CN41 — CN41 Project Structure Overview Report
CN41 is a display-only report in the Project System Information System (Structures node) that lists project definitions and their attributes based on a selection variant such as project profile, status, or responsible cost center. It does not create or change master data; it is a reporting tool used to audit, filter, and drill down into project structures before opening a maintenance transaction.
This page covers CN41, the PS Information System structure report used to list and drill into project definitions for auditing and analysis purposes. It focuses on the selection logic, the read-only nature of the transaction, and the diagnostic checks needed when the list returns unexpected or empty results.
Reviewed by an ERPClimb SAP consultant on 15 Sept 2026· 1,062 words
Purpose
CN41 belongs to the group of structure reports under the PS Information System, and it lists project definitions matching a selection variant, showing attributes such as status, dates, profile, plant, and responsible person in an ALV-style list. The single fact that explains most confusion around it is that CN41 is display-only: it reads master data, it never writes it. Consultants who expect to edit a status or a date directly from this list are in the wrong transaction; any change has to happen in CJ02 or the project builder. CN41 exists purely to filter, sort, and drill through a population of projects that would otherwise have to be checked one CJ03 call at a time, and its value is entirely in the selection screen and the drill-down, not in any update capability.
When it is used
CN41 gets used when a consultant or project controller needs a filtered list of projects rather than a single project detail screen, for example during a portfolio review, a period-end audit of which projects are still open, or a check of every project under a given profile before a mass status change. It sits before, not instead of, the maintenance transactions: the typical sequence is CN41 to identify the population, then CJ02 or CJ20n to act on individual projects. On systems where a Fiori project overview app has been rolled out, that app tends to replace CN41 for ad hoc browsing, but CN41 remains the fallback when a specific selection variant or a legacy layout is required and nobody has built the equivalent app variant.
How to use it in practice
- Open CN41 and fill the selection screen: project number or project profile, project status (released, closed, and so on), and any organizational restriction such as company code or plant.
- Choose or build a selection variant if the same filter combination will be reused regularly.
- Execute the report; the result appears as an ALV list of project definitions matching the criteria.
- Sort, filter, or total the list using standard ALV functions, and drill down into a project to see its WBS elements or networks if the layout supports it.
- Export to spreadsheet for offline analysis, or note the project numbers that need action in CJ02 or CJ20n.
Key data objects
- PROJ - project definition header data, including status, dates, profile, and responsible person; this is the primary source table for the CN41 list.
- PRPS - WBS element data, read when the report layout drills down below the project definition level.
- JEST/JSTO - status management tables, read to resolve the system and user status shown in the list.
- No table is written by CN41 itself; it is a read-only report and produces no update to any of the above tables on execution.
How to prove it in the data
To confirm why CN41 returned an unexpected result, run SE16 on PROJ using the same selection criteria entered on the CN41 screen: project profile, status, and any organizational fields. Compare the row count to what CN41 displayed. If PROJ contains more rows than CN41 showed, the gap is almost always a status filter or an authorization restriction, not a data problem. Cross-check the missing project's status by reading its entries in JEST against the status values excluded on the CN41 selection screen.
ECC vs S/4HANA
CN41 continues to work on S/4HANA in SAP GUI unchanged; the underlying PROJ and PRPS reads have not been restructured for this report. Where an organization has adopted the newer project overview Fiori apps, those tend to cover the same ad hoc browsing need with better filtering and a modern UI, but they are not a strict one-to-one replacement of CN41's selection variant logic. Sites still running classic PS reporting continue to rely on CN41 without modification.
Common pitfalls and how to diagnose them
- Empty or short result list: the selection screen restricted status or profile more tightly than intended, or the date range excludes projects created after the report's default 'as of' date. Rerun with a broadened selection before assuming a data problem.
- Missing project despite matching PROJ data: authorization for that project or WBS is restricted under the standard project authorization check, and the report silently drops rows the user cannot see rather than raising an error. Confirm by having a user with broader project authorization run the identical selection.
- Attempted edit from the list: users click into a line expecting to change a date or status and find nothing happens, because CN41 has no update mode. Redirect to CJ02 for single-object changes or CJ20n for structural changes.
- Performance timeout on wide selections: selecting an entire company code or profile with no date or status narrowing can pull an enormous population, especially in systems that have never archived closed projects. Narrow the selection variant rather than letting the report run unbounded.
- Drill-down inconsistency: a project shows a different WBS count in CN41 than in CJ03, usually because the report layout used has a different hierarchy level setting or because deletion flags on some WBS elements suppress them from the report but not from the master data display.
Whose problem this is
This is functional PS territory in essentially all cases; CN41 has no configuration or customization surface that would pull in ABAP or Basis, apart from generic ALV performance issues on very large selections. A clean handover states the exact selection variant used, the expected versus actual row count, and whether the discrepancy tracks to status, authorization, or date filtering.
Related SAP objects
Reviewed pages this object connects to in the ERPClimb knowledge graph.
Source: ERPClimb — https://erpclimb.com/sap-tcodes/cn41ERPClimb is an independent platform and is not affiliated with SAP SE. Reference pages are written and reviewed by SAP consultants for learning and troubleshooting.