It has been a while since I last mused about things S/4HANA and C/4HANA (or Customer Experience Suite) at SAP. So, it is time to have a look at what happened since.
Last yr I concluded that ?The differentiation many of the old global transactional systems and the structures of engagement is increasingly being sorted out? And that the ?Modularization of the diverse clouds into ?Micro?-Services could allow for a persevering with recombination of structures that permit for the definition of functional scope in line with purchaser goals rather than fine imparting pre-packaged structures?.
Has there been any change, because?
Let?S bypass along the questions that I requested in my previous submit.
· How reliable is the roadmap, or rather, are the roadmaps? At the end of the day there is the eternal dilemma between flexibility and stability.
· How to go ahead with multiple back end systems?
· How are engines and industry solutions dealt with?
· How is the differentiation between S4 including customer management and the C4 offerings?
All those questions stay relevant, as they're touching the center of SAP?S approach. What is the current-day solution to them?
Let me provide my address them, as I see it evolving. Just to make certain, that is my statement and me taking note of clients, not an respectable word of SAP. Just my interpretation. After all I am not at the distribution list of SAP?S internal method discussions.
Being a CRM guy and a set man, for me the ultimate question is the elephant inside the room. The solution to in which SAP sees the boundary among S4 and C4 is definitely crucial to customers and partners alike. There sincerely should no longer be too much gray place proper here. Lets tackle this one last ? Because the series of bullets suggests.
So, permit?S start from the begin. Some answers, and nicely, some tips.
Roadmaps ?
? Are virtually that, roadmaps: Plans that are primarily based mostly on information available and priorities at a positive element in time. They exist to provide guidance to customers.
Of route, priorities can alternate and customers with sufficient negotiation electricity can ask for an model. As a outcome, what has been too rigid in the pinnacle ole times of on premise software program application with launch cycles of 365 days or greater, has grow to be very bendy. This essentially means that customers will not reap any strongly worded answer ? Not to say a promise ? Approximately immoderate level capability that extends the cutting-edge release in paintings.
Even that one has a huge disclaimer.
On one hand, this approach as it ought to be solutions customer name for for flexibility and having the capacity to persuade releases with a near term impact. On the alternative hand, this pliability deprives SAP and its customers of long term balance inside the roadmap.
Having stated that, and considering the roadmaps that I particularly take a look at, SAP is quite consistent. Of path the longer the outlook is the greater the variance is, but in fashionable the subsequent two releases appear like pretty ordinary ? Although assets inform me that unique making plans is completed best for the subsequent upcoming release.
I am effective that SAP is fixing a amazing a part of the development portfolio of upcoming releases. If now not, the advice is probably to do, to balance out strategic and patron necessities. Of path, if roadmap promises are given to clients, those want to be honoured, too. And if ensures are given, priorities are modified, then the posted roadmap need to be tailored ? As it it wishes to be after each launch, even as a promise has come to be fact.
I understand that that may be a difficult balancing act, but it's far one that a worldwide elegance portfolio manipulate of a worldwide elegance organisation can shine with.
Multiple Back Ends
This is similar to in advance than. CRM Middleware remains a part of the package deal. Different structures can talk through it. And then there's the SCP. I nonetheless need to validate it, but connecting thru CRM Middleware appears to be an first rate way to keep patron records in synch whilst providing considerable ranging sales and service functionalities. All in all there isn't always a whole lot exchange thinking about last 12 months. There wants to be a major machine for each real worldwide entity, and landscape complexity desires to live in test doing so.
Multiple decrease again stop remains complex. Especially so, while order taking and/quotation control via C4 comes into the photograph. Especially more complicated conditions like resource of variation configuration are tough. Variant configuration especially, an SAP electricity, desires the Configuration and Pricing Service ? CPS ? That is residing inside the SCP. Now, this provider can connect to handiest one ERP, and there can be no infrastructure yet to aid multiple returned ends, despite the fact that information and wide variety levels are harmonized between them. So, all over again, on the identical time as topics are improving there's although a few manner to go. And on this particular example I do realize matters: It is important as many customers are having a a couple of backend situation and second, SAP might be very interested by and actively running on improving the state of affairs here.
There is a technical and a business project right right here: Technically CPS is single tenant, i.E. Can aid only one single backend. Which is a high-quality begin and SAP is taking into consideration the way to feasibly enhance this. And there are a few very clever individuals who understand their stuff operating on it. So, take a look at right right here! Then there may be a enterprise project. SAP clients pay for CPQ. This device is strong, gives loads of cost, specially integrated into a landscape. So, given its price, customers will arrive at a trustworthy charge. Customers moreover pay for version configuration in ERP. The same argument as earlier than applies.
But then additionally they need to pay (handsomely) for the CPS, which resides inside the SAP Cloud Platform, SCP ? Every other entity this is paid for. I well known that CPS has been a chunk of exertions but I think it's far profitable considering to deliver it free of rate as a part of the answer. This would seem a lot better.
