SAP S/4HANA Reviews

It has been used across various verticals, including billing, sales, business, and pharmaceuticals. It has been implemented in different business verticals.

Apart from the core business processes, the performance has been drastically improved. The speed of executing reports has increased significantly. We no longer need day-minus-one business processing.

In the past, we had to extract, transform, and load data (ETL cycle), and only then would we get critical dashboards and reports the next day. Now, it's available in real-time data, within the same instance, on a single click. This is a major improvement.

Everything is available in S/4HANA. It's really good. There might be some restrictions in the public cloud, but in the private cloud, anything you can think of can be made available. That is the best part of S/4HANA.

S/4HANA stands for high-performance analytic appliance. 90% of activity is done on the hardware side, as it supports fast memory executions.

Initially, it was SAP ECC 6.0, but then they introduced faster execution processes and best practices for different verticals. It gives an advantage on top of what is being used across different businesses. They have introduced best processes altogether.

The implementation time has also been reduced drastically. We start by showing the customer the best practices and configurations. This is a major difference from before when we used to understand their "as-is" process and then design the "to-be" process.

Now, we get acceptance on the best practices early on and only do customizations where necessary. Most customers prefer this approach because they are changing their business to match best practices rather than us changing the software to match their business.

Additionally, there are public and private editions of the product. The private cloud is owned by the customer, giving them full control over customizations. The public cloud is controlled by SAP, which offers only best practices that customers accept, knowing they align with industry standards.

One disadvantage is the introduction of multiple products. In older versions, everything was in a single package. Now, we need separate licenses for different functionalities: S/4HANA Cloud for human capital management, SuccessFactors for talent management, and Ariba for procurement. For advanced components, we need S/4HANA for enterprise portfolio and project management. 

Additionally, if we purchase SuccessFactors, we also need to add integration tools like SAP Cloud Platform Integration. So, it's like buying a basic bundle (starting from 65 or 25 FPUs) and then adding more components and integrations later, each with its own license fees. Essentially, they have changed the model to introduce multiple products with new license fees.

Everything is available and works well in S/4HANA. There might be some restrictions in the public cloud, but in the private cloud, you can make anything available.  

I am a consultant; we don't use it in-house. We work with SAP. It has been almost nine to ten years since we started with S/4HANA side.

The private cloud is 100% stable. The public cloud still needs some time; it's 90% stable, but 10% still needs enhancement.

Private cloud is ten out of ten, and public cloud is nine out of ten.

It is a very scalable solution. 

The customer service and support are good. 

Positive

S/4HANA deployment is easier than previous versions.

Deployment time:

The deployment time depends on the complexity of the business. 

For a public cloud implementation with standard business processes, it takes three to four months, with the fifth month for support. 

For a private cloud implementation, it may take five months or more, depending on the customizations and configurations needed. The number of consultants and the complexity of the business processes are the most important factors.

Moreover, the maintenance is easier now.

Integration into existing infrastructure: 

 There are multiple options for integration depending on the products. For SuccessFactors, you can either use SAP Cloud Platform Integration (CPI) or the SuccessFactors Integration Suite. 

In the Middle East, where I work, there's a government-mandated e-invoicing system that requires integration with S/4HANA. 

Like Ariba, that also needs to be integrated. In this version, integration options have been expanded. Previously, it was only SAP Process Orchestration (PO) that handled integration, but now there are more options available.

For a private cloud implementation, a team of eight or nine people: six consultants for the core modules, one basis consultant, one technical consultant, and one project manager. 

For a public cloud implementation, the number of consultants is reduced to six.

ROI has multiple aspects. In the initial days with ECC, costly hardware with depreciation cycles was necessary. Moving to the cloud reduces those expenses. Within three to five years, ROI is very good. 

Additionally, the need for data centers, DR sites, and skilled maintenance teams is eliminated, drastically reducing costs within five years compared to SAP ECC.

It's expensive when opting for a private cloud but cheaper on a public cloud.

For private clouds, the price could have room for improvement. It is a bit on the higher end. 

The license is subscription-based. The users can lock in licenses for three, five, or even seven years. The agreed-upon pricing on day one applies yearly for the chosen duration. This is available for all SAP products.

Clients don't have to pay extra for support, maintenance, or other things. So, the subscription includes everything.

