SAP Knowledge Base Article - Public

2529189 - Assignment profile "Does Not Match" operator behaviour for alternate job code


When using an assignment profile (AP) to target a user population with the "Does Not Match" operator on the alternate job code attribute, it gives unexpected results.


SAP SuccessFactors Learning

Reproducing the Issue

  1. Consider 3 user records in Learning and assign the alternate job codes to these three users as mentioned in the example scenario below >
  2. Example: USER1 is assigned job code "A" in the "Alternate Job Codes" tab of the user record. | USER2 is assigned job code "B" in the "Alternate Job Codes" tab of the user record. | USER3 does not have any alternate job code >
  3. Create an assignment profile and in the "Rules" tab on of the AP, add the domain and set the rule with the "Alternate Job Code" > "Does Not Match" > "B" >
  4. The "Download Preview Users" will display the "USER1" and the "USER3" in the AP >
  5. Add job code "A" to the "USER2" > This implies that the "USER2" has two alternate job codes now, "A" and "B" >
  6. The "Download Preview Users" in the assignment profile will display all the three users, "USER1", "USER2" and "USER3".


The above scenario may seem that it is not working as expected, but this is by design. Imagine the following scenario: A driving school has several instructors, all with the job title "Instructor". This school provides instruction on three types of vehicles: Cars, motorcycles and trucks.

To differentiate the instructors, they set alternate job codes: Car Instructor, Motorcycle Instructor and Truck Instructor. The current instructors are set up as follows: John: Motorcycle, Car | Jane: Car, Truck | Doe: Motorcycle.

Frank: Motorcycle, Car
Hank: Car, Truck
Sheila: Motorcycle

There is a new course called "Safety for vehicles with 4 or more wheels" that needs to be assigned to the appropriate instructors. So, the following AP rule is set: "Alternate Job Code" > "Does Not Match" > "Motorcycle" > Result: John, Jane.

Everyone who has codes/titles other than motorcycle need to take the course. Doe is excluded because this user only has motorcycle. This is the way the operator was designed to work. The correct way to handle the scenario mentioned in the "Reproducing the issue" section is to add multiple "Does Not Match" rules in the AP.

In the above-mentioned scenario, let's say the new course was called "New rules for driving trucks" and it was desired to exclude both John and Jane:

Incorrect rule: "Does Not Match" > "Motorcycle".
Result: John, Jane.
Correct rule: "Does Not Match" > "Motorcycle" > AND > "Does Not Match" > "Car".
Result: Jane.


This is by the system design to handle the "Does Not Match" operator with the alternate job code attribute. Always include multiple operators with "Does Not Match" to get the expected results based on your requirement.


alternate, job, code, assignment, profile, ap, does, not, match, rule, download, preview, user , KBA , LOD-SF-LMS-ASP , Assignment Profile , LOD-SF-LMS , Learning Management System , Problem


SAP SuccessFactors Learning all versions