SAP S/4HANA Cloud Reviews

We are into little segments and we are using SAP's little option. We are using five models in that S4HANA, and this is just the backend. On the front-end side, we are using both applications and both are integrated together.

The primary and secondary line views are very helpful.

The solution is reliable.

The scalability is very good.

The integration is very stable. We have 18 years of SAP experience and we simply have migrated to S4HANA. We are using SAP Best Practices within our business requirements and it works very well for using this approach.

Technical support has always been insightful and responsive.

There isn't anything I would want to improve on. It's a good solution.

There is a difference between the real-time synchronization of any application or the solution that's provided by the OEM. SAP is providing releases or notes frequently, so it's an ongoing activity. SAP is constantly providing small, small patches to upgrade everything. The release strategy is based on the OEM. It works fine for us, this approach.

The pricing is high.

We have used SAP for the last 17 years, however, recently, last year, we migrated into HANA.

The stability of the product is good. It doesn't crash or freeze. There are no bugs or glitches. The performance is reliable. 

We've never had issues with scalability. It's good. If a company needs to expand, it can do so.

We currently have 40 or more SAP users in our business. While we have over 700 employees, the backend application can only be used by corporate or regional team members.

Technical support has been great. We've used them in the past and have been satisfied with how they have helped us. 

I am also familiar with Oracle and Microsoft Dynamics. This product has a higher cost, however, it is the best option and therefore you get good value for money.

That said, our company is almost 20 years old and we adopted SAP about 18 years ago. We've pretty much always used it. 

The installation or implementation of this product takes around five months. It's about the process implementation. Therefore, whenever you will implement any application, you have to understand how it will fit into your business. You need to consider the business use cases and the user interactions. All of these tasks take time.

While we handled the solution's implementation in-house, we also had an in-house consultant who assisted us in the process. 

If you compare this product with the big players - like Oracle and Microsoft Dynamics - SAP is quite costly. That said, if you are talking about the solution, SAP is the number one option.

You do need to pay for a license. It's an architectural license based on maintenance costs. Every year we have to pay 22% of the purchase costs and maintenance costs. It's not a subscription-based model, it's a perpetual model.

I would recommend the solution to others. We have 18 years or so of experience with SAP and we've always found the solution to be excellent. We deeply understand SAP and SAP culture. We understand the processes and how to leverage everything for the betterment of our business. We're totally aligned with SAP.

I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

We're a manufacturing company that uses S/4HANA for managing finances and other business processes. 

I like S/4HANA's automated features, readymade processes, and user interface. It supports various processes required by large international companies, like logistics, procurement, payments, sales, etc. All of these features were available in previous SAP solutions, but HANA has an updated user interface and improved integration with other systems. The readymade processes make HANA a good option if you're adopting a greenfield approach.

S/4HANA isn't ideal for managing contracts and subscriptions. There isn't a feature to notify us when a contract for a service we need is approaching its end or a product is no longer supported. You need a separate solution for that.

I have used S/4HANA for the last eighteen months.

S/4HANA is stable, but it needs resources. 

S/4HANA is scalable. 

I have contacted SAP support in Germany and Spain many times and also SAP partners. SAP support is excellent, but the support from partners varies depending on who you get. Some are more experienced than others. 

I have used other SAP ERP solutions that were more appropriate for small and medium-sized companies, like logistics warehouses. They didn't have good enough support. S/4HANA is easier to use and suitable for large, complex organizations. 

You need to prepare before deploying S/4HANA. You need to do a feasibility study and have a team analyze the current processes. It involves several groups of employees, like testing, configuration, and interface teams. Before implementing, you need to know what resources are needed. It's easier if you are adopting a greenfield approach. It can take two years or more for a large company to deploy S/4HANA company fully. It's at least one year.

The system requires ongoing maintenance. You need people who can code and understand SAP logic. It's hard to maintain if you have to change something.

