
Recommendation
Recommended approach is option A, i.e., DOA matrix and Framework in S4 HANA.
Background & Context
The DOA matrix will be governed by the executive leadership team and the approved group controller or designate.
Employee Organization data will be used to determine DOA Approval.
Assumptions
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.
Constraints
The following transaction type will be subject to DOA approval.
| Functional Area | Transaction Type |
|---|---|
| Sales | Sales Proposals and Contracts |
| Sales Quotations | |
| Contracts < N years | |
| Contracts > N years | |
| Sales Orders | |
| Rebate Contracts | |
| Credit Management | Customer Credit Limits and Rebates |
| Set-up Credit Limit | |
| Increase Credit Limit | |
| Release Credit Limit Block | |
| Bad Debt Write-off | |
| Dispute Management / Write-off | |
| Credit Memo (Returns / Rebates / Contract Write-off) | |
| Procurement & Supply | Supply / Procurement Proposals and Contracts |
| Purchase Requisition | |
| Contracts < N years (Take-or-Pay / No Take-or-Pay) | |
| Contracts > N years (Take-or-Pay / No Take-or-Pay) | |
| Third-Party (Supplier) Expenditure | |
| Non-Order Invoice (NOI) | |
| One-Time Vendor (OTV) | |
| Urgent Payment Requests | |
| Down Payment Requests | |
| Capital Assets | CAPEX Projects and Assets |
| Disposal and Write-off of Fixed Assets | |
| Inventory | Provision of Inventory |
| Inventory Review Write-on / Write-off | |
| Mergers & Acquisitions | Acquisitions & Divestments – Transactions |
| Letter of Intent (LOI) – Non-Binding | |
| Letter of Intent (LOI) – Binding | |
| Treasury | Borrowing or Other Facilities |
| Provision of Corporate or Bank Guarantee |
Impacts
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.
Business Rules
Approval Process Principles
Approval Basis
Approval decisions are determined by the Master data object, like cost centre, WBS, and Business Partner, in the document requiring approval.
Final Approver
Each approval workflow task is routed directly to the Final approver identified in the Delegation of Authority (DOA) matrix.
The ultimate approver must be authorized to approve the entire transactional value within the relevant organizational boundary.
Single-Step Approval
The process will follow a single-step approval approach.
No multi-step approvals will be implemented to minimize potential delays.
Vacant Position Escalation
If the designated approver position is vacant, the system will automatically escalate the task to the next higher filled position in the organizational hierarchy.
Eligible Approvers
The approver may be:
A permanent Syensqo employee, or
A contingent worker, provided they are officially appointed to the relevant position in SAP SuccessFactors.
- Task Centre
- BTP Task Centre will be the central Inbox for all approvals from S4 Hana, Ariba, and iCertis.
Options considered
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.
Option A: DOA matrix and Framework in S4 HANA
Describe the option in sufficient detail for a reader familiar with the subject matter to understand it properly
Option B: DOA matrix and Framework in BTP
Describe the option in sufficient detail for a reader familiar with the subject matter to understand it properly
Option C: DOA matrix and Framework in respective cloud applications
Describe the option in sufficient detail for a reader familiar with the subject matter to understand it properly
Evaluation
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 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DOA Maintainance |
|
|
| |
| Intgeration |
|  Con |
| |
| Employe Replication |  Pro | Con | Con |
See also
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.
