Product Information
What you cannot do with an S/4HANA conversion project
Most of the blogs and vast amount of documentation existing in the SAP community focuses on prerequisites, steps to follow, recommendations and advices for a successful transition to S/4HANA.
But what about the things we cannot achieve during a conversion project? Or the things which cannot be done in a specific phase of the conversion project or afterwards, in the converted and live S/4HANA system?
In this blog, lets analyze those aspects which cannot be achieved during or post a conversion project.
Please note that not all the items from this blog can be found in the Simplification List or in the Readiness Check.
1. You cannot identify all the data inconsistencies in the source system.
There are standard reports available in the ECC system for consistencies checks, which have been available for a while and most of them focus on generic checks and not checks specific for the S/4HANA conversion. In order to identify all the data inconsistencies relevant for the S/4HANA conversion, a full conversion cycle must be executed, using as recent copy of Production. This is also one of the reasons the conversion project follows an iterative approach.
One of the consistency checks reports specifically targeting S/4HANA conversion projects is provided via note 2755360. However, this report is not capturing all the data inconsistencies as the programs executed during the data migration.
Updates:
- with note 2887318 an additional program for GL errors correction is provided. This program can be used along with note 2714344 to support pre-conversion error resolution
- note 2896400 provides a series of consistency checks in the area of Asset Accounting, targeting specific S/4HANA conversion related errors and which can be executed in ECC environments. Note 2714344 can also be consulted for asset related errors and support the resolution.
These additional programs/ notes, increase considerably the % of data inconsistencies which can be addressed before the conversion cycle.
2. You cannot implement document splitting or a further accounting principle/ledger during the conversion project.
The conversion to S/4HANA from classic GL, is similar to the New GL migration scenario 1 – Merge of Classic GL and parts of Scenario 2 (Scenario 1 and additional merging of PCA and SPL). The implementation of document splitting and of a further accounting principle are available after the conversion to S/4HANA, as subsequent implementation projects, starting with release 1610 – for the additional accounting principle and release 1709 for the subsequent document splitting. For additional information, including limitations, please see Implementation of a Further Accounting Principle and Subsequent Implementation of Document Splitting.
3. You cannot switch from the accounts approach for parallel valuation to the ledger approach for parallel valuation.
This transition scenario is currently not available – not during the conversion project, nor as a subsequent project in S/4HANA.
The transition scenario is available in ECC at the moment, so it can be done before the conversion project, as part of the NEW GL Migrations scenarios. For a complete list of scenarios available in ECC as part of New GL Migration, please see Migration to New General Ledger Accounting.
4.You cannot change the relationship/assignment between existing company codes and controlling areas.
This does not include creation of a new controlling area for new legal entities or the assignment of a new Controlling Area to a company code which was not using the Controlling component before. Such project can be executed only in the ECC system, before the conversion project, with the support of the team previously called SLO and currently called DM<.
5. You cannot introduce an additional currency.
As part of the S/4HANA conversion, only the existing currencies are taken over in the environment. It is possible to introduce a new currency, after the conversion, starting with release 1809. The new currency will be available only in the General Ledger component as it will be introduced only in the Universal Journal (only table ACDOCA). All the documents will be enhanced with this additional currency and all the documents pertaining to the current fiscal year will have balance zero ensured.
As this new currency will not be available in table BSEG, it will also not be reconciled for components like Asset Accounting, Material Ledger and Controlling.
During conversion or after – as part of the separate project, it is also not possible to:
- Introduce a company code currency or a controlling area currency
- Introduce a currency type for Transfer Pricing
- Convert an existing currency type
For these specific requirements, it is still possible to execute a project in the ECC system with the support of the team previously called SLO and currently called DM<. For additional information, please check SAP Help or note 2334583.
6. You cannot use a combination of accounts approach and ledger approach for parallel valuation.
In ECC, it was possible to use such set up. In order to be able to use New Asset Accounting, which is a pre-requisite for S/4HANA, you must map the parallel valuation in New Asset Accounting with either ledger approach or accounts approach in the General Ledger application.
