SAP S/4HANA Reviews

My general opinion of SAP S/4HANA is that it is a simplified and faster application. It is robust, with embedded analytics and an inbuilt native mobile app, eliminating the need for a front-end application. I believe that the tool is one of the leading ERPs. Its architecture, security, user experience, and database performance are fantastic. I have not seen any other ERP that can compete with it.

Only SAP payroll products can handle data management in IT and HR, processing millions of payrolls monthly for big organizations. S/4HANA payroll can manage massive volumes of data, process payroll in minutes, and provide outcomes. Other applications cannot process more than 4000-5000, but SAP S/4HANA payroll has been proven for 30-40 years.

The tool's most valuable feature for our operations includes its finance, sales and distribution, procurement, and time management applications modules. It supports various industries with specific solutions such as oil and gas, student life cycle management for education, IS retail for retail, IS agriculture for agriculture, and chemical solutions for the chemical industry. Additionally, it offers SAP Media. Essentially, S/4HANA provides solutions for any industry and business.

The solution offers real-time analytics. The user interface, Fiori, is excellent. Fiori replaced the SAP NetWeaver portal and serves as the front end. It's a very solid front-end application that allows extensive customization and extensions. You can tailor it to your needs, making it a robust application.

User adoption has been smooth with Fiori. We have various methods for adopting the application, such as SAP Build Work Zone and SAP Fiori Launchpad. Fiori provides a simplified user experience. For example, creating a sales order involves minimal fields and is straightforward. Users don't require training to use the applications as they are user-friendly, similar to downloading and using a mobile app. Any technical changes are managed by the IT team, but overall, the adoption is very easy for users.

Integrations are made very easy with S/4HANA, so you don't have to struggle much. However, we face timelines, cost, and budget challenges. We are confident in customizing and delivering requirements if something is impossible as part of the standard. There are situations where certain features are not available in other platforms like SuccessFactors, which can lead to challenges in implementation. However, with the product, we have confidence that we can provide value-added solutions and deliver them, even if there are some limitations compared to on-premises or cloud solutions.

The tool's accuracy is 99.9 percent. 

S/4HANA is like a ready-made suit, but it could be improved by adding more customization options, such as different colors and attractive themes in Fiori. From a functionality standpoint, there's always a workaround solution, and we've been working on SAP for the last 18 years.

I expect more functionalities related to cloud applications and integrations with third-party applications in the next release. Given the complex architecture and data storage in the SAP database, simpler plug-and-play integration methods would be beneficial. While SAP S/4HANA currently ranks second in cloud comparison integration models, easier integration methods would be a valuable improvement.

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

The solution's pricing depends on customers and how much discount they can get. However, the list price is expensive. 

I rate the overall product a ten out of ten. 

I use the solution in my company to pay for procurement, finance, and asset management, and we use all its modules across the board for everything.

I think the tool is very good for large organizations, and to handle large volumes of data that is used while being user-friendly. The documentation and storage procedures and other things are clearly defined for end users.

There is a need to improve the migration process.

I think that clearer guidelines on implementation for faster data migration need to be improved a little bit, as transforming the legacies to SAP S/4HANA is complex. When there are business requirements, the business needs to work closely and understand that data migration and cutover activities need to be improved to meet the production goal.

I have been using SAP S/4HANA for more than five years.

Sometimes we have issues with the performance and other things, especially when you don't do proper testing and other things, or when you basically miss some of the cutover guidelines or steps in implementation and deployment, but we get good support from SAP.

It is a scalable solution.

I think if you go for public cloud, the solution's technical support is not great and I would rate it as a five out of ten. If you have a private cloud, I would rate the solution's technical support as a seven or eight out of ten.

Neutral

The product's initial setup phase's complexity or easiness is something that depends on many factors. If you have a very good SI and, you don't need to look at the setup process. With ClamSAP and SAP Cloud ALM, things are a lot easier now. Compared to old days when we used to use SAP Solution Manager 7.2, things have become a lot easier now with SAP S/4HANA and every year it is being improved.

Deployment is like a thorough cutover activity that needs to be studied. Data migration, configuration, code, and everything need to be cross-checked or double-checked, and some kind of production verification or technical verification needs to be done at every stage before moving to the next one, making it fairly complex and there are a lot of people involved in it. The aforementioned areas can be considered as the downsides of the tool when compared to Salesforce and other applications. SAP S/4HANA handles large volumes of data when compared to other applications.

