AFM Compliant Project – Kick-Off meetingJune 23, 2009

FOCUS

• Approach on how to make HPS SAP Platform compliant with AFM−Business engagement

−Planning

−Business Requirements Document

−Analysis

−Application Design Document (ADD)

OBJECTIVE• Create/ Change:

− Organizational elements

− Master data

in alignment with AFM standard

• This also calls for change in:− Configuration, and

− Custom objects e.g. Programs, Tables in iGSO

− BW reports and extracts.

CSN

WFM

HPPS

Corp OMSystems

GTS

CRS

SAP PMG(pan HP )

SRS

BPDOSystems

iCost / CCS

Easitool / PRT

Xelus Parts

EDW

TSquare

VCP

DF Vendors

3PL Systems

Other Vendors

SAP APO GATP

(Region 1)

HPS SAP(Region 2)

HPS SAP(Region 2)

Global Parts Supply Chain End-State System Architecture

Eiffel

iReturns

Global Parts Supply Chain systems

BW

Corp OMSystems

GSOHub

PGS

PRS

https

XI

B2B

XI

GPSC Internal/Web

Tools

QSpeak

HPS SAP(Region 1)

Sockeye/B2B

STRATEGY• It is a two-pronged strategy to roll-out AFM

−Changes planned by engaging SAP’s resources• System Landscape Optimization (SLO)

−Changes planned by HP’s resources

FI objects need to be Changed1. Company code (SLO)2. GL accounts (SLO)3. Business Area4. Functional Area5. Profit Centers6. Cost Centers7. Internal Orders8. Tax Codes9. Trading Partners10.Inter-company Customers11.Inter-company Vendors

Other non FI objects which are out of scope• In specific following elements are not in

scope−Controlling Area

−Sales Org

−Purchase Org

−Plants

−Transfer of master data from Polaris to iGSO

BW

• Need to load the new master data from SAP

• Need to identify the hardcoded logic in the Programs, variants, ABAP Routines & Customer Exits, BADI’s and add the new values.

• Assess the impact on Partner systems e.g. CSN, B2B, iReturn, WFM, HP Part store and so on.

What this project is about?

• De-couple the tight integration of all these elements (Bus. Area, Fun. Area, Profit & Cost Center, IOs, WBS, Tax codes, Inter-co Cust/Vendors) in SAP and re-couple with new elements that are AFM compliant.

Is AFM all about data conversion?

• This is not merely about master data conversion

• We need to thrash out:−Reconfigure SAP, wherever required

−Tweak several custom objects

−Beef-up authorization profiles

−Assess the impact on orders in pipeline

−Ensure the settlement of WBS elements and so on.

Changes to multiple master records

• Involves changes to several dependant master records.−E.g. Material Master records contain Profit

Centers, which needs to be replaced with New Profit Centers.

There are close to 9MM records in PN1 alone!!

(Material/Plant combo)

(PN1 is Production server for Americas)

Multiple inter-dependencies • Several dependencies between master

records−E.g. Cost Center Master data, WBS elements

Cost Center master records has Fields:−Business Area

−Functional Area

−Profit Center

apart from Comp code.

There are 500,000 Cost Centers in PN1 alone!

System Integrity• It is difficult, if at all possible, to change

some data elements in configuration.−E.g. Dummy Profit Center, Std. Hierarchy in PCA

• It is not possible to tweak certain master data that is locked in Configuration.

• These elements can not be made AFM compliant.

What about transaction data?

• No changes are envisaged to historical transaction data (existing line-items)

• However, SLO changes (i.e. Comp code, CoA & GL account) do reflect in transaction data, with retrospective effect.

What are the other touch-points?• Authorization profiles/SOX compliance

−Several Master data and organizational elements (e.g. Comp code, Cost Center) are Authorization objects from SAP Security stand-point.

−This aspect needs to be examined further:• In case of phased go-live, how would it impact the

profiles/access to data by users, in countries that are live with AFM and those that are not.

Old Vs. New data

• Need to assess the impact on Reporting/ Consolidation −Users at higher level need to juggle with old and

new data elements until the old data sun-set.

−Users need to look at new objects for some comp-codes that are already live and old objects for other comp-codes that are not live yet.

• Where ‘Planning’ and ‘Budget’ are involved (Cost Centers) balance budget needs to be transferred.

Migration path in the system landscape• New master data is going to be used in the

configuration.−This should not interfere with the current

projects, enhancements and above all, the production support.

• E.g. New Business Areas need to be assigned to Plant/Division

• These changes should not appear in the regular SAP transport path (DVLNTQP)

Challenges on AFM data conversion:

1. Terabytes 50TB of transaction data need to be changed both in SAP and BW

2. Millions of master data need to be changed.3. Hundreds of Custom Objects in custom

programs, Variants need to be reviewed for all the portfolios where we have any of the 13 changing objects are coded.

4. Hundreds of Custom tables need to be reviewed where SLO tool can not change them.

5. Hundreds of security objects need to be reviewed and realigned.

6. Evaluating all interfaces to ensure mapping or reverse mapping.

Challenges on AFM data conversion:

8. Whole process will take 9 to 12 months since the date we start construction.

9. During the full time of development we need Dual environment for all the three regions replicating one DVL, Three NTx and Qxx environment. Keeping Dual environment in synch during the 12 months will be a huge task.

10.Testing for three regions for all 7 portfolios will be a huge task.