7. You cannot use alternative fiscal year variants with different “beginning/end dates” when using the ledger approach for parallel valuation, for the representative ledgers in a ledger group.
This is a requirement for New Asset Accounting. Please check note 2220152 for a work-around and also the restrictions from note 844029.
8. You cannot share the same chart of depreciation for company codes with different ledgers assignment or different currencies assignment.
This was possible in Classic Asset Accounting but not possible in New Asset Accounting, as GL and Asset sub-ledger will be completely reconciled and in sync. As a solution, you can create a new Chart of Depreciation and change the assignment of the company code to the new chart of depreciation. In order to achieve this, please raise an OSS incident with SAP Support. There is a pilot available for such requests.
9. You cannot use the same chart of depreciation, for new company codes created after conversion, where a Parallel Ledger in source system has different currencies than the Leading Ledger.
In ECC, it was possible to have a Parallel Ledger with a different currency assignment than the Leading Ledger. In S/4HANA, the non-leading ledgers inherits the parallel currencies from the Leading Ledger. This might require an additional chart of depreciation, as the migrated ones cannot be used (it will not have the depreciation area required for the additional parallel currency in the non-leading ledger).
10. You cannot do a partial Finance data migration – migrate selected company codes, ledgers or partial transactional data.
In case certain company codes are not required from business point of view, in order to disable some configuration checks during conversion, you can mark them as ‘‘template‘‘, as per the note 2159452.You can also consider deleting a non-leading ledger, in specific business contexts. You will have to open an OSS incident with SAP Support to get access to a pilot note. For selective data migration from ECC to an already LIVE S/4HANA OP system, please see the scenario Company Code Specific Conversion to S/4HANA with details in the note 2522155. This scenario can be executed only with the involvement of the team previously called SLO and currently called DM<.
Conclusion
For a smooth transition to S/4HANA, carefully consider what is the level of transformation you want to achieve, what is your current set up in the source ECC system and what are the current conversion tools and programs designed to do. A conversion project could be a great experience and bring lot of simplifications for your business and customers, given the right expectations are set.
Let me know what you think in the comments below!
Hello,
Great article, first of all!
That means, if I have a customer, for example, having classic-GL, but wanting to switch to ledger approach, the only possibility would be a new-GL implementation project (ledger approach) before transition to S/4HANA, right?
Or, not doing a conversion at all, but start new, greenfield.
Cheers,
Daniel N.
Hello Daniel,
Yes, if the customer is having classic GL, is using the accounts approach for parallel valuation and they want to transition to the ledger approach in S/4HANA, the only option currently available is to do a New GL Migration project before the conversion or do a greenfield project of course.
I am glad to hear you found the article helpful.
Kind regards,
Sorina Ciobanu
Hi Sorina,
Thank you for the quick answer.
I was thinking about and also came in discussion on the same customer: Central Finance.
What do you think? Would it be a good approach for the same customer above?
In my opinion, Central Finance is not an ideal approach today, because S/4 is already mature enough. Why do invest in Central Finance when you can do directly S/4?
Maybe this would have been a feasible solution few years ago, in 2012-2016, but now, I don´t think so.
By the way, this customer, has a pretty complex Logistic construct, and the landscape consist of only SAP ERP, without other non-SAP ERP systems or other Applications.
What is your opinion?
Kind regards/O zi buna!
Daniel
Hi Daniel,
Thank you for your question. It is in fact quite a relevant question nowadays.
S/4HANA has been around for the last 5 years and it is of course more mature and includes more innovation with each new release. In the same time, Central Finance is an adoption solution using S/4HANA as basis so from feature point of view they would have the same level of maturity.
As a transition scenario to S/4HANA, if the customer has only one SAP instance, we would normally recommend to first evaluate the standard transition scenarios to SAP S/4HANA- based on of course what is more important from business point view for the customer and what can be achieved in the customer’s available timeline:
In the same time, it is possible to use also Central Finance to do a switch from source system Classic GL to a target S/4HANA system where the Ledger approach is used.This is not a out-of-box solution, but a custom solution, and one that many customers employ, and it does derive additional benefits at a later stage. This would mean a custom solution where GL accounts from the source system will be mapped to be re-posted to the target system (ledger, ledger group, account etc.)