For S/4HANA, my recommendation is that finance is very strong. They have improved. SD (Sales and Distribution) in finance has been strong since day one, but now they have also improved the purchase cycle significantly. They have introduced multiple products like IBP (Integrated Business Planning), which has improved their planning for production and the entire manufacturing process. 

Considering this, I would recommend S/4HANA Private Cloud as of now. SAP is working very hard on S/4HANA Public Cloud as well, so in one or two years, the public cloud might be the best option.

Overall, I would rate the product a nine out of ten. 

All our warehouses are manufactured. We are using it quite extensively. We are on a program that we are doing within the company.

I find the easy transformation and the good app to be very valuable. The computing capabilities are nice, and the analytics are good. The insights given help us make strategic decisions. 

It's been more than three or four years that HANA has started to enable us and has helped make our system more efficient, faster than the traditional ECC that we had, exceeding Cisco.

We are already in touch with SAP, excluding them as inputs. 

I have used the solution for more than three or four years.

SAP has been handling stability. We are doing an upgrade as well.

Scalability is somewhat of an issue.

Technical support is good.

We have used many different solutions.

It is efficient and has been a transformational journey. It's a long journey and a mindset change. 

I would rate the overall product as eight out of ten.

Nowadays, I have been implementing SAP S/4HANA and I have managed areas like analysis and blue print. I have lately started off with the configuration of the system. I have made some SAP Fiori training programs for people with a few reports, but I must say that I am not a reporting specialist.

It is expensive to implement SAP in companies, making it an area of concern where improvements are required.

I have worked with SAP S/4HANA for a year, but with SAP, I have eleven years of eleven years.

Only big companies use the tool.

I will be using SAP Signavio and SAP Process Manager soon, but I don't have experience with them since my company will be starting to use the product today.

The product's initial setup phase is almost the same as the previous ERP system my company had. I don't see a lot of changes in the configuration, especially from my point of view after I look at all the modules. I see that there are a lot of changes in the modules offered by SAP S/4HANA, especially when compared to SAP ECC.

As per the plan for the project where I work, I had to deploy the span of two years for four companies, but it had to be postponed to three years. I don't know about the background and finances associated with the product. I think it takes a very long time to deploy the product. I don't see any technical problems with the solution. I believe that the long time the product is in use is because of the finances attached to the product.

Each company using SAP S/4HANA can save some money because everything can be done in one system. If a company already has an old ERP system and wants to implement a new one, I don't think it will be able to save some money because it will have to spend a few million Euros to implement the new system. If it is a green field, then such a company can implement its first SAP tool and save 100 percent of money since everything can be done in just one system. Companies can have different systems for finances, production, and logistics, and everything needs to be connected, which is a very difficult process. With SAP S/4HANA, you can have everything under a single roof, you can see the connections across all departments, and you can find everything in my system. You can create one report, and you have got everything from all departments, including the life cycle of all the products that can be seen in one system, so it is helpful.

Everyone says that it is expensive to implement SAP in companies. I have heard others saying that SAP is only for big companies that have money. If you want to sell your company and you say that you have got SAP in your company, the price can be quoted high. It is exclusive to have SAP in your company. It is the best system in the world.

I use the solution in my company, and I feel SAP Fiori is very nice since it is modern. There are better functions in SAP systems and the configuration, but not in SAP Fiori. In SAP Fiori, everything looks better, but it is not user-friendly for me because you are not able to find a lot of things in it. You have to scroll a lot and it is not better, but some users say that it is a good tool since the reporting is much better in SAP Fiori. I feel SAP S/4HANA is better than SAP Fiori.

The data processing speed is the area in SAP S/4HANA that has the most improvement in comparison with the old SAP system because it now works in a different type of database, which is very fast.

I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

SAP S/4HANA is primarily employed for data analysis and analytics. It involves engaging with data within the platform to perform analytics and generate insights, focusing on optimizing data collection and analysis at the database level.

The ability to optimize performance by allowing both data transactions and analytics on a single platform is particularly valuable. This dual capability enhances the efficiency of data handling and analysis, making it a crucial feature for effective data management.

The platform could improve by simplifying the analytics processes, which currently require significant preparatory work outside the platform. This aspect can be cumbersome and detract from the otherwise streamlined experience.

