SAP S/4HANA Reviews

I'm an SAP solution architect and we are partners with SAP.

This is a robust product with the best feature to my mind being the integration of all the modules which has made life much easier for our clients. It's one box with everything included.  

These days, most clients ask about mass upload. It's not possible to do that with SAP so there is an opportunity for them. Mass uploads have become a necessity for industry. SAP does have ways to do this but it's not user-friendly. I'd also like to have an easier option for hosting. Currently, I know that S4HANA can be ported on cloud versions, and they have started giving out ready-to-use kits but there are some hiccups and basic things are a struggle. I've worked with a few different teams that have had problems with that.

I've been using this solution for several years. 

Technical support is quite good, no complaints there.

Deployment was quite difficult several years ago but now it's improved greatly and is quite straightforward.

The cost is reasonable but it's important to check on the options they offer to ensure you get what you want and that you're not paying for things you don't need. It's about having a consistent experience. 

If you're a company that's already using SAP, ERP or ECC, then you'll know that you will get a consolidated system if you take on S4HANA. If you're not using SAP, you have the choice to go with it and make it accessible to your team.

I rate this solution eight out of 10.

It is really fast. It is also very stable.

I'm not a big fan of SAP S/4HANA because it needs a lot of hardware. It is really fast, but it needs a lot of hardware. The hardware for S/4HANA is too expensive.

We have been using it for six months.

It is working fine. It is really stable. We didn't find any issue, but we have been using it only for six months.

It is scalable. We have around 100 users.

We take the first level of support from a partner. They have not been very good. We are thinking of replacing the partner.

It was not straightforward. I took a lot of time to set up S/4HANA. The installation, implementation, and analysis took more than one year.

It is very expensive. It is not cheap.

It is stable, but it is expensive, and it needs a lot of hardware. Next time, we would go for another vendor. In our experience, Oracle is better.

I would rate it a seven out of 10.

SAP S4HANA can be used for many things such as financials, accounts payable, accounts receivables, set accounting, management accounting, and banking.

SAP S4HANA provides a solution towards a green industry. They keep making a different version of the solution to meet the needs of different industries, such as automotive and utilities.

The solution could have a better user experience. However, they are working a lot on the user experience and they have come up with various applications, such as mobile applications. This was lacking over the last two years.

I have been using SAP S4HANA for approximately two years.

The solution is scalable.

There are various modules of functionalities available in SAP S4HANA. However, it might be better for us to only use one or two of the modules at first and scale as needed later. 

In one of our implementation, there were 50,000 users using the solution.

The support is very good.

The size of the team needed for the implementation depends on the size of the organization. If the organization is relatively small, we can manage the implementation with one or two skilled technicians, and depending on the complexity of it, it could need more technicians for support.

There is a license to use this solution.

I would highly recommend this solution to others.

I rate SAP S4HANA an eight out of ten.

We are implementing SAP S/4HANA for our customers.

We are dealing with firms who are into manufacturing, retail, and pharmaceutical.

Nowadays, people are choosing the cloud solution only, and are probably going with AWS or Azure. It varies from case to case.

In terms of the features I have found most valuable, I don't think that there is any lack or any gap process-wise. SAP is a very good tool.

If I can highlight one point that could be improved, when we talk about other ERPs, like Oracle, nowadays these ERPs provide free integration with other ERPs. For example, there is an API for banks integrated into every tool and every product form requires that bank integration in order to give real time data into the ERP. But SAP is charging a lot for that particular bank integration scenario and I think it should be free because other ERPs are providing this feature built in to the ERP. People always ask us about the integration and how much it will cost to go with that solution, so people are thinking about this.

I have been working with SAP S/4HANA for more than four years.

SAP S/4HANA is stable. It is more or less a very, very smooth and seamless product. Day by day they are increasing their technology features and they are keen to resolve the issues. India has a complex business scenario and SAP is thinking about that and resolving the issues day by day.

SAP S/4HANA is scalable, but it is scalable for those who have money. In terms of  boutique firms, nowadays they are also thinking about how to move themselves into big ERPs. But because of the cost, most of the boutique firms are choosing Microsoft Dynamics. Because of the price, SAP is not likely the highest product to be chosen, and I think SAP should think about that because if they want to benefit their customers or to increase the size of their customer base, they have to think about pricing as well.

