SAP

Is SAP Still in SMB Stealth Mode? Watch Out, Changes are Looming

Many think SAP is just for the big guys. The company is the closest you get in the ERP market to a household name, and, after all, it was in the large enterprise where it made that name for itself. In reality though, SAP plays in markets that include companies of all sizes. A good 80% of its customers are in the small to midsize enterprise range. And yet today small to midsize companies in search of a solution don’t immediately think “SAP” and they will have a difficult time discovering all that SAP has to offer them.

SAP’s competitors perpetuate the “big guy only” misconception, along with  “expensive” and “complex” qualifiers. They are like a dog with a bone, refusing to let go, hoping to lead prospects away from the 800-pound gorilla. Pundits who largely follow the large enterprise space contribute as well, along with the publicity (both good and bad) from high profile customers that are also household names. But SAP must also share some of the blame because of one thing it is so very good at: Speaking in one voice.

SAP employees stay on message. And the message is couched in the native language of SAP, which is the language of IT in the large enterprise. Although the latest overarching message these days is “Run Simple,” that alone doesn’t say enough. SAPers either talk at such a high level of abstraction that it becomes meaningless (your world will be a better place), or they talk technology.

In speaking to the decision makers and business leaders in small to midsize businesses (SMBs), you might as well be talking Klingon. They have their feet firmly planted on the ground. They want to hear how a solution will solve their immediate problems, address their challenges and bring value to the business. They want specifics. And they want to buy from a company they can trust.

The combination of negative hype and the “one voice” of SAP also might lead SMBs to think SAP is a one trick pony, with only a single product to offer, one that is clearly beyond their reach. Nothing could be further from the truth. Not only does SAP have three separate and distinct ERP offerings, it also has other offerings that sit on the periphery, outside the boundaries of ERP. These include talent management (SuccessFactors), travel and expense (Concur), a supplier network (Ariba), analytics (Business Objects) and a front office (SAP Anywhere). And this is just a partial list.

Let’s start with core ERP. At the top is SAP ERP, which has been brought to market under different names during its evolution. But make no mistake; this is definitely a solution that is meant to satisfy the needs of the largest, most complex enterprises in the world. Older versions were known as SAP R/2 and R/3 but more recently it was simply referred to as SAP ERP or ECC, providing the core of a larger Business Suite(adding CRM, SRM, SCM and PLM to ERP). The latest incarnation is S/4HANA, which is both evolutionary and revolutionary at the same time. It provides the same functionality as SAP ERP but has undergone a rewrite to take advantage of the powerful in-memory technology of SAP HANA. This is the large enterprise ERP for which SAP is famous (infamous?).

But this is not a “one size fits all” solution. SAP also offers SAP Business One and SAP ByDesign. Up until recently, it also marketed Business All in One, but in fact that was/is not a separate product. It was a version of SAP ERP packaged with industry templates and best practices, purportedly designed to simplify the implementation, thereby making SAP ERP more digestible for the mid-market. Because it was essentially the same product but with a different name, it also added some confusion. SAP appears to be backing away from that branding. I think that is smart. Can SAP S/4HANA work for this midmarket? The answer is yes, particularly where that smaller, midsize company is a division of a large enterprise that has standardized on SAP solutions. But these will be the exceptions to the rule.

SAP is also getting smarter about how it targets these three products to different segments. SAP has formed an SMB team to specifically address the market of companies with 1500 employees or less, and has defined “small” as companies with less than 250 employees. It will market SAP Business One to small companies looking for an on-premise or hosted solution (partners will provide the hosting). It will be sold largely through partners, which will provide both advocacy and intimacy to the customer. SAP Business ByDesign is available exclusively as a multi-tenant SaaS (software as a service) solution supported by SAP itself. The target is generally the mid-market but can come down into the small company range for those interested in a true SaaS solution from SAP.

However, both SAP Business One and SAP Business ByDesign have suffered from a lack of respect in the market. Competitors often write Business One off, telling me they hardly ever see it in a competitive deal. And yet Business One is implemented in over 50,000 small companies around the world and SAP is adding about 1,000 new customers a quarter. That tells me there are hundreds of deals where these competitors never get invited to the party.

Rumors of the death of Business ByDesign have been rampant for years and unfortunately SAP has allowed its critics to have had a louder voice in the market than SAP itself. In the meantime, SAP has been (rather quietly) growing the installed base to about 1,000 customers, which is larger than many customer bases of some of those competitors. Respected journalists and analysts have recently admitted ByDesign is in fact not dead. I couldn’t/can’t resist saying, “I told you so.”

This might all seem like SAP 101 to veteran industry observers. But it also might come as a surprise to learn that your typical decision maker and business leader of a small to midsize business doesn’t follow the (ERP) space that closely. Those business leaders are too busy following their own industries. So they are easily confused by the progression of product names and even more easily confused when target markets for different products overlap. And they are not well equipped to distinguish hype and myth from reality. To convince them one way or the other, you have to understand how they approach software selection and you have to speak their language. And you have to speak it loudly and clearly. That is where SAP has not done a good job.

I am optimistic that is about to change under some new leadership at SAP. Barry Padgett took over as President of the SMB team last July. He came over from the Concur team, bringing a new perspective. Barry “gets” SMBs. They need a lot of the same features and functions that their larger counterparts need, but they don’t have the large IT staffs or the deep pockets. They expect products to work seamlessly – open and connected. They don’t go out looking for technology. They go out looking for solutions to problems and answers to questions. They expect value. They need to see a path forward. And to connect with them, you need to be talking in terms they clearly understand.

Barry and his new CMO Mika Yamamoto (who came to SAP from Amazon) also understand how most software searches begin these days. Much of the legwork and due diligence is done before a prospect ever engages with a potential solution provider. Today an online search for solutions for SMBs does not lead directly to SAP. And even if you land on SAP’s website, there is no clear path to show you what you need or how SAP can help. So clearly SEO and website redesign is top on Mika’s priority list.

But both Barry and Mika know that it can’t end there. They must have a louder voice than their critics. And remember all those products in SAP’s portfolio that sit on the edges of a solution: talent management, supplier networks, analytics, travel and expense, eCommerce (front office)? SMBs have the same kind of needs as their larger counterparts in all of these areas. But they don’t have the internal expertise to assemble a solution that is not already seamlessly connected.

It is not enough that these edge solutions are available from SAP; they must be both affordable and integrated to SAP Business One and SAP Business ByDesign. These kinds of connections are certainly on the roadmap, but they can’t come too soon.

The Internet has leveled the playing field, allowing SMBs to participate in a growing, global market. But many won’t be able to compete effectively with their existing solutions. This opens up a world of opportunity to SMB solution providers. Look at the success SAP has had in the small to mid-market already. I am not advocating the SMB folks at SAP go off message, but I am advocating they articulate that message in a different voice. That voice needs to be loud and proud. They need to keep the dialogue going with existing customers and keep the development engines churning. While I also believe there is plenty of opportunity for all those with good, solid, technology-enabled solutions, if the new leadership team can deliver on these fronts, they will truly be a force to be reckoned with.

 

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

SAP Central Finance: a non-disruptive step towards system consolidation

Operating across a distributed environment has become a way of life for a large percentage of businesses today, even smaller ones. In fact 80% of all survey participants in the 2015 Mint Jutras Enterprise Solution Study had more than one operating location served by ERP (Figure 1). Even small companies (those with annual revenues lower than $25 million) average 2.87 operating locations, and that number grows steadily as revenues grow.

Figure 1: Environments Are More Distributed and Remote

Fig 1 SAPSource: Mint Jutras 2015 Enterprise Solution Study

This proliferation of operating locations often results in a proliferation of enterprise applications in general and ERP solutions in particular. In days gone by, these different operating sites were often left on their own to select the enterprise applications that would help them run their individual businesses. Yes there was a corporate accounting system, and financials needed to be rolled up. But those corporate financials were overkill at the divisional level, and often didn’t have all the functionality needed to manage operations, particularly in manufacturing sites.

As long as these different operating sites operated quite independently, this proliferation wasn’t too much of a problem. But today the likelihood of divisions operating completely autonomously has dramatically shrunk. Whether you are a services organization working on projects that span the globe or a manufacturer striving to manufacture closer to your customer, leaving each operating location to do their own thing just doesn’t cut it anymore. Standardized processes and corporate standards for the enterprise applications that support those processes have become the norm.

The majority (87%) of multi-location companies today have created standards that govern which enterprise applications are used across the enterprise (Figure 2). However, a fair number (14%) are still in the process of migrating to these standards, which means they are faced with the challenge of rationalizing existing solutions that are functioning today. Typically this means a long process of ripping and replacing solutions and many years before they see the benefits.

Figure 2: Have you established corporate standards for enterprise applications?

Fig 2 SAPSource: Mint Jutras 2015 Enterprise Solution Study

For SAP customers, SAP Central Finance might just be a shortcut to some of those benefits. It provides more than just the typical kind of consolidated reporting that is done at the aggregate level. Central Finance taps into the power of SAP HANA and replicates all journal entries in a Universal Ledger, while preserving the source of those entries, whether the source is an SAP ERP solution or not. Of course it takes a bit more effort to map the data from nonSAP solutions, but SAP has tools to help and it is quite do-able.

