Hi @Nitish Collooru. Did you try creating a new allocation strategy in your Dev workspace or a branch to validate my approach for handling negative values? If so, what was the result?
Having more than 20 outbound allocations from a single object seems awfully high. Were you describing the number of allocations you have for your entire solution or the number of outbound allocations from a single object?
------------------------------
Matt Temple
Senior Product Manager
IBM
Long Beach CA
714-349-6102
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: Tue March 31, 2026 11:44 AM
From: Nitish Collooru
Subject: Re: Negative Amounts on Weightings
Hi Matt,
In our case, we are on R12+ and we have many negative values (i.e., credits on each service wise), which are not getting allocated. Our existing allocations are more than 20. So, is there any way to tackle this scenario?
------------------------------
Nitish Collooru
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: Wed August 09, 2017 01:01 AM
From: Matt Temple
Subject: Re: Negative Amounts on Weightings
In R12, I resolved this by creating an alternate key for negative values...keeping the original key for positive values. Additionally, I created new Weighting Value field in my target object's table to be the absolute value of the original value Used for allocation weighting. Likewise, I set my weighting in the allocation definition to use the new Weighting Value column. After confirming the positive values we're allocating, I created another allocation line for the negative values referencing the "alternate" key and same Weighting Value column.
Works like a charm...in R12! ;-)
#CostingStandard(CT-Foundation)