I would like to see the inclusion of more integrated tools that allow for direct analytics and calculations within the platform itself. This would reduce the need for extensive data preprocessing, which is currently a necessity.

I have been using SAP S/4HANA for six months. 

SAP S/4HANA is highly scalable, particularly due to its model-driven development approach, which allows for efficient data integration and analysis as our needs grow.

The solution's deployment is still in the development phase, and we have yet to go live. Therefore, I have yet to have the opportunity to require or evaluate customer service or support.

Before adopting S/4HANA, I used SAP ECC and Tableau. The switch was driven by the need for more advanced features and the discontinuation of support for the older system.

The deployment is still in the development phase. 

 The solution might be expensive. 

The solution might be expensive, an important consideration for any organization looking to adopt it.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

The tool is like a spinning desk mechanism where a lot of data comes from multiple sources of multiple applications using a kind of main single source or an index from a single source through a system of record. For multiple applications holding all their data that pertains to a certain piece of data that is housed in a different application database over here, SAP S/4HANA builds models to basically collect all that information and figure out how to build reports out of each of the applications based on their datasets with a key from one of the datasets. If I have a transaction, but my transaction originates in the system over here, and the system has a lot more information, then the transaction makes its way into our system of record, after which it pulls data from the system of record, but it also pulls information from the other system to get more context to the application.

The most critical feature of the product for my company's operations would be the conglomerate business modeling which is good. I think the clients I work with are very concerned about their own data and the data of others, so they do need things in real-time, but they need more context around it and why it is being used, but otherwise, it is just a bunch of numbers.

I think that the cost is a big area of concern, considering what users get out of the tool. I believe there are some tools and even some cloud-based kind of data modeling tools, which once you start putting applications to the cloud and sharing search services in databases, I think that can kind of buy you what SAP used to put together years ago to sell, and it can be helpful for the power of what you are trying to do with it. In our company, I don't think we are building models constantly, like the real-time decision-making AI models right now with the current tool. In our company, I don't think we will ever be able to get to the aforementioned point with the use of the tool.

I have experience with SAP S/4HANA.

I have no issues with the stability of the product, as everything seems to be fine.

The product's scalability is very good, but again, I think our company's clients don't use it for what it is made for, specifically in terms of its cost. I think it is a more powerful tool than our company's clients need.

For support purposes, my company used to approach the main vendor of the product who helped us with the implementation part.

I work more on the functional side, consisting of reports in Power BI.

In terms of the product's initial setup process, I would say that my company is in a very unique situation with our clients. The product's initial setup process is pretty difficult to handle. On a scale of one to ten, where ten means it was easy, I rate the setup phase a three.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

The solution deployment took a few months because only a few experts knew how to do it. A lot of people were involved in getting the information ready and requirements done, but only a few experts could manage it.

The product is expensive. On a scale of one to ten, one being the lowest price and ten being the highest, I rate the product price as seven or eight.

A few of the products that my company uses are from SAP. My company mostly prefers an application-based or platform-based environment, so we are not on a single source platform. I think we are moving to Azure's cloud services, which will help enable our company to use some of the aforementioned areas. My company uses some NetApp tools to help with our data integration needs, especially since our systems are integrated. There are some API integrations with various applications that we use in our company.

There are some people in our company who deal with SAP S/4HANA set, and then what they do is they replicate data through the models and then expand that to Microsoft Power Apps and Power BI to create reports for everybody.

The tool must handle a lot of analytics and reporting areas like financial information, location information, and other things to support our company's core business processes.

I think because of the size of the data and some of the network support that my company has had on the tool, I can say that many of it wasn't in real-time. The tool hasn't really lived up to what it needs to be, especially from a cost perspective; it is too much, considering what our company gets out of it.

Migrating to SAP S/4HANA has affected our company's data management and reporting in a positive way. The tool gave better access to the information that can then be either viewed or manipulated externally through a different BI or utility. It did give more flexibility in building models. I think we had old warehouse mechanism information many years ago, so I believe that there is a need to do data mining of old transaction journals, which would take a long time, while SAP S/4HANA definitely has helped to speed up the process and actually regenerate the reports. I think sometimes making changes to the tool has been a problem because certain things that are not are just not built the way you want them to be, and so there can be bad information available inside out. I don't think our other tools feed SAP S/4HANA system to have the data in order to actually make it usable without some intervention.