What this accomplishes immediately: Centralized reporting across the organization, beyond the typical financial reporting, and also the potential for more informed centralized strategic decision-making.

  • Reporting based on harmonized master data
  • Central journal for balance sheet and P&L reports
  • Central profitability analysis
  • Overarching views on customer and vendor accounts
  • Liquidity forecasts based on payables and receivables
  • Central overhead analysis
  • Reports for selected cost object categories

… All this without ripping or replacing anything. Of course, some might stop here, centralizing finance and leaving disparate ERP solutions in place, while others might move on to rationalize solutions. … or some combination of the two. Mint Jutras finds there are several different flavors of corporate standards (Figure 3).

Figure 3: Is this a single or multi-tier standard?

Fig 3 SAPSource: Mint Jutras 2015 Enterprise Solution Study

Although those all running a single ERP solution won’t need to rationalize solutions, they are still likely to need to consolidate financials, especially those that are multi-national. Central Finance could also be used to absorb a new acquisition, incorporating the new entity into corporate financials. Today Central Finance can be used for corporate reporting and planning, but as SAP continues executing on its planned roadmap, in the future, customers will be able to use it for central operational processing

To sum up both approaches….

Central Finance as a corporate reporting and planning platform:

  • Establishes central financial system as a single source of truth
  • Across entities and units
  • With harmonized master data
  • Using the flexible data model of Simple Finance (now called SAP S/4HANA Finance), with the possibility of adding new dimensions for reporting that might not even be available in source systems
  • With new reporting tools
  • And the speed of HAHA
  • Cross-entity insight with limitless detail. You can even click on a document ID in Central Finance to navigate back to the source system (think traceability). This is done automatically when the source system is an SAP product. Doing the same for nonSAP systems requires additional effort.

Central Finance for operational processing

  • Simplify and standardize processes
  • By centralizing financial processes
  • By standardizing, harmonizing processes across units
  • Move processes to central execution models while streamlining processes based on harmonized data
  • Possibly simplify work in shared service centers
  • Simplify your IT landscape

Whether you need to consolidate financials only, or entire ERP systems, if you are an SAP customer, you owe it to yourself to investigate how Central Finance could make your life easier.

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

What are you running your business with? Is it ERP?

Perhaps you’ve heard me ask the question, “Is it ERP?” about various solutions on the market. Maybe you were thinking, “Does it matter?” The answer to that question is, “Yes and no.” “No,” in that ERP, like any software category, is just that. It’s a category, a label and you shouldn’t read too much into that. “Yes,” in that the category is often misused and maligned.

While the acronym itself (short for enterprise resource planning) can be somewhat misleading, I have always been very clear on my definition of ERP:

ERP is an integrated suite of modules that form the operational and transactional system of record of the business.

The rest of the world doesn’t see it quite this clearly. Of course my definition is intentionally quite broad, but it needs to be simply because the operational and transactional needs will vary quite significantly depending on the very nature of the business. You can’t run a service business like a manufacturing or distribution business. Retailers, government and non-profits all have their own unique requirements.

This situation is also clearly exasperated by the fact that the footprint of ERP has grown to the point where it is getting more and more difficult to determine where ERP ends and other applications begin. Functions like performance management, talent and human capital management, etc, that used to sit squarely outside of ERP, today might sit either inside or outside that boundary. While operational accounting has long been a core competency of ERP, more robust financial management can be an integral part of ERP, or a stand-alone solution. Likewise, the footprint of solutions that have traditionally been marketed as financial and accounting solutions have expanded as well. No wonder there is so much confusion out there.

As a result, I thought it would be a good idea this year to see what people actually think they are using to run their businesses. While I have been conducting an annual ERP survey since 2006, much of the data I collect is relevant to other solution providers as well, particularly those that focus primarily on finance and accounting, with perhaps some project management and/or human resource management included. So this year I changed the name of the study to the Mint Jutras Enterprise Solution Study and added a new question at the very beginning.

Question: Which of the following best describes the software you use to manage your business?

  • Primarily enterprise level finance and accounting solutions (might include project management and/or human capital management)
  • Integrated enterprise level finance and accounting solutions supplemented with other operational applications (e.g. inventory, warehouse management, etc.)
  • An integrated suite of modules that provides a full system of record of our business (often referred to as ERP)
  • Desktop solutions such as Quicken, QuickBooks, Peachtree, etc.
  • Mostly spreadsheets and/or some low-cost or free tools (Google apps, Zoho, etc.)
  • Don’t Know

While data collection is still underway, we have collected almost 300 responses thus far and the results are quite interesting.

Note that participants checking spreadsheets and “Don’t Know” were disqualified and therefore will not be represented in any results. While those running desktop solutions qualified, only 1 participant checked this option and therefore I will only include the first three listed above in our discussion here.

During the course of the survey, participants are asked to check off all the different accounting/ERP solutions they have implemented across their entire enterprises and then asked to select one of those and answer implementation and performance questions for that specific solution. While 84% of the participants selected a solution that is clearly marketed as ERP, only 33% of this segment selected the third option above, which is reflective of the Mint Jutras definition of ERP. So they have purchased an ERP solution, but by my definition, they aren’t running ERP.

The remaining 16% selected solutions that are generally marketed as finance and accounting solutions. And yet 21% of these participants described the solution they were running as an integrated suite that provides a complete system of record of their business (i.e. ERP). So it would appear the majority of those running full ERP solutions are not making the most of what they have. And at least one in five of those running solutions primarily marketed as accounting solutions seem to have all they need to run their businesses. The full breakdown of responses is summarized in Figure 1.

Figure 1: What runs your business?

Figure 1 Blog postSource: 2015 Mint Jutras Enterprise Solution Study

These (somewhat surprising) results caused me to dive a little deeper, looking for, if not an explanation, at least a pattern. This early sample represented a pretty diverse group with the largest representation from manufacturing (41%) and service related businesses (36%). Given ERP evolved from MRP (material requirements planning), one would expect a higher adoption rate and more mature ERP implementations in manufacturers. While very few manufacturers run the solutions marketed primarily as finance and accounting solutions, 41% indicated the software running the business was primarily a finance and accounting solution. Another 26% had integrated finance and accounting solutions supplemented with other operational solutions such as inventory and warehouse management, presumably purchased from another vendor or a partner of their ERP solution provider. Again, only 33% described their implementation as full ERP. So no, manufacturers are not ahead of the pack.

I also looked at individual solution providers where I had a sample of at least 20 responses for smaller vendors or 40+ for larger ones. What segments were most likely to be running an integrated suite that provides a full system of record? The answer: Those running solutions that specifically target small to mid-size businesses. Does this mean small and mid-size businesses were more likely to describe what they were running as ERP? Not necessarily. It depends a lot on the solution provider and the solution itself.

Sixty-eight percent (68%) of those running Aptean’s solutions and 67% of those running SAP Business One described what they were running as ERP, per the definition above. Those running Acumatica’s cloud-based solution were also more likely to do so at 55%. And yet those running any of the four Microsoft Dynamics ERP solutions (AX, NAV, GP, SL), all of which target small to midsize enterprises (SMEs), were less likely, with only 28% indicating they were running a full ERP. Instead, they were more likely to report running integrated enterprise level finance and accounting solutions supplemented with other operational applications. My guess is that the partners that sold them the Dynamics solution (note: all Dynamics solutions are sold exclusively through partners) provide these other operational applications. Yet clearly these add-on’s are not so fully embedded and seamlessly integrated that they appear to simply be part of the ERP solution.

This is in stark contrast to solutions sold by Intacct partners, where I have noted previously that it is nearly impossible to distinguish where Intacct ends and the partner solution begins. As a result, 23% of Intacct customers indicated they were running an integrated suite that provides a full system of record, even though Intacct doesn’t portray its solution as ERP. It is one of those financial and accounting solution providers.

Another factor at play here is the whole concept of 2-tier ERP implementations. A full 85% of our survey respondents operate in more than one location and 69% are multi-national enterprises. This lends itself to the scenario where each operating location (division, subsidiary, business unit, etc.) may be run as a business all on its own. In fact if these units are in different countries they are also separate legal entities, requiring their own P&Ls. So you might have one system running at corporate headquarters (HQ) and other systems running the divisions.

The requirements at corporate HQ are largely financial, particularly if all orders are placed and fulfilled at the divisional level. This contributes to a larger percentage of respondents only running financials.

In days gone by these operating units might have been left to their own devices to find a solution to help them run their individual operations. Those days are long gone though. Today, 96% of our survey participants with multiple locations have established corporate standards and 64% of the time these are multi-tier standards, meaning a different ERP is used at the divisional level than at corporate. But even with a corporate financial solution in place, divisions still need some sort of finance and accounting in order to roll up to corporate. You can push the corporate financials down to the divisional level and then supplement them with other operational solutions. Or you can implement a full ERP at the divisional level and then integrate the divisional ERP with corporate financials.

This alone could be a very good reason why SAP Business One customers are more likely to be running a fully integrated suite. Of course if they are truly a small stand-alone business, they need a complete solution and probably don’t have the budget to be looking for disparate solutions that need to be integrated. Even if they are part of a large corporate enterprise, there is a pretty good chance corporate is running some version of SAP ERP. Because SAP Business One is pre-integrated with SAP ERP, the division has an integrated suite of modules providing a full system of record of the division’s business, that also happens to roll up to corporate financials.