If somebody is asking for the two module support, it is only going to require up to two main servers, but if they are saying that we are providing you proper support and proper IT for the project then it is going to be up to four people. In India or in any country, people are pressing to do the freelance thing. The answer to this question depends on the scalability.

Customer support is good. It's very nice. There are no more issues with that. When I post SAP tickets that I mark as high priority they always ask why is it high? It should be high, medium or low. From their perspective, these tickets should be  medium or low because high priority should be replied within 24 hours. If I raise any complaint in SAP as a very high priority it should be resolved within 24 hours.

They always come up with this complaint. I faced this issue in my last project. If it is a critical thing from my business side then I need to put that remark as a very high priority. I don't know why they always question that high priority. We always want to deliver the things on a timeline. That's why we put that kind of a remark when we raise any ticket to SAP.

The initial setup is straightforward. I am using SAP for more than six years, meaning SAP ERP, not SAP S/4HANA. So it is straightforward for me. But for those who are boutique and are now going from a small ERP to a bigger ERP like SAP or another one, for them the initial setup is complex.

The implementation will take six months. It covers every process and integration for the standard part. The time depends upon if they want to integrate more tools and more processes, then it could be up to nine months. If they want a vanilla system to be implemented it is going take six months, a standard which every ERP takes if I compare with Oracle. I am not talking about any other ERP, like a homegrown ERP.

There are three phases if somebody is going to implement the SAP. There is a pre-implementation part, there is the ongoing implementation, and then there is the post implementation part where we include the support, as well. We are also doing the quality review, but it is the same as if I'm doing the implementation and we want a particular person for a particular module. Let's take the example if somebody is implementing four or five modules in SAP - for every module we require a senior guy and a junior guy so that he or she can deliver the things on a timely basis. Because it requires teamwork, the integration of every module requires up to around 10 people for any implementation, including the project manager.

I am talking only about the implementation part. Project support or the pre-implementation part is a different thing.

In our company we have our own team for SAP implementation because we are a partner with SAP. We do hire outside people, but not from SAP. We are hiring the manpower from a third-party. If the project size is very large and we need to cover things in a short period, we prefer to hire other resources so that we can finish according to the timeline which is important for every product platform. That's why if we do the things according to the timeline they give us good feedback and the word of mouth comes into the picture and they share it with other people who then reach out to us.

Regarding ROI, in India there are more startup firms and ROI is only an issue for people going for SAP to get funding because it's a very good tool and more business tycoons are looking for those companies who are using SAP. So in my experience, if somebody is using SAP there are more chances for ROI.

SAP licenses are more costly than others. But now SAP provides flexible models for licenses for users who are in a higher position or only have to give approval or check things.

On a scale of one to ten, for me SAP S/4HANA is an eight.

I used S/4HANA as a classical ERP system, so I used it to manage the data feeds of enterprise companies. One of them was an IT services company and the other was in the pharmaceutical business. They were two different businesses, but S/4HANA has so many modules and adjustments that you can generally adjust it to any kind of a business. 

S/4HANA can be cloud-based or deployed on-premises, but in both of my implementations, it was on-prem. 

One of the most valuable features, which we used the most, was the FI module, for finance. It involved controlling, account receivables, account payables, and complete financial steering. 

S/4HANA could be improved with better integration. At the moment, a main issue I see is that there's so much growth in the functionality, complementary modules, and cloud solutions which were acquired by SAP and which extend the functionality of the SAP ERP suite. It looks to me that they tend to acquire more and more functionality from acquisitions, but they don't invest enough effort into making them integrated with S/4HANA or ERP. I would say that the functionality is great, but integration is something which still needs more attention. Instead of focusing on acquisitions, they should invest, integrate, and better the existing portfolio of products in SAP. It would help us, as implementors, to have a more complex or compact solution. 

I used S/4HANA for about half a year, for two projects that I was running. 

I would say that S/4HANA is more of a stable product than a top-performing product, but that's because I don't have the same use cases with similar tools to compare it to. It's not fair to judge the performance if I don't have a like-to-like comparison with anything else. 

This solution is scalable. 

