SAP Note

189230 - Progress analysis - FAQ

Version 22 Validity: 15.12.2005 - active

Language English

Header Data
Released On 15.12.2005 15:49:38
Release Status Released for Customer
Component
PS-PRG-EVA Progress Analysis
Priority
Recommendations / Additional Info
Category
Consulting

Symptom
This note contains notes on searching for errors in progress value analysis for the following subject areas:
l

What is behind the values adjusted and original percentages of completion?

99.995% - why not 100%

How often can progress analysis be carried out?

Progress/earned values in structure overview/planning board

Actual percentage of completion 0%

Progress values for Logistics orders (measured on a time-proprtional basis)

Progress values for CO internal orders

Non-appended orders

Quantity-proportional - What is to be taken into account?

Cost-proportional measurement technique - but when makes it sense to use it

Incorrect completion percentages for milestone technology?

Storing object-related progress parameters

Upgrade: Usage of report R_CNEV_EVOF_EVFG_2_EVOP_EVPOC

Default for all orders (V_EVVD)

Other Terms
Progress value analysis, CNE1, CNE2, CNE5, milestone technology

Reason and Prerequisites

None

Solution
Adjusted/original actual POCs explained by the "Degree of processing from confirmation" measurement technique
In period 10, the degree of processing confirmed for an activity is 25%. Consequently, an actual percentage of completion of 25% is calculated
for period 10. A further confirmation occurs, retroactively as it were, for period 10. It has a degree of processing of 35%. In general,
percentages of completion in progress analysis are not changed for a past period (that is for a period for which progress analysis has already
been carried out). Consequently, the original actual percentage of completion of 25% for period 10 in our example remains unchanged during
progress analysis - until period 11. However, 35% is displayed as the adjusted actual percentage of completion. The difference is updated
internally in RPSCO/RPSQT as business transaction PEV2. The original value of 25% in this example is shown as business transaction PEV1.
Additionally: If progress analysis is only started up to period 10 instead of period 11, the original value of 25% is overwritten by a value of
35% and displayed as an adjusted value of 35% in the report.
Analysis with Transaction RKACSHOW for WBS element/network activity
Remark: Statistical key figures (Customizing setting!!)
10 non-aggregated percentages of completion
20 aggregated percentages of completion
30 percentages of completion for results analysis
GJAHR WRTTP VERSNSTAGR VRGNG -> Detail screen Period 10
1999P2EV110PEV125%
1999P2EV110PEV210%<--- only delta
PS: In the case of aggregated percentages of completion, the subordinated subhierarchy is taken into account in the standard SAP way.
Percentages of completion for results analysis are only displayed on the billing elements. If none occurs in a subhierarchy, such a percentage
of completion is updated in every object in this hierarchy (this is not displayed in reporting, it is only relevant for results analysis).
Display in reporting (progress analysis):

 Non-aggregated Actual percentage of completion

Object|original| adjusted
....|25%| 35%

99,995% - why not 100%

During the evaluation of the progress values, an object might not accomplish the percentage of completion of 100% even though this is expected.
Percentages of completion are always calculated per object and period. The individual period values are added only in reporting. As a result of
rounding up/down the individual values, the system displays a total of percentages of completion, containing percentages of completion that
differ from the anticipated 100%.

How often can progress analysis be carried out?

Progress analysis comes up with progress values for each period (aggregated, non-aggregated, and those for results analysis) as well as
progress values for planned and actual data. Besides, there is also a correction logic for actual data (see also: adjusted/original actual
percentages of completion). Progress analysis of course can also be carried out several times in a period. However, values that have been
already calculated are overwritten by ones that have just been calculated. To avoid this, you can use snapshots and fix the progress values
(also for the different progress versions).

Progress/earned values in structure overview/planning board

In CNE5, the period values do not match the values of the structure overview. The following logic applies:
Within the structure overview/planning board, the progress values and the earned values are always displayed "up to and including the current
period" (sy-datum is included). For example, if the progress value changes in the subsequent period, i.e. in the future, then this cannot be
seen in der structure overview/planning board. (Note: If the progress analysis has not been carried out up to the current period, the values
displayed for the current period, of course, are not telling.)
In the period breakdown of CNE5/CNSE5, however, the progress/earned values are always displayed for all periods for which values other than
zero were calculated. This means, also the values in the future are displayed here. In this case, the current period does not restrict the
values displayed.