With this as a likely scenario, you might think that the vast majority of SAP ERP customers are simply running integrated financials. They are not. Only 19% reported running primarily enterprise level finance and accounting, while 29% reported running integrated financials and other operational applications and a (relatively) impressive 52% reported running full ERP. Many assume SAP, being the 800-pound gorilla and therefore open to attack, is so complex and hard to implement that many never get beyond the basics of accounting. Yet in comparison to others, it is actually more likely to provide that full system of record.

This is not the case with Oracle, the other giant in the ERP industry. Almost half (46%) of Oracle users participating in the survey characterize their implementations as primarily accounting and only 28% describe them as ERP.

So while I would like to conclude that I found a distinct and recognizable pattern in all this data, the bottom line is that implementations vary quite significantly, particularly in comparing different solution providers. I am excited to have the beginnings of this new and extensive data set and look forward to sharing other insights as we move through the data collection and analysis phases.

Solution providers interested in collecting data from your own installed bases, feel free to contact me directly at cindy@mintjutras.com. There is still time but the window of opportunity will be closing soon!

 

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

SAP Business One Emerges as the SMB ERP Solution to Beat

If you are a small to mid-size business (SMB) faced with a decision about Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP), SAP Business One is likely on your radar. Even if your initial search did not result in placing SAP’s solution on your short list, chances are one of its competitors has brought it to your attention by attacking either SAP or Business One, or both. Why? Just like political attack ads that go after the front-runner, ERP vendors go on the attack against the industry leader. By sheer numbers, SAP is the largest enterprise solution vendor and over 80% of its 263,000 customers are in the small to midsize bracket. With over 45,000 SAP Business One customers, this solution might be an easy target, but it is not going to be easy to beat.

The rationalization, “Nobody ever got fired for choosing [insert front runner here]” doesn’t work for ERP, leastwise for ERP in a small company when it is usually the top boss signing off on the decision. All 45,000 SAP Business One customers could not have been “wrong.” And let’s face it: If you want to make an informed decision about a solution, you don’t go to the competition for the facts. Competitors often get the facts wrong and propagate rumors, myths and misinformation. Any comparison the competitions’ sales/marketing teams offer is often driven by wishful thinking and influenced by drinking their own Kool-Aid. To examine some of those assertions, along with some facts, click on the link below.

Click here to read more

Tagged , , , , , , ,

SAP Leverages the “Power of Big” to Benefit SMEs

Some common myths and misconceptions in the world of ERP are hard to kill, particularly when competitors and pundits just won’t let them die. Among these common myths is the perception that SAP is just for the big guys. Yes, the SAP Business Suite and even some predecessors to the Suite are installed in a large percentage of the Fortune 500. And yes, some of them cost millions of dollars and took many years to implement. Of course there are some horror stories, but I would argue those exist for any major ERP vendor.

I have to admit, during my 30+ years of working for software companies (but never for SAP), I might have encouraged some of those misconceptions, just as SAP’s competitors do today. But now, as a recovering software executive turned data junkie, I tend to look beyond the rumors and misperceptions. I go for the facts. Here are a few that are hard to argue with:

  • SAP has about 263,000 customers
  • 80% of them fall in the small to mid-size (SME) bracket. Do the math. The answer is 210,400.
  • SAP does not sell just one product. There is the Business Suite, but also SAP Business One and SAP Business ByDesign (no it is not dead or dying). SAP Business All-in-One is the Business Suite repackaged, by industry, for medium size businesses. You might choose to call it a different product or not, but it really matters little. Repackaged with best practices included, it makes the Business Suite more attractive to smaller (but not too small) companies.
  • SAP Business One, which addresses the lower end of the SME market, is installed in over 45,000 small businesses.
  • SAP’s ecosystem of partners that support small to mid-size businesses is 700 strong and growing.

I am sure one of SAP’s goals for this year’s annual SAP SME Summit was (once again) to help dispel these myths and misconceptions. I am equally sure that SAP understands it will take more than just bringing together customers, press and analysts in its hip New York City office to counter these perceptions. Instead, it seems to be effectively leveraging its extensive resources in order to help small and medium size businesses. Here are a few of different actions it has taken recently:

  • SAP HANA 9 can now be run on less expensive hardware
  • Powerful data visualization tools are available with a copy of SAP Lumira, free to any SAP customer
  • Fiori apps, providing an intuitive and modern new user experience, are now included for free (with paid maintenance) with SAP Business All-in-One
  • A 0% financing program, designed specifically for small businesses, as well as SAP’s partners that sell directly to them. This is a “buy now, pay later” option that gives the small business free financing for 24 months, while the partner gets paid within 5 days.
  • A free connection to the Ariba Network, which connects over 1.6 million companies in 190 countries, allows the small business to list its products. Although the free version does not allow bidding and purchase from the site, this is an effective way for small businesses to reach a large potential group of buyers.

It takes a large company with deep pockets and extensive resources to be able to make these kinds of offers to SMEs. Yes SAP continues to be the 800-pound gorilla in the ERP space but that doesn’t mean it can leverage the “power of big” to the benefit of the little guy.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

SAP Launches Strategic Division: SMB Solutions Group

Yesterday a press release from SAP crossed the wire announcing a new division focusing on small and midsize businesses (SMBs). Here, SMB is defined as companies with fewer than 500 employees and is a subset of SAP’s traditional view of small to midsize enterprise (SMEs). This appears to be another step in the larger plan to make everything about SAP simpler. It is no secret in the industry that smaller companies can easily be intimidated by the likes of an SAP, or (in all fairness) any company of its size and dominance. While many smaller customers take refuge behind their first line of support, SAP’s channel partners, the presence of the giant behemoth behind those partners looms large.

At this point this is largely an organizational change. Dean Mansfield will head up the new division. Dean is an industry veteran, perhaps best known in the market for his senior leadership position at SaaS ERP provider, NetSuite. But, although he is an industry veteran with a career that spans more than 20 years, he is a relative newcomer to SAP, having joined last October. He is based in Hong Kong. But if this were just an organizational announcement, it would probably elicit a big yawn. I see it as more than that, largely because of the strategy behind it.

SAP’s board is putting in place a strategy to “redefine the SMB business solutions market by creating the next generation of simplified business applications powered by SAP HANA, delivered via the cloud that will solve tomorrow’s complex SMB challenges.” That’s a mouthful. But if you look below the surface, you find several, wide-reaching implications.

First of all it is a bold and perhaps presumptive statement. In “redefining” a whole market of business solutions by creating next generation, simplified applications, it seems to imply that all business solutions targeting SMBs need to be simplified. I think this is a gross over-simplification in of itself. Not all products in this market are overly complex. In fact I am not even sure I would call SAP Business One overly complex. If Business One has a weakness, and of course all business software does, it might be in some of the gaps that remain in functionality. After all, it’s not on par with the SAP Business Suite in terms of features and functions…or complexity. The complexity with SAP is more about having a diverse product portfolio. And SAP could certainly benefit from simplifying the selling and consumption of the software. So simplification extends beyond software products, and I think SAP gets that.

But there is a product element to the announcement. This strategy seems to imply that the SMB Solutions Group will be developing a brand new product. SAP has made it very clear that it is not making a new product announcement; it is announcing a strategic division focused on defining what is needed in the future. But the implication certainly is that a (new?) simplified product is needed. I can see why SAP doesn’t want to construe this as a new product at this point in time, because it could very well be that it takes one of its existing products and transforms it into this new generation of simplified, integrated business applications. The simple truth is, SAP has not made any firm decisions yet as to direction and roadmap, and wants to leave all its options open. That is fine for now, but with this announcement, the pressure will be on to better define this strategy.

A couple of things are certain though. Whatever direction SAP decides to go in, it will involve HANA and it will be delivered via the cloud. This might lead you to believe that SAP will leverage its existing products to the fullest in order to bring a solution to market faster and more cost effectively (for SAP). This is exactly what the market would expect an SAP, or any other dominant player with a huge portfolio, to do. That and a bigger development budget than its competitors give SAP an edge. But that is not the stated direction.

Instead, SAP has a stated intention of doing what makes the most sense in meeting the needs of the customer, rather than looking first to leverage prior investments in other product lines, both in terms of core ERP and those “edge” products that might surround it. Why (possibly) create a whole new product from scratch when you have so much component inventory on your shelves? The answer is, because it is a cleaner and simpler solution for the customer. Remember, the overriding goal is to simplify.

On the one hand, it is refreshing to hear SAP express this as an objective, but on the other hand, you have to feel a bit of déjà vu here. Isn’t that what it intended to do with Business ByDesign? The whole reason SAP started from scratch in writing Business ByDesign was to reduce the level of complexity that becomes inherent in a solution that starts out as a large enterprise solution, and grows more complex through evolution.

While many love to attack ByDesign as a “failed” product, I would caution both industry observers and competitors against labeling ByDesign as a failure. No, it has not met a lot of the lofty goals originally bandied about, like 10,000 customers. No, SAP has not sold that many subscriptions, but SAP can boast more ByDesign customers than some of its smaller competitors claim as their entire customer base. Of course everyone has their own personal definition of success and failure, but I would still propose that the rumors of its death have been greatly exaggerated. That said, if you harken back to the goal of this new redefinition of the SMB market to simplify the offering, it certainly has a very familiar ring to it.