You mention that customer only has SAP system(s) in their landscape. A heterogenous landscape is a strong indicator and provides for a compelling use case for Central Finance- one of the main use cases of Central Finance is to run one central platform for corporate finance across distributed landscapes.
You also mentioned the complex logistic processes in source. This indeed is not provided as an out of the box solution by SAP, but quite few customers have started their journey towards S/4HANA by implementing Central Finance as the foundation and are now starting the delta migration of the other processes (incl. Logistics) to the target system. Central Finance offers an alternative deployment option to adopt S/4HANA with significantly reduced risk and a step by step approach. If a customer is willing to transform financial data and processes at a faster pace, but also in an incremental phased approach, then Central Finance is an alternative. This could mean Logistics processes will be migrated at a later stage – a type of Lift & Shift- so this approach will have to be carefully analysed and planned by the customer and project team.
For more information about Central Finance, see also the below blog:
https://blogs.sap.com/2020/02/14/different-views-on-what-is-central-finance/
Kind regards,
Sorina
Hi Simona,
Thanks a lot for the very detailed Explanation.
Just one Question I would have: what exactly it is meant by selective data transitions?
Is this About the so-called "Bluefield" Approach?
Where could I find more About this?
Thanks again.
Daniel
Hello Daniel,
Please check the below link for additional information:
Mapping Your Journey to SAP S/4HANA - A Practical Guide for Senior IT Leadership
Kind regards,
Sorina Ciobanu
If a customer is in classic G/L and they do not have parallel valuation active, Can they set up additional ledger and start using ledger approach for parallel valuation after Brownfield project?
Hi Sandip,
It is possible to implement an additional accounting principle after the conversion - this will be based on the ledger approach. Please see below more details, including constrains:
Subsequent Implementation of a Further Accounting Principle - SAP Documentation
It is not (yet) possible to move from the accounts approach for parallel valuation to the ledger approach.
Kind regards,
Sorina
Thanks a lot Sorina. Excellent article. Very clear PoV on parallel ledger and Brownfield conversion.
Thank you Sorina this article is very helpful !!
If we decided to make an S4 HANA conversion and migrate from classic GL to New GL in a previous separate project .
It's enough implement the New GL Conversion SCENARIO 1 (Merging of the “FI Ledgers”) ?
Could we, after (not during) the S4 HANA Conversion, use the functionalities, in Universal Journal as:
* Parallel Accounting
* Introduce an additional currency
* Document Splitting ?
Hi Mauro,
Once you do the conversion, the system ''migrates'' also to new GL from scenario 1 point of view- in the way that ledger 0L is used for both ledger and accounts approach.
You can later, as subsequent projects, introduce a new ledger via Subsequent Implementation of a Further Accounting Principle and also document splitting – please see: Subsequent Implementation of Document Splitting.
But you cannot switch from accounts approach to ledger approach – not during the conversion or after , or introduce an additional BSEG/FI currency. This can be done only in ECC, with SLO/DMLT involvement.
Kind regards,
Sorina
Thanks Sorina for quickly answer.
So I understand that the right way to ensure that in S4 can be used the Ledger Approach is implement that before in ECC through, for example, the migration to New GL Account Scenario 4 (Merging of FI Ledgers, Profit Center Ledgers, and/or Special Purpose Ledgers with Switch from Account Approach to Ledger Approach).
Could you kindly confirm ?
Thanks in advance
Mauro
Hi Mauro,
Yes, for the move from accounts to ledger approach this is the only path- for the moment. There are plans to introduce a similar scenario in S/4HANA, but this is just on roadmap for the moment.
Kind regards,
Sorina
Excellent article Sorina
Great article Sorina. Very structured and definitely very useful for companies planning the S4 journey!
Thank you Dora. Happy to hear this!
Great article! Unfortunately, we didn't now read this earlier.
In an S/4HANA conversion project this year, we encountered the issue of No.7:
"7. You cannot use alternative fiscal year variants with different “beginning/end dates” when using the ledger approach for parallel valuation, for the representative ledgers in a ledger group."