The solution is deployed on private cloud, public cloud, and on-premises.

With ClamSAP and fast-track implementation guides, you can implement the tool in three months.

The tool's ROI is pretty good, but it takes a long time to see any returns on the investment. SAP systems are implemented to last, like, maybe twenty, thirty years. The ROI will come back, but you won't see any benefits in the near future after its purchase. It is a long-term solution that you implement and move forward for twenty or thirty years, and I think the return on investment is good. If you're going into SAP S/4HANA, it is not like there is a need to bring in the whole suite for your whole business and more on to SAP S/4HANA. The ROI is good.

It is an expensive solution. The tool's price can be reasonable for large organizations, but it might not be suitable for small organizations with a small number of users.

In supply chain management, my company looks into MRP, forecasting, stock forecasting, and everything, and then the management, specifically invoice management, for processing payments.

In the finance and accounting aspect, the tool does end-to-end accounting, budget planning, and forecasting. The tool also does postings, Cl. balance, reconciliation, and all that sort of stuff.

The tool has improved the efficiency of the business processes, and I think it provides the best in-built practices as a solution, readily available, and it can be easily customized to suit your business. Everything, like the end-to-end processes, are all predefined, and the best practice for the solution is available in the product during the setup, which is really useful.

With the tool, you have real-time data and time reports. It is not like it was in the past when it was in-memory, as it used to take longer to generate the reports. Now, it provides reports in real-time, so it is really good.

Real-time insights have impacted the decision-making processes since, I think, we will know when customer orders are coming in, and we can see the demand go up pretty quickly. In real-time, the management can make decisions about reordering, manufacturing, and production planning, which is a lot on a dashboard where it is tightly integrated and helpful in many areas.

For the migration process, there is a learning curve. The end users may have to be trained. The migration process has a lot of paperwork and manual activity that has become redundant, which is good and bad since the learning curve is now a bit high. People who are near to the system need to be trained, which is a bit of a downside, but in the long run, it is okay.

I suggest the tool to large organizations, complex businesses, multiple companies, or entities with hundreds and thousands of users and employees, as it would be good in such environments. In small organizations, I wouldn't suggest SAP S/4HANA.

As maintaining and changing the tool is very costly, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

My primary use case for this solution involves controlling leads and organizing deals. It also includes managing proposals and commercial proposals. This is essentially the use case for which I adopted this solution.

SAP offers specific functions related to my data use case. There are small solutions tailored to specific CRM Control processes. For instance, the solution is common among console solutions. It includes features such as lead perspective and inputting data for new prospects and customers. 

Additionally, it provides control over offered amounts in packages and time expectations for concluding calls, yet it lacks integration with platforms like LinkedIn or other similar tools.

The disadvantages of this product include the lack of integration with platforms like LinkedIn. 

I believe the solution was used one or two years ago. Currently, it is not in use, although it was used consistently during that period.

The system is good and not slow. Availability is not a problem.

I don't know about the system's capacity or specifications regarding IT hardware environment capacity. However, the available capacity for features is good, and availability is sufficient, with no other issues to mention regarding service availability.

I am not familiar with the customer service information. I have never used the support team, and there have been no problems reported in this area.

Positive

I didn't join the company at the project's start, so I lack information on the initial setup or implementation. My involvement began two years ago, so I cannot provide details on the initial project's phases.

If the scenario is similar to mine, I recommend this solution. There is no issue with recommending it to others if it involves large consulting companies like Accenture or Deloitte. 

I rate the overall solution nine out of ten.

It has supported our client's digital transformation initiatives. There are two versions of S/4HANA: on-premise and on-cloud. We haven't seen many client use cases for the cloud version yet, mostly pilots and proof of concepts (POCs) on Azure. We sometimes convince clients to go for the cloud version for analytics purposes. 

However, 80-90% of the time, clients use the on-premise version. Clients run their entire enterprise on it, requiring customizations, which we help them with.

S/4HANA is an ERP system that connects to all other systems, even non-SAP ones. For example, S/4HANA talks with SuccessFactors, Salesforce, or Ariba. This integration allows it to serve as a single source of truth.

The finance module is the best thing. It integrates well with other modules, which makes it the best ERP available. This advantage comes from ECC, although new licenses are no longer being sold. Currently, S/4HANA is the one in use.