Will this effort be more successful? I believe it will be, for a couple of reasons. First of all, it is supported by a rather dramatic organizational change, which is driven by a new strategy. But probably more importantly is another consideration not immediately visible from the press release. Some of us in the analyst community had the opportunity to meet Dean both in person and virtually, and it was through these meetings that it became clear there was another change afoot. While product strategy at SAP in the past has always been driven by a technology focus, this new organization will have more of a business focus and will be guided and driven by business needs. To some, this might seem a minor point, but I think this could stack the deck heavily towards the new division being more successful than prior efforts.

HANA is a prime example. Yes, it was/is new and groundbreaking, some might even call it game-changing. But it was inspired by technology and created by technologists. And when it first came to market, it was incredibly elegant technology in search of a business problem. While this might go over well in the large enterprise, that is not how SMBs make decisions or acquire business solutions. Even Business ByDesign was driven largely by the development organization working with a few charter customers.

This new team understands that it is not selling IT. Technology is part of the solution and critical to the success, but first and foremost, it is selling a business solution. While simplicity is the goal, this team understands, the business needs of the SMB may not be simple. In fact complexity has a way of creeping up on SMBs over time, particularly as expectations are elevated by consumer technology. SAP wants to help fix that. Its goal is to deliver a solution that can satisfy those needs and can be implemented and deployed in a modular fashion, adding new pieces as needs evolve or budget becomes available.

While this team might not have all the answers today, it is being thorough and methodical in evaluating all the different possible avenues to meeting the goal of redefining the SMB business solution market. But now that the cat is out of the bag, the pressure is on for them to come up with a more specific product strategy and roadmap. The clock is ticking.

Tagged , , , , , ,

Can Running SAP Business Suite on SAP HANA Be a Game Changer?

It can if you change the conversation

Back in February I posted this update on SAP Business Suite on HANA after having spoken with Jeff Woods, former industry analyst, currently Suite on HANA aficionado at SAP.

As a follow-up I joined Katie Moser for a webcast.

Click here to listen to the webcast

And now for the original post:

Jeff had lots of good stuff to share, including some progress to date:

  • 800+ Suite on HANA contracts have been signed
  • 7,600+ partners have been trained
  • There are 200+ Suite on HANA projects underway
  • 55 of these projects have gone live (and the number is growing)
  • The largest ERP on HANA system supports 100,000 users

So the Suite on HANA is quite real. But the single message that resonated the most strongly with me: the conversation has (finally) changed. While we’ve been hearing about HANA as this wonderful new technology for several years now, for the most part, the talk was about technology and even when the technologists spoke about purported business value, they spoke in very technical terms. But the audience I write for, business leaders in various industries, don’t care about technology for technology sake. Many don’t (care to) understand tech-speak. But they do care about what technology can do for them.

A Year Later…

It was just about a year ago that SAP announced the availability of SAP Business Suite powered by HANA, complete with live and live-streamed press conferences in both New York City and Waldorf, Germany. I don’t think I have ever seen such genuine excitement from SAP folks as was displayed in this announcement, and yet the “influencers” in the audience were a bit more subdued. A year ago I attributed this to the fact that these same influencers tend to be a quite jaded bunch, hard to impress. We had also been hearing about HANA for a few years already. There wasn’t a “newness” or game-changing feel about the announcement. But impressing the influencers is only one step towards the real goal of engaging with prospects and customers.

A year ago I also wrote, “SAP is trying hard to change the conversation to be less about the technology and more about the business value.  What is the real value? In the words of one early adopter: HANA solves problems that were deemed unsolvable in the past.” But uncovering those previously unsolvable problems required some visionary thinking.  Tech-speak is not going to get the attention of the guy (or gal) that signs the check or spur that kind of thinking. And a year ago the conversation hadn’t changed. Just look at how the vision of HANA was portrayed:

  • All active data must be in memory, ridding the world of the “rusty spinning disk”
  • Full exploitation of massively parallel processing (MPP) in order to efficiently support more users
  • The same database used for online transaction processing (OLTP) and analytics, eliminating the need for a data warehouse as a reporting tool for OLTP to support live conversations rather than “prefabricated briefing books”
  • Radically simplified data models
  • Aggressive use of math
  • Use of design thinking throughout the model

Look carefully at those words. They mean nothing to the non-technical business executive. Sure, those words got the attention of some forward thinking CIO’s, and that was enough to kick start the early projects, projects that produced amazing results. But that’s as far as the message got. And even when the message was not articulated in technical terms, it was presented at too high a level of abstraction. Business executives faced with important decisions don’t think in terms of “becoming a real-time business.” Operational managers don’t seek out “transformative innovation without disruption.” They want to get through the day most effectively and efficiently and make the right decisions.

Asking the Right Questions Today

So how do you change the conversation? By asking a different kind of question. Because “faster” is universally accepted as a good thing, in the beginning the HANA conversation might have been kicked off with the question to the CIO: What processes are running too slowly today? But in talking to the business user, you need a different approach. SAP’s “cue card” below is a good start. You are now seeing conversation starters that make more sense to the business leader. Take the time now to read them carefully. If you are a business leader, they will resonate much more than discussions of MPP and column-oriented databases or even speed of processes. I especially like the business practice questions in the rightmost column.

Cue card

Source: SAP

But if I were sitting across the table from a business leader, I might ask questions that are even more direct and down-to-earth. For example:

  • Describe a situation where you have to hang up the phone, dig deeper and get back to your customer or prospect later. (By the way Jeff’s thought was that by hanging up you only encourage them to pick up the phone and call your competitor.)
  • What summary data do you get today that consistently requires more detail before you make a decision? Can you get at that data immediately (no delays) and easily (no hunting around)?
  • What level of granularity are you forecasting revenue? Is it sufficiently detailed? Are you forecasting by region or maybe by product line when you would love to be able to forecast by territory, individual customer and individual product combined?
  • Are there decisions that require you to consult with others? How much time does this add to the decision-making process? How easy or hard is it to keep track of who to contact? How quickly can you make contact? Quickly enough?

The goal really is to improve the business not only in small linear steps, but also to increase speed of decision and therefore efficiency exponentially. The first step is to provide new ways of engaging with the system, which means changing the user experience. But to change the game, you need to make improvements to the process itself. SAP’s new Fiori applications are a good example of this progression.

 Fiori: More Than Just a Pretty Face

Last spring, SAP announced SAP Fiori, a collection of 25 apps that would surround the Business Suite, providing a new user experience for the most commonly used business functions of ERP. While useful in pleasing existing users and perhaps even attracting new users within the enterprise, this first set of apps just changed the user interface and did not add any significant new functionality.

The latest installment has 190+ apps supporting a variety of roles in lines of business including human resources (HR), finance, manufacturing, procurement and sales, providing enhanced user productivity and personalization capabilities. The apps offer users the ability to conduct transactions, get insight and take action, and view “factsheets” and contextual information. The next round of Fiori apps are expected to add even more new capabilities, thereby taking them to the next level in changing the game.

The MRP cockpit is an example of this next generation Fiori app and a perfect illustration of how these new apps can recreate processes, even ones that are 30 years old. If you “know” manufacturing, you probably also know that the introduction of Material Requirements Planning (MRP) software back in the late 70’s was transformational, although nobody really called it that back then. “Transformative” innovation is very much a 21st century term. But it truly was game-changing back in the day.

Last year, even before the conversation had shifted, I saw the parallels between the potential for HANA and the automation of the planning process that MRP brought about. Today the MRP cockpit delivers on that potential.

For those outside the world of manufacturing, in a nutshell, MRP takes a combination of actual and forecasted demand and cascades it through bills of material, netting exploded demand against existing inventory and planned receipts. The result is a plan that includes the release of purchase orders and shop orders and reschedule messages. While the concept might be simple enough, these bills of material could be many layers deep and encompass hundreds or even thousands of component parts and subassemblies. Forecasts are educated guesses and actual demand can fluctuate from day to day. Without automated MRP there is simply too much data and complexity for a human to possibly work with.

As a result, prior to MRP, other ways of managing inventory became commonplace. You had simple reorder points. Once inventory got below a certain point, you bought some more, whether you actually needed it or not. You also had safety stock as a buffer, and the “two bin” system was quite prevalent. When one bin was empty, you switched to the other and ordered more. These simplistic methods may have been effective in some environments, but the net result was the risk of inflated inventory while still experiencing stock outs. You had lots of inventory, just not what the customer wanted, when it wanted it. And planners and schedulers still had to figure out when to start production and they knew enough to build a lot of slack time into the schedule. So lead times also became inflated and customer request dates were in jeopardy.

Once MRP entered the picture, these were seen as archaic and imprecise planning methods. Even so, most didn’t rush right out and invest in MRP when it was first introduced. In fact now, decades later, the adoption rates of MRP in manufacturing still sits at about 78%. Why? The existing practices were deemed “good enough” and, after all, that’s the way it had always been done.

