This week we are starting a new blog series on the most common SAP Controlling pitfalls and how to avoid them. SAP Controlling 2013 speaker Tanya Duncan is up first.
In my opinion, the most common Controlling pitfall is choosing design alternatives without understanding the ramifications. Controlling is an interesting and, in my opinion, more fun module compared to Finance and other SAP modules. It is more flexible in how you achieve requirements, but it also requires attention to building a robust, sustainable design.
For example, you can account for scrap in product costs in several ways: to name a few... through planned scrap rates in the Bill of Material, by reducing the component quantity in the Bill of Material, or creating by-product scrap materials in the Bill of Material. This decision hinges on several business questions: Is scrap a major component of the product quantity and/or cost? Are there legal or corporate reporting requirements around scrap? Do you need to inventory scrap (value or quantity)? Do you sell scrap internally or externally? Do you consume scrap in to other products?
There is usually not a 'right' option at first glance, but with further understanding of the options, users quickly understand the extra work that can go in to the alternative they chose. In designing an integrated solution, all teams must be involved in the decision and understand the implications. Consultants should be able to explain the pro's and con's for each options and recommend an alternative that will be robust and fulfill business requirements. End-user testing should occur early to uncover complications and issues with the design so there is plenty of time to make adjustments.