Technical Specs

1
Technical Specs

• Total Property Management

• System Requirements Definition, presented to SAP
  September 30, 1999 by the AD ASUG Property SIG
• Marsha Campbell from American Appraisal offered
  to train a SAP employee in Property Management in
  a three day intensive.
• SAP declined the offer by American Appraisal.
• SAP assigned a part time employee to the project,
  who did very little with it.

2
Serialization Request

• Link Between PO Equipment Master

• Serialization requires Material PO
• Material PO is not supported by Enterprise Buyer
  Pro
• Material POs treat Property Management as if it
  is the same as Inventory Management.

3
Differences
4
Requirements
Campus
Invoice JV Line Items
needs a link to
needs to feed
AssetMaster
EquipmentMaster
can link to
Property Item
Lincoln
Received via GoodsReceipt
needs a link to
will create
PropertyItem
PurchaseOrder
EquipmentMaster
can be
5
Lincoln Lab Proposal
Purchase Order
Goods Receipt
Invoice Receipt
Property Line Item
DATA WAREHOUSE
Material Master
Serial Master
Equipment Master
PROPERTY MASTER
WEB USER INTERFACE PTRACK
6
Why PM Equipment Master

• Can expense PO item directly to WBS.
• Goods Receipt-gt EM automatically created.
• Useful for Lincoln
• Links property back to PO.
• Links property to HR.
• Links property to Invoice.
• Links property to Calibration.
• Links property to Movement.
• Provides Status Management
• Can provide an easy ITS PTRACK user interface.
• Provides equipment hierarchy (parent/child).
• Can track to location and responsible person.
• 50 of the necessary fields are in EM.
• Very few unnecessary fields in EM.
• Equipment Master can automatically create an
  Asset Master
• Useful for campus if we decide to go this route.

7
Why Not PM Equipment Master

• The link between EM MM/FI requires
  serialization, which in turn requires Material
  POs.
• Enterprise Buyer Professional (EBP) does not
  provide Material PO support.
• The link between EM MM/FI requires Goods
  Receipt.
• Not a problem for Lincoln.
• Would require a change in business processes on
  campus

8
Material POs - Lincoln Proposal
Lincoln solution has items 100, 200, 300 as the
dollar valued line items that go to the vendor.
Lines 101, 102, 201, 202, etc are zero valued
line items entered by the Property Office to list
each property item associated with a particular
line item.
Todd envisions managing property from both the
Material Master and the Equipment Master.
Therefore, he is proposing creating a Material
Master record for every property item.
9
Lincoln Proposal - Concerns

• Zero Valued Line Items
• Links Property to overall PO but not specific FI
  line items. This works for Lincoln but not main
  campus. ICR requires a link to FI at the line
  item level
• Material Master for each Property Item
• Property managed in two SAP locations, MM and PM
• Must create new Material Master for each new
  purchase.
• Must maintain fields that either have nothing to
  do with Property Management or hold the same info
  for all property items.
• PTRACK functionality would need to update 2 SAP
  modules instead of 1.
• Not required for the Lincoln solution. 12 Generic
  Material Masters would work just as well for
  Property Management purposes.

10
Possible Campus Proposals

• On campus we have the potential to create assets
  from the purchase order via an asset account
  assignment category on the PO.
• Split ownership will be a challenge.
• ICR eligible property owned by private sponsor
  will be a challenge.
• We can explore the use of settlements from a cost
  collector to an asset.
• ICR eligible property owned by private sponsor
  will be a challenge.
• Reasons neither of these options (1 or 2) work
  for Lincoln
• Must debit expense on WBS PL, not asset on
  balance sheet.
• They must be able to link their property back to
  the PO. Otherwise, Duke solution (credit
  corporate asset debit WBS expense overnight)
  would work at Lincoln.
• Settlements would link asset back to FI (cost
  collector) but not MM (source document).
• We can also explore the use of material POs in
  ways Lincoln was not willing to explore because
  they have discovered a good workaround to the
  Material PO problem.
• Central or decentralized goods receipt would need
  to be implemented on campus in some fashion, if
  we were to work with Material POs linked to PM
  Equipment linked to AM Assets.
• This would at least link the equipment back to
  the invoice line items, which could update the
  asset dollars in AM.
• Does not solve the problem of JV line items, but
  requiring tag numbers on JVs might work.
• Whatever we do we must figure out a way to link
  our property items to invoice line items and JV
  line items.
• Not an issue for Lincoln, which is why their
  material PO proposal works for them and not
  campus.

11
Conclusion
A campus SAP Property Management Solution will be
challenging.
A Lincoln SAP Property Management Solution is not
as challenging because there is no dual ownership
and central receiving is in place today.
A combined Solution will be VERY challenging!