It required a paradigm shift to understand the potential of MRP and the planning process executed by MRP was complex. Not everyone intuitively understood it. And if they didn’t really understand, planners were unwilling to relinquish control. Particularly since MRP runs were notoriously slow.

It was not unusual for early MRP runs to take a full weekend to process, and during that time nobody could be touching the data. This didn’t work so well in 24X7 operations or where operations spanned multiple time zones. Of course over time, this was enhanced so that most MRPs today run faster and can operate on replicated data, so that operations can continue. But that only means it might be out of date even before it completes. And MRP never creates a perfect plan. It assumes infinite capacity and “trusts” production run times and supplier lead times implicitly. So while most planners were relieved of the burden of crunching the numbers, they were also burdened with lots of exceptions and expedited orders.

Yet over time, MRP brought a new dimension to material planning. It brought a level of accuracy previously unheard of and helped get inventory and lead times in check. Manufacturers have experienced an average of 10% to 20% reduction in inventory and similar improvements in complete and on-time delivery as a result of implementing MRP.

But through the past three decades, MRP hasn’t changed all that much. Yes it has improved and gotten faster, but it hasn’t changed the game because it still involves batch runs, replicated data and manual intervention to resolve those exceptions and expedite orders. Now with HANA we’re not talking about speeding up the processes by 10% to 20% but by several orders of magnitude, allowing them to run in real time, as often as necessary. But if it was just about speed, we might have seen this problem solved years ago.

You probably don’t remember Carp Systems International or Monenco, both Canadian firms that offered “fast MRP”. Carp was founded in 1984, and released a product in 1990 bringing MRP processing times from tens of hours down to 10 minutes. It ran on IBM’s RS6000 (a family of RISC-based UNIX servers, workstations and supercomputers). But it was both complex and expensive for its time ranging in price from $150,000 to $1 million). Not only was it expensive and required special servers, in order it to work it needed to replicate the data and then apply sophisticated algorithms.

About the same time Monenco introduced FastMRP, also a simulation tool, but one that ran on a personal computer. While it cost much less than Carp’s product, it was also less powerful and had significantly fewer features.

You won’t find either of these products on the market today. If speed was all that was required they would have survived and thrived. In order to change the game, you also need to change the process, which is exactly what SAP intends with its new Fiori app for MRP.

The new MRP cockpit includes new capabilities, like the ability to:

  • View inventory position looking across multiple plants
  • Analyze component requirements with real-time analytics
  • Perform long term MRP simulations
  • Analyze capacity requirements and suggest alternatives

But this too requires a paradigm shift. Manufacturers, as well as other types of companies, are quite accustomed to making decisions from a snapshot of data, usually in report format, possibly through spreadsheets. They have become desensitized to the fact that this snapshot is just that, a picture of the data, frozen in time.

What if you never had to run another report? Instead, whenever you needed a piece of data or an answer to a question, you had immediate and direct access, not to the data as it was at the beginning of the day, or the end of last week, but to the latest data in real time? Not only will decision-makers need to adjust to thinking in real-time, but will also have to trust the software to automate much of the thinking for them. Will they be able to sit back and let the software iterate through multiple simulations in order to find the best answer to an exception even before it is reported as an exception? I suspect they will if it is fast enough. And HANA is now delivering at speeds that just a few years ago would have been impossible. But with these speeds accelerating by orders of magnitude, the ability to communicate and collaborate effectively must also accelerate.

Making the Human Connection

It is not enough to change the way users engage with the software, it is also necessary to change the way they engage with other people. How often do you or your employees today express sentiments like:

  • If I just knew who to contact for approval/help….
  • I don’t know what to ask
  • I wish I could check with (several) people on this quickly

What if the software could help? As work flows are streamlined, automated and accelerated, so must the lines of communication and potential collaboration. Whether employees are looking to move a process forward, resolve an issue or mature an idea faster, lack of communication and clumsy modes of collaboration can inhibit the game-changing effect of the technology. Which is why SAP has upped its game in the area of Human Capital Management and social collaboration tools. It took a significant step forward with the acquisition of SuccessFactors and JAM and has been blending these capabilities with the HANA platform.

Key Takeaways

Nobody today would disagree that the SAP Business Suite, powered by HANA combines deep and rich functionality with powerful technology. But can it be game changing in terms of how businesses operate? The potential certainly exists, but it’s not just about speed. Changing the game means changing the way we’ve been doing things for decades. Before we can change the process, we need to change the conversation. Are you looking to optimize business processes? Are you ready to talk?

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

The Message from SapphireNow was Simple

Period.

You probably thought I was going to tell you what the message was, after describing it as simple, right? Wrong. “Simple” is the message. In the past, SAP’s products and SAP, the company has been anything but simple. Anyone that follows me knows I am a very big fan of keeping things simple. I spend a good chunk of my time and efforts distilling complex concepts down to understandable …simple terms. So you might think I would be thrilled with this message. But when I walked out of Bill McDermott’s keynote earlier this week, there was something about the message I found troubling. My issue: Business isn’t simple.

No place is this more apparent than in manufacturing, which is sort of “home” for me. But all enterprises face complexities. First of all, all are becoming more distributed. My research shows even the average small company (with annual revenues under $25 million) has 2.2 operating locations. That number escalates to 13.7 in large enterprises (over $1 billion in annual revenues). Increasingly these are global organizations, managing complex, global supply chains. Add to this changing regulatory requirements, the uncertainties of a global economy and the emergence of new sources of competition as well as new markets. There is no magic wand anyone is going to wave that will remove these complexities. And yet with the liberal use of quotable sound bites generated on the main stage, I had visions of SAP’s personnel aggressively promoting and promising “simple business.”

Then I happened to have a conversation with Josh Greenbaum (@josheac) about our mutual reactions to Bill McDermott’s keynote. A remark from Josh made it all click for me. Essentially what he said was: “Simple” is the wrong word. “Simplify” says it much better. Josh is right.

Yes, doing business with SAP could be simplified, both from a partner and a customer perspective, as well as from a supplier standpoint (I can personally attest to the latter – yes, SAP is my customer). The software products and associated implementations scream for simplification. The way innovation is delivered can be made simpler. So can pricing. The same can be said for SAP’s organizational structure. So the real question is: Can SAP deliver on this promise to simplify? There is no single answer. Instead you need to break it down by the many different opportunities for simplification. Here are a few.

SAP’s Organizational Structure

We’ve already seen a few changes here. Obviously with Jim Hagemann Snabe stepping out of the co-CEO role, leaving Bill McDermott as the sole CEO, this, in of itself, could be seen as a simplification. And I think this was a catalyst for creating the focus on “simple.” I am convinced that this is not just a word, a tagline or a marketing message to Bill. He is truly committed to simplifying everything he can. Indeed SAP has already made some organizational moves, but I would say the jury is still out on whether SAP can really deliver on this one.

I gave up a long time ago trying to figure out the organizational structure and who does what in just the parts of SAP that I cover and deal with directly. I have never encountered a more confusing mess of titles, reporting and seemingly overlapping roles. Back when I did try to keep track of all of this… just when I thought I had it figured out, it would change. So rather than waste cycles second-guessing the organizational structure, I have come to rely on the phenomenal analyst relations (AR) staff to guide me. If there is a better AR team in the industry, I haven’t met them. Yet, while they do a fantastic job, I vote for a simpler organization chart, clearer roles and responsibilities and titles that give you a clue as to what the individuals actually do.

One recent change leads me to believe that SAP is trying. This is the recent announcement of Rodolpho Cardenuto as the head of a new Global Partner Operations (GPO) organization. Prior to forming this organization, partners were covered in a very fragmented way. The new GPO organization consolidates these disparate groups, combining the existing Ecosystem and Channels team, with the SAP® Business One business (which is sold exclusively through the channel), the OEM business and all the company’s strategic partnerships around the world – much simpler.

I know there are some other changes underway and I have to believe some of the jobs that were recently eliminated may have been as a result of “simplification” efforts, since SAP execs made it quite clear this week they are in growth mode, and not contracting.

 

Simpler to Partner?

Speaking of this new GPO organization, partners are becoming increasingly important to SAP. In addition to the strategic decision to sell to small to medium size enterprises (SMEs) exclusively through the channel several years ago, SAP now sees the potential for accelerating growth worldwide by building alternative routes to market through its partner ecosystem, whether this is through added coverage or added capabilities.

SAP has also actively encouraged partners to develop their own “value-add” in terms of industry-specific functionality and other add-on capabilities. The development of new platforms (the HANA Cloud Platform) and an online marketplace directly supports this.

Of course the formation of the GPO organization is one step in the simplification process in dealing with partners. Before, different groups dealt with different types of partners (e.g. systems integrators, global VARs, strategic partners, etc.) However, more and more, partners have taken on multiple roles. Systems integrators also became resellers; global VARS also became strategic partners and co-innovators, etc. In the past that meant they had to deal with different groups within SAP, and those different groups all worked differently.

The formation of the consolidated GPO organization is therefore one more step in the continuing effort to make it simpler to partner with SAP. Of course some of these partners are large companies, like Cap Gemini, Accenture and Deloitte and are well-equipped to deal with complexity. But then there are thousands of partners that are themselves small businesses. Think what it must be like for a small Business One reseller to deal with a company like SAP. I first saw these simplification efforts get underway about 4 years ago when Kevin Gilroy came on board. One of his first tasks was to simplify contracts. Don’t quote me on the page count, but I think before Kevin arrived, the contracts were upwards of 30 pages or more. He proudly brought a two-page contract to Bill, who promptly told him to get it down to one.