In the early project planning phase, the project team did not notice this issue until project starts (the first conversion cycle). And this impact a lot to the project: New GL w/ scenario 7 execution, unexpected New GL migration service cost, and historical data handling... It was a nightmare..
nice!
Hi Sorina
I found this article very useful. We have to perform migration from ECC 6.0 to S4H 2020. So I have following queries -
Regards
Kapil
Hello Kapil,
Happy to hear you found the article useful.
Please see below the answers to your questions:
Kind regards,
Sorina
Hi Sorina
Thanks for your clarification.
Until version 17xx, we had FI specific pre-check report (RASFIN_MIGR_PRECHECK) and it seems now everything is included in SI Check. But SI check does it for complete system, and not just for FI. It takes lot of time, and I may need to execute FI pre-check couple of times. Hence I was looking for FI pre-check report.
After SI check, should we execute FIN_AA_CORR_RECON & FIN_AA_CORR_DISPLAY, FIN_CORR_RECONCILE and FIN_CORR_DISPLAY in ECC, as mentioned in notes 2896400 & 2887318 ?
Regards
Kapil
Hello Kapil,
I understand your point related to the SI checks. I will keep in mind this feedback.
You can execute FIN_AA_CORR_RECON & FIN_AA_CORR_DISPLAY, FIN_CORR_RECONCILE and FIN_CORR_DISPLAY at any point in time in the source system- they indicate data related consistency errors. So they are not directly connected to the SI checks.
Kind regards,
Sorina
Hi Sorina
We are facing issue while executing FIN_CORR_MONITOR tcode in ECC system. When we execute this report in Correction mode to rectify table inconsistencies, system starts background job which gets automatically terminated with error message "Define a leading ledger" FAGL_LEDGER_CUST023.
Regards
Kapil
Hi Kapil,
Please do not create a ledger in ECC. I believe the best thing would be to raise an incident.
The issue can also be related to note 840783 - Error message FAGL_LEDGER_CUST020 or FAGL_LEDGER_CUST023 - SAP ONE Support Launchpad - but please raise an incident for the best resolution.
Kind regards,
Sorina
Hi Sorina
Thanks for feedback. We referred to note 840783 and executed report FMGL_CHANGE_APPL_IN_LEDGER, error is resolved.
Regards
Kapil
Hi Sorina,
Thanks for the article as earlier Brad Shen said i have issue with the following
7. You cannot use alternative fiscal year variants with different “beginning/end dates” when using the ledger approach for parallel valuation, for the representative ledgers in a ledger group.
Our scenario is :- For china company code we have 2 ledger 0L and Z1 ledger in R3 system. 0L and Z1 Ledger have different fiscal year variants. in this case what should be our approach.
2. You cannot implement document splitting or a further accounting principle/ledger during the conversion project.
We have landscape
1) ECC 6.0 (FAGL_ACTIVEC-ACTIVE =X) - Active (please note splitting rules are not defined just activated)
2) ECC 6.0 (FAGL_ACTIVEC-ACTIVE =' ') - Not active
We want to merge these 2 systems. In this what should be approach for document splitting?
please help reply on this.
Thanks & Rgds
Chandra
Hi Chandra,
Point 1:
Please see the following notes:
844029 - Alternative fiscal year variant for ledgers in General Ledger Accounting (new) - SAP ONE Support Launchpad
2220152 - Ledger approach and Asset Accounting (new): Alternative fiscal year variant for parallel valuation - SAP ONE Support Launchpad
2490222 - Additional Explanation to SAP Note 2220152: Alternative Fiscal Year Variant / Parallel Valuation / Period Determination / Reporting - SAP ONE Support Launchpad
Point 2:
If you are planning to merge 2 ECC landscapes, you probably use additional tools – not just the ‘’standard’ ones.
I also understand in one system you have new GL and in another system classic GL. I believe in case of a merge, you will have to assess how the merge will be done and how the data will be mapped. I do not see how a ‘’classic’’ conversion project will work here.
Document splitting you can implement after conversion- as a separate project.