The technical support of SAP really depends on where your ticket is resolved. Sometimes you are lucky and you get an expert on the first trial, directly from Europe, and you get good advice very quickly and can continue with your progress. However, sometimes your tickets get stuck and maybe sent to India or sent to less experienced consultants, and you need to chase it to get your ticket resolved. It's hard to make a judgment on this because I've experienced both circumstances, either getting great support in a short amount of time or having to escalate the ticket for a couple of weeks because it's hard to reach the right expert. It's hard to compare because it depends, case by case. 

I'd say their technical support falls in the middle of the scale: it could be better, but it could be worse. At the moment, it's satisfactory, but unfortunately, this isn't always the case. 

Implementation is definitely not straightforward. It's straightforward if you have a proper expert in your sub-base team, but it's not installing Windows or Microsoft Excel. It's a corporate enterprise management system, so there are a lot of parameters you need to set up. The installation itself is the easy part, but the configuration for the business use case is complex. Typically, the installation took about one week. For the configuration, making it compliant with the business use cases, and setting up all the security and users, it took months—typically three to six months, depending on the size of the company. 

The team needed for deployment and maintenance depends on the size and complexity of the customer's business processes. It also depends on how far they would like to go with customizations because almost nobody is purchasing such an enterprise solution to use it as a standard. Almost every customer has some specific features they need to get configured, adjusted, or developed in the solution. From that point of view, it will decide the size of your team. 

If you have a small- to mid-size company—one hundred employees, compact business processes—then you can do it in a couple of months with five people. If you have an enterprise company with thousands of employees around the globe, then it takes almost an indefinite number of consultants because it depends on the complexity of your setup. So the minimum team of five could set it up in a couple of months for a small- to mid-sized company, but it could be a team of twenty to fifty people if you have a complex environment. 

I have implemented this solution for two customers. 

This is not the cheapest solution on the market, so you need to invest seriously in it. As a solid product, it has a solid price. It's definitely one of the more expensive tools on the market, but it's also one of the best products on the market. 

You need to pay for licensing. There are multiple models, but typically, it's a yearly subscription. Usually, when you implement it from scratch, you don't just purchase it for the first year, but for three or five years. 

Compared to similar products, I rate SAP S/4HANA an eight out of ten, because it can always be better. 

I would definitely recommend S/4HANA to those considering implementation. The greatest and biggest enterprises use SAP solutions. If you have a really serious business and you're looking for a rock solid solution with all the modules and functionalities you may need, then SAP is definitely one of the best options. On the other hand, you need to have a business which is profitable because this solution is not cheap, and implementation projects are neither cheap nor fast. You need to invest seriously in such a solution, but it pays off because there are no risks of malfunctions. You have enough contractors on the market who can help you with the solution, so you can always get support. 

We are consultants who help supervise our customers' implementation projects. Two of our customers use S4HANA. The older ones are on the ECC platform.

We found that the implementing partners themselves are struggling with S4HANA's features. It's not an exact translation of the older ECC, so SAP has taken a new route to do things with S4HANA. Maybe it's a good product, but the implementing partners also like to have an in-depth understanding of the full feature set the product offers. There are areas where even the implementer has to go back to set, which takes time, so that's one of our major concerns.

The older implementations were cloud-based, but one is happening now in one of the larger utilities, which sells services to around 4 million consumers. That's an ongoing project that hasn't gone live yet. This will be the real test. In a year, we'll know, and we can give more feedback.

Another complaint I have is that the screen source is disjointed. When I say this, I'm speaking from a user experience perspective. I don't know the S4HANA database, so I can't say if it's good or bad. I am sure that S4HANA would have certain limitations compared to Oracle, which is the gold standard for databases. Maybe there are some challenges in the backend, but I don't dwell on those because I'm not a technician. But the graphical interface requires improvement, and its flow should be very smooth. 

Also, the Fiori app is very basic. They need to become richer because people tend to use Fiori to access the S4HANA application to save on license costs. Fiori gives you access because it's a web client, and they market it as an app. It's not really a full-fledged app, but the roadmap has to be cleared from SAP. And when its capabilities improve, it gives a native app experience when people use Fiori.

I haven't been using S4HANA for long. It's been two years now.