The partner management team has made great strides already in making it simpler to partner with SAP, and this week I saw a new partner portal that will likely make the life of a partner much easier. It is a single point of entry, easily searchable, to access all the assets and resources SAP provides. This is free, but for an added fee, partners can also sign up for the SAP Learning Hub, which brings additional virtual educational directly to the partners.

Bottom line: I think the simplification efforts have been successful and will continue to make it easier for partners, which will in turn allow them to spend less time figuring out how to deal with SAP and more time servicing the customer.

Easier to Do Business With?

But what about the customers that deal directly with SAP or even indirectly through partners? Often questions of ease of doing business boil down to pricing. One analyst in a press conference this week asked about simplifying pricing, citing Oracle’s policy of publishing its price list for all to see. I would caution anyone against confusing transparency with simplicity. Oracle might publish prices, but good luck in trying to figure out what anything will really cost, because its pricing is far from simple.

In all fairness though, any ERP vendor struggles with this, particularly those with broad portfolios. SAP has already taken steps to further simplify its pricing structure, particularly around the bundling of HANA, but any prior efforts were dwarfed with one announcement this week: Fiori apps are free. Here is the announcement:

SAP AG today announced that SAP Fiori user experience (UX) and SAP Screen Personas software will now be included within underlying licenses of SAP software. For existing customers [those who already purchased], SAP will provide a software credit redeemable against future software sales. In addition, SAP will offer a portfolio of UX services, including design, rapid deployment and custom development, to enhance customer engagement. SAP users can now take advantage of a next-generation user experience based on modern design principles setting a new standard in the industry.

This announcement is huge, for a couple of reasons. First of all, it really does help to simplify the pricing because there is no price. From the moment Fiori was released with a modest price tag, the hue and cry from customers and industry observers was that it should be free. This perception was largely based on the fact that the first 25 Fiori apps simply changed the user experience and added no new features and functions.

A new user experience adds “value” in of itself but no further value was added, so it is understandable that customers would expect their maintenance dollars would pay for this. In addition, because Fiori largely just delivered a new user interface, many customers and industry experts alike lost sight of the fact that they were indeed developed and delivered as apps. They thought SAP had just gone into the presentation layer and changed the user interface, as it would have for an upgrade. That was never the case and now the Fiori apps that are being developed go well beyond changing the user interface. The SAP Smart Business Cockpits being developed now are changing business processes and delivering very significant added features and functions.

These cockpits address a variety of functions and roles throughout the organization, including:

  • Cash management
  • Sentiment analysis
  • Bank analyzer
  • Demand forecasting
  • Bulk pricing scenarios
  • Mass execution of availability checking
  • Transportation asset management
  • MRP cockpit
  • Transportation management
  • Purchasing
  • PLM Variant configurations
  • An accounting hub
  • An “exposure” hub

These will be delivered over the next year or so. I am sure I have missed a few, but you get the picture. What does this have to do with simplicity? All of these are being developed as Fiori apps, which means there won’t be an SAP salesperson knocking on your door to sell them to you. They are released on a quarterly basis and they are free. And because they are delivered as “apps” and not as traditional “enhancements” you don’t have to go through a complete upgrade cycle to get the one (and only one) you are interested in. You just implement that one app.

This essentially paves the way for SAP to reinvent the Business Suite from the outside in, without causing a major reimplementation along the way. I think this added value was overshadowed by the declaration of victory by ASUG in having won the battle over charging for Fiori apps and the fact that many are still thinking Fiori is just a new user interface.

A Simpler Solution?

Which brings us to how the “Simple” or “Simplify” message pertains to the SAP products. The best example of the impact is probably the introduction of a new product, “Simple Finance.” Don’t let the name fool you – it is not just for small companies that might have simple accounting requirements. SAP itself made the transition to this product and is now running its financials with it. And I heard it made that transition over a weekend.

I myself don’t have as clear a picture of this as I would like, since my packed schedule at SapphireNow often conflicted with sessions and discussions on the topic. So I will turn to the dynamic duo of Jon Reed (@JonERP) and Dennis Howlett (@dahowlett) to add some insight since they spent some one on one (or two on two?) time with Hasso Plattner and new head of development Bernd Leukert on the topic. Den and Jon published this to better explain SAP’s cloud strategy, and indeed Simple Finance was developed as a cloud offering. But this excerpted section is perfect for the point I am trying to get across:

Plattner and Leukert confirmed that the freshly-named ‘Simple Finance’ is part of a broader rewrite/re-imagining of SAP ERP, with HANA and cloud as the enablers. Referred to as the ‘simple suite’ or the ‘S system,’ Leukert said that the monstrous ordeal of rewriting 400 million lines of business suite code was not necessary, because of a “massive reduction in code” resulting from the simplification HANA allows and in particular, the elimination of bulky aggregates which account for a significant percentage of current code.

This simple suite, currently focused on the Simple Finance area also includes an aggressive paring down of software accounting complexities, a now-familiar talking point of Plattner’s.

While anyone can see the value of massively reducing the amount of code required, the non-technical person might not immediately appreciate the significance of the elimination of aggregation. Forgive me for over-simplifying, but think of it this way. Traditionally accounting solutions have accumulated all sorts of totals. Some are for periodic reporting (monthly, quarterly, annually, etc.), while other aggregates are used to gain insight into different parts of the organizational structure. This aggregation enables reporting without having to sort and calculate totals across a potentially large volume of transactions. Sounds simple and effective because you can gain access to these totals through a simple query. But there were some drawbacks.

Not only is there embedded code to maintain these aggregates, but sometimes these totals are not updated in real-time, and instead are calculated with batch runs. That means you are looking at a snapshot in time and not the “real” number. Secondly, what happens when you want to change the organizational structure and report in a new way? Those pre-calculated totals are now meaningless. If you can instantly slice and dice and calculate on the fly using any criteria, you don’t have to do any of this aggregation and you get complete flexibility.

This flexibility and speed is the real value HANA brings to the business, along with improved, faster decision-making. If SAP can deliver this simpler suite through a combination re-writing code and adding Fiori apps, I believe the SAP products will undergo a dramatic transformation.

Of course, even if this happens, SAP’s competitors won’t let go of the message that SAP is big, clumsy and complex any time soon. They will still be inserting that FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) in the minds of prospects as long as there is a shred of truth to it. That only makes it more of a challenge for SAP.

Conclusion

SAP will never deliver Simple. But it can Simplify. These are just a few of the ways. While I believe SAP has already made progress, it still has a long way to go to deliver simplification. But I do believe it is committed at the very top of the organization. But the buy-in has to permeate throughout the ranks. I believe some of the SAP folks will need a frontal lobotomy to make this transition, but many more will be breathing a sigh of relief. They, like SAP partners and customers, will say, “Finally.”

 

 

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

SAP Business Suite on HANA: Changing the Conversation

It’s Not About the Technology, It’s About the Business

I recently got an update on SAP Business Suite on HANA from Jeff Woods, former industry analyst, currently Suite on HANA aficionado at SAP. Jeff had lots of good stuff to share, including some progress to date:

  • 800+ Suite on HANA contracts have been signed
  • 7,600+ partners have been trained
  • There are 200+ Suite on HANA projects underway
  • 55 of these projects have gone live (and the number is growing)
  • The largest ERP on HANA system supports 100,000 users

So the Suite on HANA is quite real. But the single message that resonated the most strongly with me: the conversation has (finally) changed. While we’ve been hearing about HANA as this wonderful new technology for several years now, for the most part, the talk was about technology and even when the technologists spoke about purported business value, they spoke in very technical terms. But the audience I write for, business leaders in various industries, don’t care about technology for technology sake. Many don’t (care to) understand tech-speak. But they do care about what technology can do for them.

A Year Later…

It was just about a year ago that SAP announced the availability of SAP Business Suite powered by HANA, complete with live and live-streamed press conferences in both New York City and Waldorf, Germany. I don’t think I have ever seen such genuine excitement from SAP folks as was displayed in this announcement, and yet the “influencers” in the audience were a bit more subdued. A year ago I attributed this to the fact that these same influencers tend to be a quite jaded bunch, hard to impress. We had also been hearing about HANA for a few years already. There wasn’t a “newness” or game-changing feel about the announcement. But impressing the influencers is only one step towards the real goal of engaging with prospects and customers.