The license for S/4HANA is expensive, and the licensing structure is hard to understand. The admin license is something like 500 euros per user. Other ERP solutions allowed you to pick only the modules you need. The SAP ECC version requires you to take all the modules even if you are not using them.

You take the whole system and pay your monthly fees. S/4HANA can define licenses based on roles, series, etc., but there are so many kinds of licenses and fees. It's more complicated than the licensing for Microsoft Dynamics or other SaaS ERP tools.

I rate SAP S/4HANA eight out of 10. Before implementing an ERP tool, you should understand your needs, processes, and business requirements. 

S4HANA Cloud is reliable and accurate. Our existing team also has expertise in SAP, so it was simple to migrate to the cloud solution. S4HANA Cloud has advantages because we don't need to maintain the infrastructure, and there aren't any huge upfront costs. 

We have to deploy add-ons integrated with the B1 when we are on the cloud option, and we face challenges with web integrations. Right now, when we attempt web integration, some of the ports are not open. There are infrastructure issues like IP conflicts and switches that need to be redefined. 

Integrating SAP with other products like payroll solutions should be smoother. I wish there were some tools a consultant could build according to the client's requirements. For example, say I want to process debit and credits. In SAP, we have to follow SAP terminologies and patterns. I need a template to deploy my structure according to the client's requirements. There is no structure available in SAP that a consultant can mold.

This product is implemented in 35 domains across multiple organizations with different structures, so there is a bottleneck in multiple segments. The consultant needs different models to help with the financials. 

I have worked with S4HANA Cloud for two years, but I have eight years of experience with on-premise SAP solutions.

S4HANA Cloud is stable.

S4HANA Cloud is scalable. Over the last six years, you can see how much it has improved. SAP has added multiple modules, new features, and patches. The usage depends on the company structure. Some companies need 20 to 30 licenses while others may require more than 100.

We submitted multiple requests to SAP for technical support, and their response was quite good. 

S4HANA seems quite complicated when you first deploy it, but after you go through the setup procedure once, the next implementation is smooth. The maintenance depends on the complexity of the deployment and the company's structure. For example, plant maintenance requires three to four users. It all depends on the company structure, like the number of call centers involved, revenue, etc. 

One consultant can handle the deployment by themselves. It's not so complex.

I rate SAP S4HANA Cloud seven out of 10. 

Our primary use case for SAP S/4HANA Cloud is managing and coordinating theatre productions, including handling logistics, accommodations, and technical requirements. It supports our environment by streamlining communication and ensuring seamless event execution across various venues.

The solution has significantly improved our organization by enhancing our ability to manage multiple productions efficiently. It has streamlined coordination between teams, improved communication, and facilitated better tracking of logistical needs, leading to smoother operations and reduced manual errors.

The platform's most valuable features include the integrated scheduling tool, which allows us to coordinate between different teams and venues effortlessly, and the comprehensive logistics tracking system, ensuring that all aspects of our productions are managed effectively.

The product could be improved by enhancing its user interface to make it more intuitive and by increasing the customization options for tracking and reporting, which would better align with our specific needs.

They should include advanced analytics features for performance tracking and reporting, as well as improved integration with other tools we use for budgeting and scheduling.

The product is generally stable, with minimal disruptions or downtime, which is crucial for maintaining the smooth operation of our productions.

The product is highly scalable, effectively accommodating the needs of both small and large-scale productions without compromising performance.

The technical support team has been responsive and helpful, addressing issues and providing solutions promptly whenever needed.

Positive

We previously used a different solution but switched because the former needed to provide the level of integration and customization we required for managing complex theatre productions.

The initial setup was relatively straightforward but required some customization to fit our requirements. The process involved integrating various components and configuring settings to align with our operational requirements.

We implemented the solution with the assistance of a vendor team.

The return on investment has been positive. The solution contributed to more efficient operations and reduced overhead costs, which impacted our overall budget favorably.

Overall, SAP S/4HANA Cloud has been a valuable asset to our operations. We are taking full advantage of the available training resources to maximize its benefits and provide feedback to the provider for continuous improvements.