Views on real-time analytics in S/4 HANA:

It is a limited part. Real-time analytics is available to a certain extent, and the visualization is very good.

S/4HANA offers additional features like fuzzy search and duplicate detection. It even provides a percentage of how likely it is a duplicate based on defined parameters. These out-of-the-box features are helpful for users.

Customization capabilities: 

On-premise is completely customizable, but the cloud version has limitations. There are certain limitations of the cloud version for customization.

On-premise provides more flexibility. You can create custom code or change the entire process. For example, one of India based Oil & Gas major has built everything custom, even their configuration page is a custom SAP GUI. They have their own custom SPRO.

Similarly, every client needs some customization because:

• Terminology and processes differ slightly. You definitely need customizations for these two things. 
• Additionally, there might be extra requirements. Let's say you want someone to be notified when a purchase order is released. This also requires customization.

On-premise offers full flexibility for this, while cloud deployments have set limitations. These limitations are documented, and we have no choice but to comply. This can be a blocker for users who feel they have to accept what's offered, not what they need. This is a major concern for users considering the cloud version.

There are certain limitations of the cloud version for customization. The cloud version offers various deployment options. If it's managed by SAP, no changes are allowed. If the customer manages it, they can make some changes, but not drastically. There are limitations on the extent of these changes.

For the on-premise version, it's mostly there. However, there are certain things like the strict adherence to LOBs (Lines of Business). They don't always operate in isolation, and S/4HANA may not always be a perfect solution.

For example, material creation and vendor management are separate LOBs. But procuring materials happens from vendors, and those vendors also become entities in your system. Ideally, there should be a way to intermix these LOBs.

Currently, you have to use different T-codes for each, which makes sense, but there should be ways to integrate or cross-utilize them.

I have been using SAP S/4HANA since its inception; I have worked with almost all versions except the latest one released in 2023. 

It is quite stable, with no concerns. It offers flexibility and robust reporting out of the box.

On-premise scaling is excellent, but cloud scaling is intentionally restricted. If the same solution is accessed with different tenants, they can't change SPRO, and you're also expected to use SPRO. That's the model. 

However, the on-premise version is highly scalable, as demonstrated by India based Oil & Gas major, who has changed almost everything. This shows that it's scalable down to the code level, if needed.

For S/4HANA, I'd rate it an eight, slightly higher than the seven for ECC.

Positive

There are no close competitors to S/4HANA. Other ERPs exist, but they aren't at the same level. They are often considered "poor man's ERPs." So, no other tools currently compete with SAP S/4HANA.

Deployment refers to the cloud, while installation refers to on-premise. Both are straightforward, with numerous documents available and a supportive team that provides quick assistance when needed (if at all we need the support). It's easy.

For maintenance, there are two answers: on-premise is easy to maintain, while cloud is tough.

Cloud maintenance difficulties:

Even with managed services, even to make allowed changes involves SLAs (Service Level Agreements). Moving a transport, containing all changes, even a single comma, can take three days. It never happens within an hour. You have to wait one to two days to see changes reflected in your system. This is a major drawback, especially since moving a transport could be automated, considering SAP's flexibility.

SAP's licensing and pricing model is quite flexible. They offer both a floating license model and an agent model, focusing more on the latter. It depends on the number of licenses and users.

In some cases, they also offer seat-based pricing. For example, 50 seats can be used by either Kumar or Michael, or one seat can be shared by Kumar and Michael across shifts. They have a flexible model and the price is also flexible.

For instance, if it's 10 or 20 licenses, there might be a lump sum, but for 100 licenses, they offer a better price. They are flexible in that sense.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. S/4HANA could gain a larger market share if they extend their SAP model pricing to smaller companies. Currently,  S/4HANA focuses on an agent-based model for larger companies. If they were willing to offer an SAP model, they could secure more deals.

Smaller companies often have a rotating workforce, so allowing the same license to be used by different people at the same desk would be more appealing. This flexibility could attract more users to opt for S/4HANA.

SAP S/4HANA is used for business applications. At our company, we have implemented the solution across nine modules which include CO, SD, MM, HCM, PM and more. 

In the past few years, there have been drastic changes in application environments; the SAP Fiori apps with numerous dashboards and KPIs provided by the solution help our organization adapt to the industry transformations. The SAP Fiori apps of SAP S/4HANA assist in decision-making processes. 

