ME2M — Purchasing Documents per Material
ME2M is a report transaction that lists purchase orders, contracts, scheduling agreements, and RFQs filtered by material number, showing quantities still to be delivered or invoiced. It reads existing EKKO and EKPO data and does not create or change any purchasing document. Use it to trace all open purchasing activity for a specific material across vendors and purchasing organizations.
This page covers ME2M, the material-centric purchasing document list, and how it differs from vendor-centric or purchasing-group-centric reports like ME2L. It focuses on the selection parameters that most often hide data the user knows exists, and on how to prove the underlying purchasing tables agree with what the report shows.
Reviewed by an ERPClimb SAP consultant on 15 Sept 2026· 1,019 words
Purpose
ME2M displays purchase orders, contracts, scheduling agreements, and RFQs selected by material number rather than by vendor or purchasing group. It is a pure list-display report built on top of EKKO and EKPO, with additional history pulled from EKBE and schedule lines from EKET depending on the scope of list chosen. The one structural fact that explains most confusion: ME2M never writes anything. It is a filtered view, and the filter is not just the material field - the selection variant (scope of list, selection parameter such as still-to-be-delivered or still-to-be-invoiced, and the date range) determines which document lines actually appear, independent of whether the document itself is open in a business sense.
When it is used
Reached for when the investigation starts from a material rather than a vendor - a shortage on the shop floor, a stock reconciliation, or a question like what is still outstanding for this material across every open PO and every vendor. Sits alongside ME2L (vendor-centric), ME2N (document number range), and ME2K (purchasing group). MD04 shows the same open PO quantities as part of the overall supply situation but does not give document-level detail or history; ME2M is the tool once the question narrows to a single material or small material range and the analyst needs actual PO line items, quantities, and delivery/invoice status.
How to use it in practice
- Enter the material number or a material range in the selection screen; optionally restrict by plant and purchasing organization.
- Choose a selection parameter such as still to be delivered, still to be invoiced, or all purchasing documents - this decides whether closed lines are excluded.
- Choose a scope of list (ALV, or one of the delivery/invoice-oriented lists) that determines which additional columns and history data are pulled in.
- Set the document date range if relevant; leave it open when hunting for an old PO that is not showing up.
- Execute and review the list; double-click a line to drill into ME23N for the full purchase order, or into the history for GR and invoice detail.
Key data objects
- EKKO - purchasing document header: vendor, document type, purchasing organization, document date.
- EKPO - purchasing document item: material, plant, order quantity, deletion indicator, account assignment.
- EKET - schedule lines: delivery dates and scheduled quantities per item, relevant for scheduling agreements and PO items with multiple delivery dates.
- EKBE - purchase order history: goods receipt and invoice receipt postings against each item, used to compute still-to-be-delivered and still-to-be-invoiced quantities.
How to prove it in the data
Pull EKPO filtered on MATNR and WERKS to get the candidate item list, then join EKKO on EBELN to bring in vendor and document type. Cross-check open quantity by joining EKBE on EBELN and EBELP, summing goods receipt and invoice receipt movements, and comparing against EKPO-MENGE. If a PO the user expects to see is missing from ME2M, check EKPO-LOEKZ (deletion indicator) and EKPO-ELIKZ / EKKO block indicators, since these are excluded under some selection parameters but not others.
ECC vs S/4HANA
ME2M is available unchanged on S/4HANA as a classic list-display report and continues to read the same purchasing tables. Fiori apps for managing purchase orders provide overlapping functionality with a different user experience, but they are organized around document status rather than a pure material-centric list, so ME2M remains the faster path when the starting point is a single material and the goal is a document list, not a single PO's detail.
Common pitfalls and how to diagnose them
- Wrong selection parameter: choosing all documents instead of still-to-be-delivered or vice versa makes closed or fully received lines disappear or appear when the user expected the opposite. Always check which radio button was selected before assuming data is missing.
- Selection date range too narrow: the default period on the selection screen can exclude older documents entirely. A PO known to exist simply falls outside the date filter; widen or clear the date range first.
- Deletion or blocking indicators: an item flagged for deletion, or a PO with a delivery/invoice block, is excluded under some selection parameters. Check EKPO-LOEKZ and any block fields on EKKO before concluding the document is not in the system.
- Material number format mismatch: leading zeros, unit-of-measure conversions, or entering a material group instead of a material number in the range field silently returns zero rows.
- Authorization scoping: purchasing group or plant authorization restricts which documents a user's ID can see even though the documents exist. An empty list under a restricted user, paired with a full list under a broad-authorization user, points here rather than at missing data.
- Confusing still-to-be-delivered with still-to-be-invoiced: these are different scope-of-list flags computed from different EKBE movement types; a line can be fully delivered but still open for invoice, and picking the wrong parameter makes it look closed when it is not.
Whose problem this is
Functional MM/purchasing territory. Escalate to Basis or ABAP only if the report times out on very broad selections (performance tuning, index usage on EKPO) or if authorization objects need adjustment. A good handover states the exact selection parameters and date range used, the material and plant, and whether the missing or unexpected line is confirmed present in EKPO/EKBE by direct table check.
Related SAP objects
Reviewed pages this object connects to in the ERPClimb knowledge graph.
Source: ERPClimb — https://erpclimb.com/sap-tcodes/me2mERPClimb is an independent platform and is not affiliated with SAP SE. Reference pages are written and reviewed by SAP consultants for learning and troubleshooting.