Please see:
Subsequent Implementation of Document Splitting (sap.com)
Kind regards,
Sorina
Hi Sorina,
Thanks.
for point 2, In the note 2220152, the highlighted in bold one means that the following steps should be performed in Source system (ECC6) instead of S4HANA?
You want to implement the Simple Finance add-on or migrate to S/4HANA and thus activate Asset Accounting (new) as well. Then, so that you can continue to work in the general ledger with alternative FYVs, you must perform the following steps before you install the SAP Simple Finance
add-on:
An additional, absolutely necessary (non-leading) ledger must be introduced. In addition, this new ledger must be managed in a new ledger group together with your existing ledger that maps the parallel valuation. In addition, in the new ledger group, the new ledger must assume the role of the representative ledger. However, note that the restrictions listed in SAP Note 844029 are still valid.
In the chart of depreciation, assign the new ledger group LX to the area that represents the parallel valuation.
Thanks & Rgds
Chandra
Hi Chandra,
I believe you get an error during the SI checks so in this case it has to be done in source system, to be able to move on.
Also, given the fact that this is an already live system, please check this statement as well:
Note for existing customers coming from classic Asset Accounting and using an alternative fiscal year variant in the general ledger:
Existing customers must ensure that correct values exist in the new representative ledger L2 . Otherwise, subsequent processes cannot be executed. In addition, a migration of the data (with migration scenario 7) is absolutely vital. For more information about the migration and mandatory SAP migration service, see https://support.sap.com/ja/offerings-programs/support-services/general-ledger-migration.html.
Kind regards,
Sorina
Hi Sorina Ciobanu,
A Very precisely written blog. Thank you very much for your effort and generosity to share your knowledge with others. The content is really useful for consultant like us. Look forward to see more blogs from you like this.
Hi Sorina
Many thanks for your information regarding the S/4HANA conversion project. Currently we choose "Bluefield (Mix and Match)" for the transition. For point 2 " 2. You cannot implement document splitting or a further accounting principle/ledger during the conversion project." , is the restriction just only for the Brownfield?
Can we activate document split or add a further accounting principle/ledger during the Bluefield transition process? For my understanding is that the new S/4HANA system is just a shell without any historical data. We may add new configuration for the new system.
Thanks.
Regards,
Debby
Hi Debby,
This blog is addressing only a ''classic'' conversion scenario. A ''Bluefield'' or a ''selective data transition'' project is more complex and it is also using a mix of tools- always depends of course on the scope. I would suggest to discuss this topic with your implemenation partner. As you mentioned, in theory in an empty system additional configuration can be done. The challenge will come on how the data will be migrated& enhanced for example. According to the project specifics additional topics may come up- so this question cannot be answered in a generic way.
Kind regards,
Sorina
Hi Sorina
I will discuss with the implementation partner and see if we should take the risk to have the project more "challengeable".
Thank you so much for sharing the experience with us.
Regards,
Debby
Hi,
I am very sorry to bother you but I am in the middle of a RFP about a brownfield for a client who doesn't have a new ledger. I read your article about it and I was wondering if since your article, there were any changes about moving in one step to S/4 and yet still able to switch from account approach to ledger approach.
Thanks for your precious help and have a good week-end!
Bertrand
Hello Bertrand,
There is no tool available at the moment to help customers to move to S/4HANA and switch from accounts approach to ledger approach in the same time. The options available at the moment are to either do this transition to ledger approach in ECC as a New GL Migration scenario or to discuss the options for an SDT project.
A similar tool for transition is planned in S/4HANA for 2023.
Kind regards and all the best with the RFP!
Sorina
Hi Sorina,
Thanks you ever so much for your precious help. Can't wait to be in 2023 🙂
Best Regards !
Bertrand
Hi Sorina,
Thank you for the valuable insight. This blog is very helpful. Is there a roadmap item associated with this tool to switch from account approach to ledger approach that we can follow? I'm not sure from your response if this is planned to be released in 2023 or as part of the version S/4HANA 2023. I can't seem to find anything similar on the roadmap explorer (https://roadmaps.sap.com/). Any help is greatly appreciated.
Thank you for the help and this blog!