A year ago I also wrote, “SAP is trying hard to change the conversation to be less about the technology and more about the business value.  What is the real value? In the words of one early adopter: HANA solves problems that were deemed unsolvable in the past.” But uncovering those previously unsolvable problems required some visionary thinking.  Tech-speak is not going to get the attention of the guy (or gal) that signs the check or spur that kind of thinking. And a year ago the conversation hadn’t changed. Just look at how the vision of HANA was portrayed:

  • All active data must be in memory, ridding the world of the “rusty spinning disk”
  • Full exploitation of massively parallel processing (MPP) in order to efficiently support more users
  • The same database used for online transaction processing (OLTP) and analytics, eliminating the need for a data warehouse as a reporting tool for OLTP to support live conversations rather than “prefabricated briefing books”
  • Radically simplified data models
  • Aggressive use of math
  • Use of design thinking throughout the model

Look carefully at those words. They mean nothing to the non-technical business executive. Sure, those words got the attention of some forward thinking CIO’s, and that was enough to kick start the early projects, projects that produced amazing results. But that’s as far as the message got. And even when the message was not articulated in technical terms, it was presented at too high a level of abstraction. Business executives faced with important decisions don’t think in terms of “becoming a real-time business.” Operational managers don’t seek out “transformative innovation without disruption.” They want to get through the day most effectively and efficiently and make the right decisions.

Asking the Right Questions Today

So how do you change the conversation? By asking a different kind of question. Because “faster” is universally accepted as a good thing, in the beginning the HANA conversation might have been kicked off with the question to the CIO: What processes are running too slowly today? But in talking to the business user, you need a different approach. SAP’s “cue card” below is a good start. You are now seeing conversation starters that make more sense to the business leader. Take the time now to read them carefully. If you are a business leader, they will resonate much more than discussions of MPP and column-oriented databases or even speed of processes. I especially like the business practice questions in the rightmost column.

Cue card

Source: SAP

But if I were sitting across the table from a business leader, I might ask questions that are even more direct and down-to-earth. For example:

  • Describe a situation where you have to hang up the phone, dig deeper and get back to your customer or prospect later. (By the way Jeff’s thought was that by hanging up you only encourage them to pick up the phone and call your competitor.)
  • What summary data do you get today that consistently requires more detail before you make a decision? Can you get at that data immediately (no delays) and easily (no hunting around)?
  • What level of granularity are you forecasting revenue? Is it sufficiently detailed? Are you forecasting by region or maybe by product line when you would love to be able to forecast by territory, individual customer and individual product combined?
  • Are there decisions that require you to consult with others? How much time does this add to the decision-making process? How easy or hard is it to keep track of who to contact? How quickly can you make contact? Quickly enough?

The goal really is to improve the business not only in small linear steps, but also to increase speed of decision and therefore efficiency exponentially. The first step is to provide new ways of engaging with the system, which means changing the user experience. But to change the game, you need to make improvements to the process itself. SAP’s new Fiori applications are a good example of this progression.

 Fiori: More Than Just a Pretty Face

Last spring, SAP announced SAP Fiori, a collection of 25 apps that would surround the Business Suite, providing a new user experience for the most commonly used business functions of ERP. While useful in pleasing existing users and perhaps even attracting new users within the enterprise, this first set of apps just changed the user interface and did not add any significant new functionality.

The latest installment has 190+ apps supporting a variety of roles in lines of business including human resources (HR), finance, manufacturing, procurement and sales, providing enhanced user productivity and personalization capabilities. The apps offer users the ability to conduct transactions, get insight and take action, and view “factsheets” and contextual information. The next round of Fiori apps are expected to add even more new capabilities, thereby taking them to the next level in changing the game.

The MRP cockpit is an example of this next generation Fiori app and a perfect illustration of how these new apps can recreate processes, even ones that are 30 years old. If you “know” manufacturing, you probably also know that the introduction of Material Requirements Planning (MRP) software back in the late 70’s was transformational, although nobody really called it that back then. “Transformative” innovation is very much a 21st century term. But it truly was game-changing back in the day.

Last year, even before the conversation had shifted, I saw the parallels between the potential for HANA and the automation of the planning process that MRP brought about. Today the MRP cockpit delivers on that potential.

For those outside the world of manufacturing, in a nutshell, MRP takes a combination of actual and forecasted demand and cascades it through bills of material, netting exploded demand against existing inventory and planned receipts. The result is a plan that includes the release of purchase orders and shop orders and reschedule messages. While the concept might be simple enough, these bills of material could be many layers deep and encompass hundreds or even thousands of component parts and subassemblies. Forecasts are educated guesses and actual demand can fluctuate from day to day. Without automated MRP there is simply too much data and complexity for a human to possibly work with.

As a result, prior to MRP, other ways of managing inventory became commonplace. You had simple reorder points. Once inventory got below a certain point, you bought some more, whether you actually needed it or not. You also had safety stock as a buffer, and the “two bin” system was quite prevalent. When one bin was empty, you switched to the other and ordered more. These simplistic methods may have been effective in some environments, but the net result was the risk of inflated inventory while still experiencing stock outs. You had lots of inventory, just not what the customer wanted, when it wanted it. And planners and schedulers still had to figure out when to start production and they knew enough to build a lot of slack time into the schedule. So lead times also became inflated and customer request dates were in jeopardy.

Once MRP entered the picture, these were seen as archaic and imprecise planning methods. Even so, most didn’t rush right out and invest in MRP when it was first introduced. In fact now, decades later, the adoption rates of MRP in manufacturing still sits at about 78%. Why? The existing practices were deemed “good enough” and, after all, that’s the way it had always been done.

It required a paradigm shift to understand the potential of MRP and the planning process executed by MRP was complex. Not everyone intuitively understood it. And if they didn’t really understand, planners were unwilling to relinquish control. Particularly since MRP runs were notoriously slow.

It was not unusual for early MRP runs to take a full weekend to process, and during that time nobody could be touching the data. This didn’t work so well in 24X7 operations or where operations spanned multiple time zones. Of course over time, this was enhanced so that most MRPs today run faster and can operate on replicated data, so that operations can continue. But that only means it might be out of date even before it completes. And MRP never creates a perfect plan. It assumes infinite capacity and “trusts” production run times and supplier lead times implicitly. So while most planners were relieved of the burden of crunching the numbers, they were also burdened with lots of exceptions and expedited orders.

Yet over time, MRP brought a new dimension to material planning. It brought a level of accuracy previously unheard of and helped get inventory and lead times in check. Manufacturers have experienced an average of 10% to 20% reduction in inventory and similar improvements in complete and on-time delivery as a result of implementing MRP.

But through the past three decades, MRP hasn’t changed all that much. Yes it has improved and gotten faster, but it hasn’t changed the game because it still involves batch runs, replicated data and manual intervention to resolve those exceptions and expedite orders. Now with HANA we’re not talking about speeding up the processes by 10% to 20% but by several orders of magnitude, allowing them to run in real time, as often as necessary. But if it was just about speed, we might have seen this problem solved years ago.

You probably don’t remember Carp Systems International or Monenco, both Canadian firms that offered “fast MRP”. Carp was founded in 1984, and released a product in 1990 bringing MRP processing times from tens of hours down to 10 minutes. It ran on IBM’s RS6000 (a family of RISC-based UNIX servers, workstations and supercomputers). But it was both complex and expensive for its time ranging in price from $150,000 to $1 million). Not only was it expensive and required special servers, in order it to work it needed to replicate the data and then apply sophisticated algorithms.

About the same time Monenco introduced FastMRP, also a simulation tool, but one that ran on a personal computer. While it cost much less than Carp’s product, it was also less powerful and had significantly fewer features.

You won’t find either of these products on the market today. If speed was all that was required they would have survived and thrived. In order to change the game, you also need to change the process, which is exactly what SAP intends with its new Fiori app for MRP.

The new MRP cockpit includes new capabilities, like the ability to:

  • View inventory position looking across multiple plants
  • Analyze component requirements with real-time analytics
  • Perform long term MRP simulations
  • Analyze capacity requirements and suggest alternatives

But this too requires a paradigm shift. Manufacturers, as well as other types of companies, are quite accustomed to making decisions from a snapshot of data, usually in report format, possibly through spreadsheets. They have become desensitized to the fact that this snapshot is just that, a picture of the data, frozen in time.

What if you never had to run another report? Instead, whenever you needed a piece of data or an answer to a question, you had immediate and direct access, not to the data as it was at the beginning of the day, or the end of last week, but to the latest data in real time? Not only will decision-makers need to adjust to thinking in real-time, but will also have to trust the software to automate much of the thinking for them. Will they be able to sit back and let the software iterate through multiple simulations in order to find the best answer to an exception even before it is reported as an exception? I suspect they will if it is fast enough. And HANA is now delivering at speeds that just a few years ago would have been impossible. But with these speeds accelerating by orders of magnitude, the ability to communicate and collaborate effectively must also accelerate.

Making the Human Connection

It is not enough to change the way users engage with the software, it is also necessary to change the way they engage with other people. How often do you or your employees today express sentiments like:

  • If I just knew who to contact for approval/help….
  • I don’t know what to ask
  • I wish I could check with (several) people on this quickly

What if the software could help? As work flows are streamlined, automated and accelerated, so must the lines of communication and potential collaboration. Whether employees are looking to move a process forward, resolve an issue or mature an idea faster, lack of communication and clumsy modes of collaboration can inhibit the game-changing effect of the technology. Which is why SAP has upped its game in the area of Human Capital Management and social collaboration tools. It took a significant step forward with the acquisition of SuccessFactors and JAM and has been blending these capabilities with the HANA platform.