Actual percentage of completion 0%

Make sure that you have entered a maximum percentage of completion in the Customizing of the progress analysis.

Progress values for Logistics orders (time-proportional)

If you want to calculate progress values for Logistics orders, note that the earliest start date and lastest finish date are used to calculate
the percentages of completion.
Depending on the order status header, the maximum percentage of completion is exceeded.

Progress values for CO internal orders (time-proportional)

In CO internal orders, "Work start" and "Work finish" in "General Data" are used to determine the percentages of completion of various
measurement techniques. The maximum percentage of completion can only be exceeded if the "Completed" system status has been set.

Non-appended orders
If you carry out the progress analysis and non-appended orders are assigned to your project, you should take the following into account:
A WBS element has, for example, costs of 200 dollars, an order which is assigned to the WBS has costs of 100 dollars. In the reporting, a total
of 200 dollars costs are displayed (non-appended). The progress value can, however, in this instance have a maximum value of 300 dollars. If
you now compare the progress values and the costs with each other, the result can be "confusing" as when totaling the progress values no append
logic is used and there are 200 dollar costs against 300 dollars progress values.

Quantity-proportional - what is to be taken into account?

If you want to determine percentages of completion based on measurement technique in proportion to the quantity, the statistical key figure
must be defined with the category totals value.

Cost-proportional measurement technique - but when makes it sense to use it

Using a measurement method on the basis of the cost-proportional measurement technique only makes sense if costs have been planned by period
exclusively (no annual and no overall plan values from structure planning because these values cannot/will not be included in the calculation
of the progress values). Otherwise, you should use a different measurement technique.

Incorrect completion percentages for milestone technology?

You are using a measurement method based on the milestone technology. Incorrect and, in some circumstances, negative completion percentages are
calculated. First check the milestones and their completion percentages, as well as the planned and actual dates. An absolute prerequisite for
correctly calculating the completion percentages is that the completion percentages correspond to the dates.
Correct:
Milestone 11.1.xxxx 10
Milestone 21.7.xxxx 50
Milestone 31.9.xxxx100
Incorrect:
Milestone 11.1.xxxx100
Milestone 21.7.xxxx 50
Milestone 31.9.xxxx 10
Only the "correct" details are right with regard to the logic for progress analysis (no declining, cumulative completion percentages).

Storing object-related progress parameters

For each object, never only one progress version is stored. A progress version is always stored in combination with a measurement method.

Decreasing percentage of completion

A decreasing percentage of completion of an object may occur, for example, when method 'degree of processing' is used (in the non-cumulative
view, in the period breakdown of cne5 / cnse5, the values are negative). This leads to the planned and actual progress values for this object
all being zero.

Upgrade: Usage of report R_CNEV_EVOF_EVFG_2_EVOP_EVPOC

When upgrading from a release < 4.5 to a release => 4.5, report R_CNEV_EVOF_EVFG_2_EVOP_EVPOC needs to be executed.
What happens when executing the report?
1. The estimated values maintained manually are transferred from table
EVFG to table EVPOC.
2. The measurement methods maintained manually for an object are
transferred from table EVOF to table EVOP.
Note that starting with Release 4.5, an explicit field maintenance is no longer required/possible (Transaction OPUE).

After transferring the data, the progress values need to be calculated for all projects using Transactions CNE1/CNE2. Then the progress values
can be analyzed again via Transaction CNE5.

Default for all orders (V_EVVD)

In maintenance view V_EVVD, a default can be maintained for object type 'order'. This type is used, if no measurement method is stored for an
order type in maintenance view V_EVVDOR.

Validity
Software Component From Rel. To Rel. And Subsequent
SAP_APPL
45A
45B

46A
46B

References
This document refers to:
SAP Notes
176111 CNE5: Missing progress values
516476 Consulting note Progress analysis
153051 CNE5: Missing percentage of completion

This document is referenced by:

SAP Notes (3)
176111 CNE5: Missing progress values
153051 CNE5: Missing percentage of completion
516476 Consulting note Progress analysis