Next steps• Assess the impact on SAP bolt-ons e.g. Tax

engines in different countries (Taxware in US)

• Other impacted elements:−Custom Tables, Programs, Function modules,

User-exits, Substitutions−Issues with Hard-coding in ABAP code−Background jobs−Interfaces−User created variants to run the reports−ALE/I doc−Down-stream systems

Next steps Cntd…• Study the impact/changes required

−Derivation of iGSO Business Areas

−Derivation of Profit centers for O&C

−The impact on Revenue recognition on change of GL accounts

These are only examples.

• The count of Custom objects:−Z* Tables = 2035

−Z&Y programs = 4452

−Job Variants = 134, 594

Dependency− Dependency:

• Company codes move from FI1/US1 to gERP

− Otherwise we will end up remapping from AFM compliant master data to SCS master data till FI1/US1 move.

− Availability of fund for SLO services from SAP for Company code and General Ledger accounts;• For Chart of Accounts conversion and company

conversion we need to have SLO in place. Budget is available only in FY11. (This plan is not agreed by FINTRANS project management team, escalated to our managers)

• SLO conversion will take 9 months from the day we engage SAP.

AFM Compliant Project – Kick-Off meetingJune 23, 2009

Backup slides

Impact on other projects

• Need to assess the potential conflicts with other on-going projects

• Need to check if there any Archiving project in the pipeline

SLO Changes to SAP Application• Changes planned to be made by SLO

−Chart of Accounts

−GL accounts (Rider: SLO can not handle 1 to many)

−Company Codes

Scheduled for FY 2011 (issue escalated to schedule for FY 2010)

SLO conversion will take 9 months from the day we engage SAP.

Changes to BW data are not handled by SLO

SLO Changes to SAP Application• Changes planned to be made by SLO

−Chart of Accounts

−GL accounts (Rider: SLO can not handle 1 to many)

−Company Codes

Scheduled for FY 2011 (issue escalated to schedule for FY 2010)

SLO conversion will take 9 months from the day we engage SAP.

Changes to BW data are not handled by SLO

Changes without using SLO• Changes to Organizational elements:

−Business Areas

−Functional Areas

FI objects need to be changed:Changes without using SLO, Cntd.• Create or Change Master Data:

−Profit Centers−Cost Centers−Internal Orders−WBS elements−Secondary Cost-elements−Tax Codes−Trading Partners−Inter-company Customers−Inter-company Vendors

33 April 10, 2023

• Thank you

Importance of having BRD 1• Master data is maintained (create/change)

by Business and they have correct information

• AFM process may involve dispensing with the redundant data and IT will have no clue on it

• In case of GL accounts, (remember we have only one chart of accounts for all comp codes/ countries) there may be several 1:N or N:1 mappings and business alone can take a call. (1:1 is no issue)

Importance of having BRD 2• Where GL matching is not 1:1, especially in

the case of accounts managed on Open Item basis, all open items are to be split and the reposted to new accounts. Only Business knows about it.

• Now is the time to exercise tight control on the creation of new accounts. (For the sake of record there are 64000 GL accounts at the CoA level in PN1 which extends to 485,000 – close to half a million – at comp code level. About 85,000 of these are blocked from posting)

Importance of having BRD 3• There are 500,000 Cost centers and the

issues that are relevant with GL accounts will be relevant here too.

• There are 9MM material masters and the impact of changing the Profit centers needs thorough analysis.

• Only Business is in a position to give the data and the ownership on that rests with them

• This holds good even with transaction data where Inter-co customer/vendor Open items needs to be transferred

Importance of having BRD 4• There will be several configuration changes.

For e.g. tying the Business Areas to Sales Area

• Changes to the derivations of Profit Centers and Cost Centers

• All the above should be viewed in the light of the ‘Phased go-live’. If few countries go-live how to handle authorizations and reports. In the interim reports which are not country-specific needs to be split for countries that went live and those that are not.

Importance of having BRD 5• What is not an ideal date for go-live. E.g.

Quarter-ends (due to SEC reporting). • Country specific tax-engines.

AFM Design Project Revised Time line

46 April 10, 2023

May'09 June'09 July'09 Aug'09 Sep'09 Oct'09

Scoping

Requirement

Analysis

Design

Staffing profile planned for -Design

Q2 '09 Q3 '09Q4 '09

Position May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct

BW analyst 3.5 3.5 3 3 3 3

DBA - ORA 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2

Developer/Programmer/Designer - CFIT 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0

Quality test 1 1 1 1 1 1

SAP Business Analyst 0.5 1.5 3 3 3 2

SAP Business Analyst GADSC 0 0 1 0.5 1 1

SAP Developer GADC 0.5 0 1 1 2 3

Total 6.1 6.6 9.7 9.2 10.7 10.2

49 April 10, 2023

FI objects –not in scope

1. WBS elements (see next slide)WBS elements are not in AFM. If it does not get in to AFM it would be mapped to Internal orders as it is deployed by EDS.

2. Secondary Cost-elements ;No controlling documents are planed to be sent to gERP. So not in scope.

Approach/ Strategy

• Create new master data while the existing master data sun-set.−Existing master data remain in the system but

dormant.

−Reason:• To facilitate the open Sales Orders that already locks in

Profit Centers

• To ensure the validity of the account assigned POs

• To enable the settlement of IOs and WBS elements

These are only some examples.