The SAP Fiori apps can provide an excellent and comfortable user experience. The aforementioned SAP S/4HANA apps can be integrated easily with almost any portable device so that POs and business documents can be approved on the go.

The classic interface of the solution and the configuration at the back-end or at the consultant's end needs improvement. 

I am a user of SAP S/4HANA. 

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. SAP S/4HANA offers impressive stability and functions well without any errors. 

I would rate the scalability of the solution a seven out of ten. The product is majorly for enterprise-level customers and offers great scalability. The classic application feature of the solution needs drastic improvement, but the SAP Fiori app already provides all the advanced features. There are more than 100 users of the solution in our organization. Our company uses SAP S/4HANA, majorly for large enterprises. 

As part of our company, we engage with technical support as consultants and a response is obtained in three to four hours. The response time of technical support should be improved by the solution provider. Whenever certain business operations cease in our organization, we seek immediate support from SAP, but it's not available presently. I would rate technical support a six out of ten. 

Neutral

At our company, the previous legacy software was not supporting us with reporting features and did not facilitate business operations. The software was developed using old technologies, and our company management division was expecting a top-tier solution with dashboards, analytics, and KPIs to rebuild the business operations; this was the reason why our organization shifted to SAP S/4HANA. 

The initial setup of SAP S/4HANA is difficult as, for every module, a dedicated consultant is required. For instance, if you need to implement nine modules, nine individual consultants are required to configure the product. In addition to the aforementioned team, a technical professional will also be needed. I would rate the initial setup a four out of ten. 

Our company had the target to deploy the solution in ten months, but it took sixteen months. For the deployment process in our organization, we used the ASAP methodology for implementation, and it was completed in five phases. The phases include preparation, BTP, business grouping, realization, final preparation, going live, and lastly, the after-implementation phase.

It's quite an expensive solution because multiple hardware resources are needed. A large investment must be made in hardware and software applications to use SAP S/4HANA. I would rate the pricing an eight out of ten. Small and medium businesses usually won't be able to afford SAP S/4HANA. I believe the standard licensing price remains fixed for the solution without additional costs. 

The implementation process of SAP S/4HANA needs to be well-planned in advance and all the required professionals need to be aligned. The expertise of the deployment professionals, consultants and deployment partner is a major factor in SAP S/4HANA deployment as the process often involves transformation from a legacy system to a top-tier solution. I would overall rate the solution an 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.

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. 

Our organization is into the technology stack. Our customers are big companies from around the globe that all use SAP, either hosting it on public cloud, private cloud or on-premise. Personally, I have 22 years of experience. I deal with the operating systems, databases and the installation of the applications.

S/4HANA is an ERP package that runs on HANA database and LINUX operating systems. Most big companies are running their ERP on SAP. 

S/4HANA is an end-to-end solution. It seamlessly integrates with all the SAP Business Suite products such as IoT, AI, Analytics and all other SaaS solutions. The product is very robust and comprehensive.

Small businesses that have a small user base find this solution too expensive. I would like to see the price come down.

I have been working with SAP and ERP solutions for 22 years. The package is very mature.

S/4HANA is very stable. All of the big companies are running SAP, for example, British Airways, and UK Babcock are both using it. The solution is reliable. 

The solution is scalable. We have customers that have a 500 user system with 500 clients, and we have customers with 50,000 users and 50,000 clients. S/4HANA is absolutely scalable.

SAP's technical support is one of the best.

The initial setup is very straightforward. However, we required very specialized expertise to implement S/4HANA as it requires customization for the customer. It takes anywhere from six months to twenty-four months to implement, depending on the landscape of the customer.

SAP S/4HANA is affordable for big companies, but is very expensive for small companies. The implementation costs of SAP are substantial.

For large companies, this is a good solution. I understand that CIOs need to walk a tight rope between time to implement and the budget. SAP as a product requires, to a large extent, business process reengineering. It is important that anyone considering this solution understands the mapping of their business processes and how it will run in SAP. You also need to ensure you have all stakeholders buying into the process.

I have seen many companies buy the product thinking that they will implement it within five months only to discover that after five months, nothing has happened and the stakeholders are not aligned. Further, if you adapt the solution independent to your own needs, it will become difficult to maintain and manage. 

It is important to have a core team that understands SAP, and not only rely on an external consultant.

With the right project plan, execution, blueprint, and fully committed stakeholders, the solution will be successful.

I would rate this product a ten out of ten.