Gabe
Hello Gabe,
Thank you for pointing this out. Indeed, this scenario is not on the roadmap anymore - I have also updated the text. This can currently be achieved via migration services and if you are interested in more details here I believe you can get in touch with your SAP contact. Note 3042755 - S4TWL - Migration from account solution to ledger solution - SAP ONE Support Launchpad will also be updated soon.
Kind regards,
Sorina
Thank you Sorina. I appreciate it!
Sorina, this is indeed a great blog with extremely information on what customer are running up against coming from ECC account-based approach.
On the aforementioned stated below:
3. You cannot switch from the accounts approach for parallel valuation to the ledger approach for parallel valuation.
I managed to dive in to note 3042755 and my understanding is that there is another way (see last bullet point in the note) from Classic GL (account-based) to switch to ledger approach after the conversion by setting up a new company and configure it to take advantage the new accounting principles/functions offered by S/4.
Granted there will be lots of realignments of the assignments for other modules to point to this new company code so to speak since this is a brand new plus the cutover balances from old to the new company code.
Sorina, I would like to hear/validate your thoughts on my understanding if you could please?
Thanks
Hello Frans,
Thank you for the comment. Yes, in this blog the focus was/is on a classic conversion approach so where we also take over historical data, via lets say standard tools. You can create a new company code, but of course you will not have the historical data but just the classic initial data load you would have for any new legal entity you would add in your landscape.
As the note also mentions, now there is also a service available so this can be also another option.
Kind regards,
Sorina
Hi Sorina,
Thank you for such a detailed, in-depth blog.
I have a simple question that I hope can receive a definitive answer for, as I come from a purely technical background and not a functional one.
I am currently in the process of planning the ECC6 to S/4HANA migration although the actual approach has not yet been decided. i.e brownfield, greenfield or sdt.
A question from senior management, that I am struggling to answer definitively is can we run the classic GL in parallel with the new GL in the target S/4HANA system?
If this is not possible can you explain why not, and what can be done to mitigate this please?
Kind regards
Akin
Hello Akin,
It is not possible to run classic GL in parallel with New GL because when you do the conversion the data is moved from classic GL tables like GLT0 to S/4HANA Universal Journal ACDOCA. So the classic GL as such is not updated anymore. Maybe you can check what features the customer needs and see how they can be achieved with S/4HANA.
I hope this answers your question.
Best regards,
Sorina
Hi Sorina,
Thank you for taking the time to respond to my query. I greatly appreciate it.
Kind regards
Akin
Hi Sorina,
I wonder if you might be able to advise me please.
We are planning a migration go S/4. We will do a system conversion from classic GL. We use SPL as our solution for parallel ledger currently.
Is it correct that it is not possible to do an implementation of parallel ledgers on S4 at the same time/alongside doing the system migration itself? Rather, implementation of parallel ledgers must always be done as a post migration project.
If it is the case that implementation of parallel ledgers can only happen as a post migration project, can you advise if there are any restrictions around timing of this implementation? For example, is it required that there must be at least full 12 months data on the S4 system before an implementation of parallel ledgers can happen?
Thank you for your advice.
Rgds
Mrk
Hello Michael,
Yes, it is not possible to implement a subsequent accounting principle - hence ledger- in the same time with the conversion project or in the same fiscal year. Please see more details here:
Subsequent Implementation of a Further Accounting Principle | SAP Help Portal
Another option would be to do a New GL migration project, before the conversion project.
Kind regards,
Sorina
Hi Sorina, thank you very much for the information. Kind regards Michael
Hi Sorina, for a customer in ECC with co-area currency 20, in a brownfield conversion to S/4 it is possible to
during the preparation activities to conversion?
thanks for reply
Stefano
Hi Stefano,
None of the above is possible. You would need separate projects for this, probably before conversion.
Kind regards,
Sorina
Hi Sorina
Thanks for sharing this insightful article and providing your comments to the the community members.
Ledger approach recommended as compared to accounts approach in S4Hana?
Regards
Sandeep
Hi Sandeep,
The main reason is that the new functionalities in SAP S/4HANA are/will be built based on the ledger solution. This is also explained in note 3042755- hence referred in the blog post.
Kind regards,
Sorina