QI01 — Create Quality Info Record for Procurement
QI01 is used to create a quality info record controlling vendor-material procurement quality behavior such as release, block and inspection requirements. It is most useful when procurement quality rules must be maintained for a specific material and supplier combination. Start from the exact business object, organizational scope and status, then prove the result through document flow, logs or master data before applying a corrective action.
This ERPClimb practitioner page covers QI01 — Create Quality Info Record for Procurement. It focuses on the transaction's real operational role, the parameters that matter, the evidence needed to diagnose problems, S/4HANA context, and the mistakes that cause most support rework.
Published 19 Sept 2026· 635 words
Esta página ainda não está disponível em português.
Purpose
create a quality info record controlling vendor-material procurement quality behavior such as release, block and inspection requirements. QI01 is most useful when treated as part of an end-to-end process rather than a shortcut. The object status you see here is usually influenced by upstream master data, configuration, planning or document history, so capture those inputs before changing anything.
When it is used
QI01 is typically used when procurement quality rules must be maintained for a specific material and supplier combination. It is also valuable during project testing because it exposes a repeatable state that can be compared before and after configuration or master-data changes. In production, narrow the population first and distinguish display/analysis from actions that post, approve, replicate or change status.
How to use it in practice
- Confirm material, supplier and plant.
- Enter validity and procurement-quality controls approved by QM.
- Review whether the record blocks or releases supply.
- Save and test a representative PO/GR process.
- Monitor quality and procurement behavior after activation.
Key data objects
These are the most useful anchors when working in QI01. Capture them in screenshots, test evidence and incident handovers so another consultant can reproduce the same result and identify whether the issue is data, configuration, status or integration.
- material — verify the exact value, validity/date context and relationship to the affected process.
- vendor/business partner — verify the exact value, validity/date context and relationship to the affected process.
- plant — verify the exact value, validity/date context and relationship to the affected process.
- validity/release status — verify the exact value, validity/date context and relationship to the affected process.
- inspection/control settings — verify the exact value, validity/date context and relationship to the affected process.
How to prove it in the data
Build an evidence chain rather than relying on one message: identify the source requirement or master record, show the transaction status or worklist entry, then show the resulting document, posting, warehouse object, planning element or replication log. Use the same date and organizational scope throughout. That makes the diagnosis repeatable and separates a true fix from a coincidental retry.
ECC vs S/4HANA
Quality info records remain relevant in S/4HANA procurement, with Business Partner replacing classic vendor master maintenance but not the quality relationship itself. Where a Fiori app or cloud service becomes the strategic user experience, the SAP GUI transaction can still remain valuable for support, migration and deep technical analysis, but it should not be used to justify a legacy design for new work.
Common pitfalls and how to diagnose them
- Creating a quality info record for the wrong plant. Return to the exact object status and chronology before applying a workaround.
- Using a block to solve a master-data issue without supplier-quality governance. Return to the exact object status and chronology before applying a workaround.
- Forgetting validity dates and unexpectedly blocking future purchasing. Return to the exact object status and chronology before applying a workaround.
Whose problem this is
Primary ownership is the QM team, with adjacent functional, Basis, Security or integration teams joining when the evidence crosses system boundaries. Escalate with the object/document number, organization, date/time, expected result, actual status and checks already completed.
Related SAP objects
Reviewed pages this object connects to in the ERPClimb knowledge graph.
Source: ERPClimb — https://erpclimb.com/sap-tcodes/qi01ERPClimb is an independent platform and is not affiliated with SAP SE. Reference pages are written and reviewed by SAP consultants for learning and troubleshooting.