S4HANA is relatively stable, but it's not as stable as ECC was. ECC had a long time to mature, so S4HANA still has a few years to go before it can achieve the level of stability that we've come to expect from SAP.

We've primarily relied on the local implementers for support, and there are challenges whenever they need to refer back to SAP's own technical support. It usually takes longer than expected in many cases. Sometimes they're pretty fast, but they're usually not, which is a serious concern.

We've worked with three of the biggest products in the ERP segment: S4HANA, Oracle EBS, and Microsoft Dynamics AX. Microsoft Dynamics is pretty straightforward. It's not as complex and offers a good user experience, whereas SAP through Fiori gives a certain level of user experience, but that's not as good as what Microsoft offers. But the rich line where you go through the desktop license — that user interface is still cumbersome. It's not as user-friendly I must say. On the other hand, Oracle is the middle of the two. I won't say that it's as good as Microsoft's user experience. However, while it is a bit more complex than Microsoft, it's not as complex as SAP. 

I would currently rate S4HANA seven out of 10. We tell our clients that SAP's roadmap shows us that S4HANA will mature in time. It won't happen tomorrow. They have to make an informed decision whether they want to live with certain delays in getting certain fixes or go with another solution. SAP is such a big name, so half the time, people are willing to live with those delays with the expectation that things will get better in a year or two. SAP is a trusted name, and I'm sure they must be doing something now to get S4HANA up to speed. I hope they understand that.

We are in the progress right now in achieving the maximum utilization of the SAP HANA. We are exploring most of the available features.

I find the Production Planning Cockpit (PPC) and Material Requirements Planning (MRP) most valuable modules.

In a feature release, they could improve by adding budgetary features.

I have used SAP S4HANA for approximately three years.

SAP S4HANA is stable.

As for our requirements, SAP S4HANA has been scalable. We can extend our requirement to the system. We are using the new enhanced feature and there are many features that are available for the system allowing scalability.

We are receiving technical support from a local team here from India.

The price of SAP S4HANA is reasonable.

I would advise others when implementing to work very closely with the SAP team. When we are migrating from a legacy system to any newer system or SAP, we need to work on the mass uploading requirements, such as the master data, or open items, such as assets. We need to make another clean system before uploading all the data to the system.

I rate SAP S4HANA a seven out of ten.

Because I'm a procure-to-pay consultant, I mostly look at that angle, and I have a bit of experience with sales and distribution. I also like the integration between S/4HANA and other ERPs because S/4HANA is a suite. For example, the integration between S/4HANA and EWM Transportation Management, and Ariba.

The procure-to-pay solution in the Contract Management angle could be better. If you look at it on Ariba, the Contract Management Life Cycle for Ariba is more robust. You can create documentation, SLAs, and NDAs. Apart from the procurement aspect of the contract, you have the legal side, but Ariba cannot do that.

From what I've seen, the features of the procure-to-pay model in S/4HANA and their Contract Life Cycle Management side primarily focus on the procurement side. I believe it would be good if this solution could handle a part of the legal side.

They will incorporate Extended Warehouse Management and Transportation Management into the S/4HANA cloud. Most big companies that use a solution like S/4HANA have a legal department within the organization. Suppose they can incorporate that to be in S/4HANA suites; I think it'll be good. It will be just like what we have with Transportation Management and Extended Warehouse Management.

The user interface could be better. They have too much information on the interface, and our customers still keep complaining that it looks complex. Even though many things have changed, they still complain that the interface or the screen they see is a bit complex. It's only when they see the Fiori interface that their mind becomes a bit calm.

I've been using SAP S4HANA since 2018.

SAP S4HANA is a stable product.

SAP S4HANA is scalable. That's one of the main benefits of using SAP solutions. Most SAP solutions are scalable.

In Nigeria, we have to consider currency conversion rates with the Euro and Dollar that impact the final cost. But I believe that it'll be cheaper in the cloud where SAP has to do the maintenance of the server and more in the long run. 

I would tell potential users that S/4HANA is suitable for big companies. It comes with best practices and handles most processes, be it simple or complex. SAP also has almost 50 years of experience in the supply chain and financial industry. They should go for it, but they should stick to the best practices and not do much customization.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give SAP S4HANA an eight.