I rate it a nine out of ten. 

In my consulting work, clients commonly use SAP S/4HANA Cloud for finance and logistics. Some integrate additional applications through the Business Technology Platform, while others streamline manufacturing processes with Digital Supply Chain functionalities.

The most valuable aspect of SAP S/4HANA Cloud is its ease of deployment and the reduced hassles of infrastructure support. Compared to the earlier on-premise ECC version, upgrading is now much smoother, eliminating the challenges that used to appear during version upgrades. One significant advantage is that SAP handles infrastructure support and downtime directly when the system is hosted in its environment. This not only saves time but also mitigates the challenges associated with managing infrastructure independently.

There is room for improvement in SAP S/4HANA Cloud, particularly in enhancing the application's response time. While it is not problematic, any improvements in this area would be beneficial. Additionally, despite the availability of the BTP for integration, there is a potential for increased flexibility. A more adaptable environment from SAP in terms of integration would be highly valuable for optimizing processes and workflows.

I have been an SAP consultant for over 20 years, specializing in supply chain and order fulfillment. 

I find it to be a highly scalable product. The ease of deploying patches and upgrades from SAP contributes to its scalability, provided that users maintain a clean system. The seamless integration suite facilitates the incorporation of non-SAP applications into the landscape, making it a straightforward solution for deployment and accommodating the continuous addition of new functionalities by SAP. Overall, scalability is a strong point for this product. I have worked with setups having around 200 to 400 end users concurrently using SAP S/4HANA Cloud.

While I haven't needed support frequently, the times I did, the response from the SAP technical team was good. The support provided was helpful and responsive, particularly within the Indian ecosystem. Although instances requiring assistance have been infrequent, the overall experience with SAP's technical support has been positive.

The initial setup of SAP S/4HANA Cloud has been relatively smooth in my experience. Compared to earlier on-premise versions of SAP, the process is notably more efficient, particularly in the context of public or private cloud deployments, like SQL HANA on the cloud. I would estimate that the initial deployment is about 40-50% percent more streamlined than it used to be in the past.

For SAP S/4HANA Cloud the return on investment is significant. 

While SAP S/4HANA Cloud may be on the higher side price-wise, it is a worthwhile investment.

In my experience of nearly two decades in the ERP field, I highly recommend choosing SAP S/4HANA Cloud. SAP is a reliable and user-friendly ERP, and its integration with the public cloud ensures continuous updates without the hassles of migration or upgrades. It offers ease of deployment, a user-friendly interface, incorporation of good business practices, preconfigured solutions, scalability, and straightforward upgrade and management processes. Overall, I would rate SAP S/4HANA Cloud as an eight out of ten.

Managing the server and taking advantage of the services provided by SAP itself is the most valuable feature. They take care of everything.

There is room for improvement, especially in the financial and costing parts. In a specific scenario, it becomes complicated when you have different valuation types for materials, and you try to create a costing model. It's a bit challenging to cover all the aspects.

In future releases, there are two scenarios I would like to see addressed: handling different materials and the pricing model. 

Another area of improvement is the support provided by this solution. It takes a long time to receive support on certain issues.

I have been using this solution for one year. We use the latest version.

I would rate the stability of this solution a nine out of ten. 

We haven't encountered any scalability challenges. So, I would rate the scalability of this solution an eight out of ten for now, with the possibility of it being higher.

Around 300 users are currently working with this solution in our organization. Over time, we plan to increase the usage of this solution. We need to add more features and incorporate more cloud-based solutions like Aruba for retirement. We are planning improvements in the overall technology sector.

Customer service and support's response time is really long. The ticketing system and the support cycle are very long. It takes a while to get a customer response and they often forward lots of articles and links to read. There isn't a clear, direct support contact.

Neutral

The initial setup is okay. In the implementation phase, a very clear standard of methodology by SAP is activated. It's working very nicely. The whole thing is just for your team or for the users to validate such a high-tech solution.