I rate the tool a six or seven out of ten.

We use the solution to import master data. We use classic resolution to collect local US company material masters and align HQ material masters' numbers. We import FI/CO/MM/PP/SD IMG and opening posting accounts and stock. 

We use it to import transactional data. We collect purchase orders and sales orders into S4H 

We also use it to import security. We collect user roles and permission objects.

We provide training requirements for logistic modules for sales orders to intercompany purchase orders and make production orders for goods issued and goods received. Finally, we run production order confirmations for cost variants. 

We removed gaps for MRP planning, forecast data, and PIR purchase orders. We integrated overall sales commission collections and sales profits management. 

It's helped with business aspects and improved material planning and RMA processes.

It's helped with service aspects and improved customer service and spare parts management.

It's good for HQ FICO aspects. We consolidated P/L statements, cash flows, and income statements.

For supply chain aspects, we integrated the last puzzle piece for material control.

We found the solution integrated with HQ and local material number for batch orders to split several partial orders. 

For customer service and RMA views, material alignment or aggregate is evolving. The US can assign sales forecasts to distribute Asia-built finished parts. This business model can accumulate mass stocks for replacing parts and labor maintenance services. If sales order to shipment can align with the ERP platform, the materials to order can support visibility across Asia/the US/the EU. The integration not only speeds up order processes but also controls solid stocks and costs.

During parallel preparation of go-live processes, SAP B1 and S4H transactional data alignment can be difficult to track. The approach is to have the same sales order amount and quantity to compare the correctness so both sides are matched, according to FI concerns. For project purposes, we need to figure out if there is any solution or approach when considering data migration for sales orders and purchase order imports. THe validation is also the key to review bothe side data of correctness.  Any resolution for an add-on program to validate reports can be useful. 

I spent six months in a S4H project implementation, including SAP business - one migrated into an S4H 1809.

.

.

.

Positive

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

We use the tool  as an ERP transactional system for financials, logistics, human resources, sales, distribution, and billing.

SAP S/4HANA dominates around 70 percent of the ERP market in Chile, and I believe this isn't merely coincidental. I've always maintained that if someone believes SAP S/4HANA lacks a certain functionality, they haven't explored it thoroughly. However, there's a widespread lack of understanding regarding its full potential and how to configure it.

Many businesses in Chile and elsewhere underutilize SAP S/4HANA, limiting its use to basic tasks like document entry or accounting, which is unfortunate considering its capabilities. SAP S/4HANA offers integration, consistency, security, and potential for user-friendliness. Nonetheless, initiatives like Fiori and SAPS/4HANA seem to be moving in the right direction to address this issue.

I can discuss one of our largest clients, a utility company. They specialize in generating and commercializing electricity, primarily for industrial customers. They utilize the tool, encompassing standard ERP features like logistics, human resources, and financials, and integrating their core business processes into the entire system. It adds great value to the company.

For instance, by integrating metering systems online into the ERP system, all billing and operational processes become online. The system connects with the CRM system and incorporates the physical network. Let me provide an example. If there's an outage at your home, contact the utility company, and the tool will identify your location and provide access to relevant client information.

The entire process is seamlessly integrated into the system. When the affected individual is eventually billed, they will receive a discount due to the outage, as per our loss analysis for such situations. It's all integrated, making the experience seamless, efficient, and pleasant for everyone involved, from the call center staff to the customers.

The solution's most valuable feature is integration. Our core data services are very powerful, and they allow a whole new reporting capability that was not present before. Another valuable feature is energy data management, specifically the processing of metering information from utilities, which has benefited our organization the most. It allows us to monitor real-time consumption data.

The use cases I mentioned before all involve customization in terms of parameterization and custom developments. We strive to keep things standard, but there are cases where centralization or more specific development is needed. Through both of these means, we've successfully delivered projects and provided meaningful solutions to our customers.

I think the user interface still needs improvement. While efforts are being made to enhance and make it more user-friendly, there are still shortcomings. Fiori is a great step forward, but work must be done. So, I believe SAP S/4HANA should focus more on improving GUI access. We also had a difficult time migrating the fixed assets. 

I have been working with the product for seven years.

I rate the solution's stability a ten out of ten.

I rate the tool's scalability a ten out of ten. 