Engines and Industry answers
Another sore point.
Well, without a doubt of them.
But factors that I will address high-quality quickly.
Industry solutions can only be appropriately addressed after enough of the horizonal functionality is available. Now, this seems to be largely the case in both, S4 as well as C4. This is indicated by SAP showing an increasing focus on industry solutions, especially in the S4 area. Is SAP there yet? Not by a wide margin, compared to ECC 6. But then ECC 6 has a few years of advantage.
Engines are a comparable subject matter. Many of them were coded into current applications. Those, which have been made part of CRM like e.G. TPM or loyalty manage are a assignment that desires to get addressed (TPM) or already are in device of being addressed (loyalty management). Others are too deeply ingrained into the ERP system (solution configuration? Condition method?) and too intently become morphed into standalone engines. Existing clients create a genuine foundation proper here.
All in all, I do see paintings in improvement, however art work that would want to be accelerated with a view to fend off the competition.
S4 vs. C4
Where does S4 quit and C4 start? This is the 1,000 greenback question. The authentic SAP solution is that whatever is transactional is in S4 and whatever is patron going through is in C4. If it is client revel in, then it is C4 (that's probable not a great selection standards).
Marketing is simply in C4.
This answer still leaves a lot of grey space as there is considerable overlap between ‘transactional’ and ‘customer facing’. Order taking can happen in both systems. S/4 has the original CIC and now the SAP Contact Center 365 that runs on top of it; C/4 has a service center.
Even worse, if you ask S4 guys or C4 guys, you continue to get non matching solutions.
On one hand, C4 is strategic. This is also evidenced with the useful resource of the fact that for the first time ever these days SAP suggests CRM ? Or as an alternative customer revel in ? Related software sales.
On the opposite hand S/four is strategic. And there are hundreds of SAP CRM clients who're deeply invested into this software program. And reputation or no, SAP CRM is a amazing and effective answer. So, even though SAP funding into the CM a part of SAP is significantly lower than the investment into C/4, it's far a honest and incredible concept to supply Customer Management (CM, previously called CRM Add On) as part of the S/four license.
For multiple cause
Which is precisely what SAP has virtually finished.
You are asking what one of a kind motives are?
Well, how approximately those :
· SAP has plenty of ERP and CRM customers who need some kind of sales and service solution and who do not need as much as C/4 offers. Still, they do want to (or need to) migrate to S/4. With CM as part of S/4 these customers get a powerful sales and service solution without the immediate need of buying another solution. These existing customers can take advantage of the package while having the additional benefit of not needing to maintain a middleware as CM is an integral part of S/4. According to SAP the investments into customizing and custom code can be reused to an extent of more than 90 per cent. This is real value.
All that at no extra price and probable even at a lower license charge as customers do no longer want SAP CRM anymore. On top of this, the necessary know-how is already available.
· There are also many new customers with either another CRM product or none at all (yeah, these still exist). Both groups can benefit from using the CRM that is built in to S/4; for similar reasons as the first group: There is a good CRM and integrated solution available ‘for free’ that just needs to get used.
In end
SAP works hard to decorate on those topics. Let me try to formulate 3 praises and 3 suggestions for further development.
As it's far no actual fashion to give up with grievance, even tremendous one, I start with a few tips.
· It should be interesting to improve on the solution thought again. Take the example of variant configuration. There are too many pricing entities and, well, too many product groups that one needs to talk to, if things are getting serious. Customers do variant configuration. They do it in a sales system. Try to harmonize responsibilities around this, using a one face to the customer approach. This could facilitate things for you and your customers.
· The boundary between S4 and C4 needs to be clarified. Currently it is not and there is a lot of confusion in the market. Customers need more guidance. They are first looking at their implementation partners – who need guidance, too – and then at SAP. So, please sharpen the picture, that is pretty blurred here.
· SAP has a lot of engines. That is great. Somehow many of them are built into applications, which is not so great. Think TPM. Think loyatlty management. Think configuration. There are many more examples of functionalities that can be better exposed as engines, offering advantages for customers and hence for SAP
Now, permit me quit with a few super factors that I see
· It is a fantastic move to offer CM as part of S4. This offers lots of benefit to existing as well as new customers – and therefore to SAP.
· SAP shows quite some customer orientation when it comes to improving the C4 suite. I have only limited examples but these are very laudable and encouraging. More of this can change images
· I think that SAP does a good job at communicating roadmaps. Yes, it can get improved, but overall, continue on this path
Overall SAP is on a superb way, in all likelihood now not the best that is ideal for each consumer, but it's far. Final advice: Show it. Learn some classes from the opposition, adopt them to in shape them moreover inside the impressions department.
Comments
Post a Comment