Key Takeaways

Nobody today would disagree that the SAP Business Suite, powered by HANA combines deep and rich functionality with powerful technology. But can it be game changing in terms of how businesses operate? The potential certainly exists, but it’s not just about speed. Changing the game means changing the way we’ve been doing things for decades. Before we can change the process, we need to change the conversation. Are you looking to optimize business processes? Are you ready to talk?

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Technology and Best Practices Fuel Growth for SAP Brazil

SAP’s growth in Brazil has outpaced growth in not only other parts of the world but also growth in the Brazilian market. As an emerging economy, rapid growth is to be expected, but along with that growth comes the usual challenges. These obstacles are amplified in Brazil, a difficult business environment burdened by challenging tax and regulatory requirements. This demanding environment not only presents an impediment to growing Brazilian companies, but also the enterprise software vendors that would love to help, and in doing so, fuel their own growth. SAP’s exceptional success stems from a value proposition that combines new, innovative technology with localized business best practices. And a focused, purposeful plan doesn’t hurt either.

How Much Growth?

The first half of this year SAP Brazil grew its software business by 80%, far ahead of the growth of the overall software market.  Indirect business grew faster than direct, which for SAP means growth in small to medium size enterprises (SMEs), serviced exclusively by its channel partners.

Part of this growth resulted from a regional focus. While the concept of sales regions is widely accepted and even natural in other large countries like the United States, this type of sales approach was new for the vast territory that makes up Brazil. After introducing this regional concept, SAP Brazil saw triple-digit growth in some regions. Software revenues in the northeast part of the country grew by 400%. Just having undivided attention and a more local presence seems to pay off.

Is Brazil a Land of SME Opportunity?

Historically Brazil has been a country of extremes. It is home to some of the largest corporations in the world. And yet according to Endeavor, a non-profit dedicated to promoting long-term economic growth through mentoring and supporting entrepreneurs, about 90% of companies in Brazil are micro-companies. While definitions of a micro-company might vary around the world, they are generally very small. Small companies have tended to stay small in Brazil for two reasons.

Brazil is not a country known for entrepreneurship. Many more startups were born from unemployment than from an entrepreneurial spirit. And once a certain revenue threshold is exceeded, (still) small companies are subject to the same tax and regulatory requirements as very large enterprises. Where the small company lacks the manpower and expertise to handle these stringent requirements, it stays small by design. As many of these businesses are now being passed on to a new generation, the desire for growth is met with frustration. Most have yet to invest in solutions that can help fuel growth. Those vendors that truly understand these local requirements and can offer affordable services and solutions that meet these needs will be most likely to capitalize on this opportunity.

SAP obviously plays in the large enterprise and as a result has a lot of knowledge and expertise available to bring to bear on the problem. Much of what it has learned in supporting large multi-nationals is relevant and the knowledge is transferrable.

But the largest potential for growth in Brazil is in this SME segment. SAP identified 400,000 (out of a total of 2 to 2.5 million small businesses) as being in its addressable market. Today about 1% (4,000) of them are SAP customers and SAP is on a mission to significantly increase that percentage.

Is the Growth Sustainable? Partners Play a Big Role

But is the growth achieved thus far sustainable? Because SAP sells exclusively through the indirect channel in the SME segment, its continued success depends a lot on its partners. For the most part these partners are local (Brazilian) companies and with the exception of the big multi-national consultants and systems integrators, they too are SMEs. So they understand the market and are well positioned to help SMEs deal with Brazilian bureaucracy.

Combining this expertise with SAP’s investment in technology is key. Not every enterprise software vendor has deep enough pockets to address these local requirements. SAP does, and is going two steps further. Step one is in its investment in transformative (some call it disruptive) technology. Step two involves using that technology to embed localized best practices into its solutions.

Because partners are so critical to the success equation, I spoke at length with one of them about what has made SAP and its partners so successful this past year.

Partner Profile: Cienci

Cienci is a partner offering a broad portfolio of SAP products. I asked Ricardo Nobrega da Silva, Director of Cienci to share what he felt was the secret to SAP (and its own) recent successes. His answer: SAP has evolved from an ERP company to a technology company, providing businesses large and small the kind of innovation they need to compete and grow. This is reflected in Cienci’s own broad portfolio. Selling to the mid to large segment of SMEs in Brazil, it offers:

  • SAP ERP, both as ECC (Enterprise Central Component, the heart of the Business Suite) and packaged for the SME as Business All-in-One
  • SAP GRC Nota Fiscal Electronica (SAP NFE) to support companies in complying with the requirements of the Brazilian authorities for electronic invoicing
  • SAP Vendor Invoice Management (VIM) by OpenText, a prepackaged application that works with SAP ERP to stream-line accounts payable processes
  • HANA
  • Fiori, a new collection of 25 apps that will surround SAP ERP, providing a new user experience for the most commonly used business functions of ERP
  • Mobility solutions including
    • SAP Mobile Platform (SMP)
    • Sybase Unwired Platform (SUP)
    • Syclo, a work management mobile app for field service productivity and safety
    •  Afaria to manage devices
    • Apps it has natively developed for mobile devices
  • Integration services using SAP NetWeaver Process Integration (PI) and Gateway
  • Other services in support of SAP products and implementations

In addition, Cienci signed the first Managed Cloud as a Service (MCaaS) contract for Fiori in the world and is also certified for SAP CRM Sales Mobile Rapid Deployment Solution (RDS). It also focuses on SAP HCM solutions and SuccessFactors and signed the first OEM contract for SuccessFactors in the world.

“All the latest technology trends are important in Brazil, just as they are in other parts of the world. This includes social, mobile, cloud and big data. SAP is a big company and has invested a lot in bringing innovation to the market faster across a broad portfolio. Take mobility as an example. It is the only company that can deliver both a platform to manage devices [Afaria] as well as a development environment to develop mobile applications,” said Mr. Nobrega.

Is Technology Enough?

That said, even though Brazilians are generally receptive to new technology, Mr. Nobrega cautions they will only buy it if the technology adds business value. While he feels SAP is making the right response to the market with the right solutions, smaller companies need to be educated on the potential business impact. Like smaller companies around the world, they tend to focus on cost only and are reluctant to invest.

So educating these small companies is a necessary step in the process. The challenge for SAP and its partners is to prove the value, particularly if the technologies, and even sometimes the issues, are not well understood.

This issue is not unique to Brazil. Most small and medium size business executives are not technologists, and unless they are, they might not know or care about that underlying technology, because they don’t understand it. They might feel the systems they have today are the best on the market. In other words, they don’t know what they don’t know. Or they may simply feel they can’t afford anything better.

There is danger in this type of thinking. Those lagging behind in technology-enabling their businesses don’t need to understand how new technology works but they do need to understand what it can do for them.  They also need to understand that solutions today are more affordable than ever. And finally they need to be able to quantify the potential return on investment. This education process is a job for both SAP and partners like Cienci.

The first step in this education process might be in dispelling some SAP myths.

Myth #1: The first myth is that SAP is only for big companies. The reality is that a large majority of SAP’s customers, numbering more than 80,000, are SMEs.

Myth #2: The second is the SAP only offers complex and expensive ERP. In fact SAP offers three different solutions in Brazil:

  • The SAP Business Suite with ECC at its core
  • SAP Business All-in-One, which also has ECC at its core, but is pre-configured for specific industries and packaged with best practices to speed and ease implementation
  • SAP Business One, an entirely separate and distinct ERP product designed for small companies (generally with fewer than 100 employees)

Myth #3: The next myth is that SAP solutions are only offered as a traditional on-premise deployment. In fact there are several different cloud deployment options, including managed services in the cloud (MCaaS) and Software as a Service (SaaS).

Myth #4: And the final myth is that all implementations are long, slow and cost millions of dollars. The reality is the speed and ease of implementations has been steadily improving over the past decade and there are instances where first go-live milestones are achieved in weeks, not months and years. As to the cost, get a quote.

Of course any company, large or small, will need to cost justify a solution. For this, we would point to Mint Jutras research that quantifies the results measured since implementing ERP. And these results might surprise you.

Figure 1: Improvements Realized Since Implementing ERPSAP Brazil Fig 1

Source: Mint Jutras 2013 ERP Solution Study

The improvements shown in Figure 1 come from the 2013 Mint Jutras ERP Solution Study. These improvements were measured “since implementing ERP”. While it would be tempting to call them results achieved “as a result of ERP”, in reality improvements like these always result from a combination of people, process and technology. ERP can’t take all the credit, but is often the catalyst and vehicle by which they are achieved. World class denotes the top 20% in terms of performance measured by results, progress against goals and current performance in selected (universal) key performance indicators. Note that even those not world class achieve very significant results, typically enough to cost justify the investment.

Summary and Key Takeaways

The growth SAP has enjoyed in Brazil over the past year has resulted from combining its efforts with those of its local partners. Leveraging its heavy investment in development and its experience with large enterprises around the world, it has brought the necessary functionality to its solutions. Deep pockets and a focus on disruptive technology have allowed it to stay ahead of the technology curve. The challenge will be in not getting too far ahead of the adoption curve. SAP and its partners will have to work together to educate prospects and even existing customers to better understand the potential, not for technology sake, but in demonstrating the impact on the business itself.

But to pave the way for this technology-enablement, SAP and its partners first need to mentor and guide small growing businesses through the Brazilian jungle of bureaucracy, tax and regulatory compliance.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,