It was completely deployed with SAP. It's a fully managed cloud solution provided by SAP.

The deployment model we chose is RISE with SAP. It's a comprehensive cloud solution managed by SAP itself.

The pricing model can be complicated in certain scenarios. 

The pricing depends. It depends. For small to medium-sized businesses, it can be expensive. However, for larger organizations like ours, it is acceptable and working well. For small businesses, it might be more challenging due to cost limitations.

The pricing calculations are based on various factors, and for businesses with larger volumes and more complex requirements, the costs can be higher compared to smaller businesses.

I have used other solutions as well. As an example, I used SAP ECC. I've been using it since 2005, so I have experience with an older version.

I would advise them to ensure they have a well-prepared and capable team to handle the system and its overall utilization. It's important to understand the requirements and risks involved in implementing SAP S/4HANA Cloud. Especially when it comes to financial investment and resource allocation. Proper preparation is crucial.

Overall, I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

I use SAP to manage an entire company. It is an ERP system that helps me streamline and integrate various business processes.

Public cloud deployment is preferred, as I do not have to take care about infrastructure, security and upgrades.

What I like the most about SAP S/4HANA public cloiud is how reliable and powerful it is.

SAP S/4HANA public cloud could improve by adding more features because the current set is a bit limited. I need more options for enhancing the system, especially compared to the features available in the on-premise version. Additionally, the initial setup can be quite complex and still requires deep SAP expertise.

I have been using SAP S/4HANA public cloud for five years.

Very stable, no issues.

I would rate the scalability as a seven out of ten. It is fairly scalable. We have approximately 250 users at our company. Scalability inviolves potential subscription price increase. Adding extra features very often require AddOn subscriptions that you can hardly predict at the start of the project.

My experience with SAP's technical support varies a lot. It depends on the person handling the ticket; if you are lucky, you might get someone knowledgeable, but sometimes it is not so great. It is a bit hit or miss. I would rate the support as a five out of ten.

Neutral

SAP ERP, SAP S/4HANA (on-prem). 

The initial setup is complex. It takes at least four to six months to deploy the solution, depending on scope.

SAP S/4HANA is very expensive. You need to compare the TCO, which is hard in some cases. Of all SAP ERP solutions, public cloud is still the most affordable.

My advice to new users is to pay serious attention to the standard feature set analysis (Fit 2 Standard workshops). If you don't, you might find out later that you need something not in the standard features, and there is no way to add it afterward. Overall, I would rate SAP S/4HANA public cloud as an eight out of ten.

We use the product for handling configurations and managing user requirements across different modules.

The product's most valuable features include its real-time data storage and integration capabilities through SAP connectors. These features have enhanced operational efficiency by allowing seamless data processing and connectivity.

We have encountered challenges with integration projects, particularly between SAP and non-SAP systems, which have caused delays. While these issues are being gradually addressed, I recommend improving the user interface of the SAP ticketing portal. Making it more user-friendly and searchable would help submit tickets more effectively and ensure they reach the correct team for resolution.

I have been working with SAP S4HANA Cloud for approximately three years.

We have encountered issues with updates and delays in receiving timely information regarding component readiness for updates. 

I rate the stability a four out of ten.

I rate the platform's scalability as seven out of ten. 

Support tickets are often unresolved for extended periods, and the support team needs more understanding.

Negative

The initial setup is moderately difficult, with the deployment process varying depending on the complexity of the development. 

Complex developments can take hours, whereas simpler ones can be completed in minutes.

I rate the process a six out of ten. 

The product implementation was handled through a vendor team.

The return on investment has been lower than expected, as the rising costs have not translated into proportional gains.

The solution's costs have significantly increased, and we have not seen any anticipated cost savings.

I advise those considering the solution to ensure proper training and support. Having a well-informed front-end team and receiving regular updates to address customer needs is crucial. 

I rate it a five out of ten.