The tool's deployment is straightforward. 

The solution is worth its costs. 

I rate the product an eight out of ten. If your business processes are clear, the implementation will be straightforward. If not, it will not. Don't try to accommodate the system to your business process; instead, try to align your business processes with what's defined in the system.

I am a system integrator. We recently implemented it for a customer, and they are finding it easy to use.

We implemented the remote version of S/4HANA on Azure, and it is working well for the customer.

My customers use it for all functions, including finance, sales, and Oracle. 

They are using it for all six core functions: 

• Source to pay
• Record to report
• Order to cash
• Procure to pay
• Plan to produce
• Core finance. 

They also use it for other pharma operations.

The cloud-based feature of Microsoft Azure has been very valuable. It is easy to implement and use, saving the customer a lot of effort on infrastructure. The product is also very stable, and the customer is comfortable with it.

The customer has worked with previous products, and this one has brought a lot of comfort in terms of infrastructure handling. The infrastructure is managed by a different team, and the users are also comfortable with the interface. So far, they are happy with the product.

The product is user-friendly. The user interface, now called Fiori, is very stable. The product also has a lot of interfaces available to interact with cloud products, and it supports all kinds of integrations, so the amount of customizations needed from customers is greatly reduced.

The infrastructure resources are also effectively used. It is very optimized; used in a very optimized manner. The maintenance and handling of the infrastructure are very well taken care of with S/4HANA on Azure.

The interface could be improved with more Fiori applications. There are still a few applications in SAP GUI. I think SAP is working on this, but it will take time. 

Additionally, the admin interface could be improved. Since the admin is not directly an end-user, it may not be in focus, but if the customer's team is managing it, it would be helpful. 

Bringing all the admin applications into one place would be very helpful for customers to lock this down and use it internally for management.

In future releases, I would like to see a centralized admin interface. A lot of admin activities need to be done at different places. Apart from that, the pain development and change management for developments could be improved. 

Some features are not yet available in the new interface, so bringing those in would make it easier for customers to manage from the admin side.

I've been working with this solution for the last five to seven years. I work with the 2022 feature pack zero.

Since SAP brings new versions, I would rate the stability nine out of ten as of now.

So far, the performance is fine. No major hiccups or conversations have been reported that would cause the product to fall into any category of material issues. 

All stability and performance-related aspects have been taken care of. We have positive feedback from the customer side in terms of performance and stability.

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten. Scalability is quite flexible. With the solution on Azure or other cloud products, scalability options are very flexible. The backend hardware technologies have improved on the cloud side, so many options are available now.

In my last five years of experience, all the customers I've seen are on S/4HANA. I've hardly seen anyone use older versions. New customers are all getting on S/4HANA.  

Our customers are mostly enterprise-level businesses. 

The technical support from SAP is quite mature. It's been five to seven years, so the product is now getting into the maturity phase. The product support team is quite capable of solving issues on time.

Positive

For me, the initial setup is very straightforward. It may not be easy for the customer, but for the integrator, it is.

So, I would rate my experience with the initial setup an eight out of ten, with ten being easy. 

There were some generic issues in development, but the support from SAP was good, and they were resolved. All products will have some issues. The product support is good enough to resolve them on time.

Deployment time:

Implementing it for all the functionalities within the given scope took around one year, including various phases like development, quality assurance, and production. It depends on the scope, but with the current scope, including all planned interfaces and project management, it will be manageable.

We (my company) are system integrators. 

Deployment process:

We start with development, where all customizations are performed. It's then moved to the testing system for various tests like regression, unit, user acceptance, performance, and integration testing. 

Once approved and verified by the customer, it's taken to production for deployment. Then, there's minimal functional and engineering testing, followed by live production testing done by the end users. If everything is clear, we go live.

Since customers are adopting it and finding it valuable, in comparison to others, I can give the pricing a five out of ten, with ten being expensive and one being cheap. It's not too expensive and not too cheap.

Additional costs to the licensing fees include maintenance or integration costs, depending on who manages it for the customer. Maintenance and support costs are general support costs for all products.

The product is mature and implemented in various industries. It's a very well-renowned and established product. They can go ahead and implement it. It depends on how they choose the integrator and the support for this product. 

The product is very stable, and finding integrators and support will not be difficult.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.