Group Reporting Preparation Ledger - massive mappings for segment and performance

[dmitrij_rempel]

Dear Experts,

We need your experience in Group Reporting Preparation Ledger mapping functionalities.

We are right now in the evaluation for Group Reporting project and the customer has a massive mapping requirement for data delivery within management version.

In the mapping from accounting to the group data model (for integrated consolidation units) the dimension segment should not be taken over from ACODCA, but is to be derived from combination of cost type / cost center / profit center.

The number of mappings per segment at the moment is:

Segment 1 - 11.304

Segment 2 - 1.887

Segment 3 - 810

Segment 4 - 545

Segment 5 - 2.509

Segment 6 - 315

Segment 7 - 569

Segment 8 - 575

Segment 9 - 695

Segment 10 - 557

SUM - 19.766

Can I overwrite the segment information even if I want to make a matrix consolidation with dimension segment?

Can Group Reporting Preparation Ledger handle this number of mappings? Are any performance issues to be expected?

Kind regards,

Dmitrij

P.S.: I know, that this mapping would be possible with automatic connection via GRDC. But the customer doesn't want to loose the drill down functionality. But as a fallback it could be a solution. Would the customer get some performance issues in GRDC if we implement there such mapping?

[JAnnapureddy · Accepted solution]

Hello Rempel,

Currently, the provided substitution rules do not support the mapping of the cost center and profit center with a segment. This limitation arises because the Target field only allows for Consolidation Unit and Financial Statement Item mapping.

However, it is possible to map this information using the consolidation unit. To do this, you would need to define a segment as a consolidation unit.

In simpler terms, achieving this can be done at the local level, either in S4 Finance or ECC finance, through FI-Substitution rules.

I recommend asking your customer to open a CIP request.

Best Regards,

J.A

[Eduardo_Lombard · Accepted solution]

Hi Dimitrij,

It is important to have similar substitution rule for Partner Unit to proceed Interunit Elimination.

Best regards

Eduardo Lombardi

[dmitrij_rempel · Accepted solution]

jannapureddy: Thank you. I like your proposal with substitution rule in ACDOCA. Of course we need here the lookup table for so many substitution combinations, but it should work.

Regarding consolidation unit - legal structure should remain as it is. The derivation should be done for management structure only.

eduardo.lombardi: Yes, you are right the same mapping should be done for partner segment.