Business Innovation Approaches

The ERP market, and SAP in particular, is changing drastically and quickly. So what will SAP look like in 10 years' time? That is a big question, but here are my thoughts on what MIGHT happen... 1. User Experience: SAP GUI will be an anachronism. There will still be clients who use it, but they will be few. Even Fiori will have developed - see below. 2. AI will be embedded fully into all SAP processes. Fiori will be enriched with AI, so that you will have a single landing page app with a visual question, like "What do you want to do today?". From there you can speak/type your prompt and open a guided SAP app to walk you through it. I even think that the "Joule" brand will be phased out, as LLMs will be so central to the SAP experience, that a name will be unnecessary. 3. Training: There will be no need for any training on the system (imagine future-SAP to be like an iPhone app - automatically upgraded and no training required to use it). EnableNow will be fully embedded into the standard offering to allow guided process walk throughs. 4. Technical offering: Software-as-a-Service will be the norm. Most SAP implementations will use the public cloud offering rather than PCE, which will gradually begin to be phased out. On-prem will be like the SAP GUI - still used but declining drastically year on year, not least due to SAP almost completely removing discount offerings for on-prem contracts. 5. Upgrades - SaaS solution will have automatic upgrades (again, like smartphone apps). Testing will be automated in the background through Tosca test scripts fully embedded into the SaaS offering. 6. Personalization will be greater than customization. Full and rich personalization will be available to users to shortcut the processes they work through. Process mining via Signavio will be available as standard to prompt AI driven improvements to personalization settings. 7. Innovation - I'm sticking my neck out here, but my thinking is that SAP will continue to market BTP as the innovation platform, and as a result, will step away from many of the "difficult" processes in SAP (e.g. master data governance, integration standards etc.). These difficult processes will be covered by standard add-ons in BTP, marketed by SAP's partners. SAP get a healthy cut of all sales of these add-ons after all, with very little work on their part - good business model! 8. Future for SAP consultants: inevitably, these kind of scenarios always prompt lots of questions about how this will affect SAP functional and technical consultants. My view is that it will affect them in a good way, albeit that they will need to upskill in AI, SAP build, BTP partner offerings, and the public cloud. All those personalization options, AI prompts, EnableNow settings, Tosca test scripts, Signavio modelling, and background configuration won't create itself. This is a "top of my head" list. What have I missed? Interested to know your thoughts in the comments. #saptips #saphints #erpgurus

At SAP, we're seeing firsthand how increased profitability and productivity can drive business success on our transformation journey. This is not just a result of our internal efforts – it is also a testament to the power of modern technologies like Business AI. Just as we are experiencing productivity gains, we are enabling our customers to do the same through AI-driven solutions. And we are only at the early innings of leveraging AI's full potential. Let me highlight two impactful examples from our latest developments in #BusinessAI: 1. AI-assisted explanations of fixed asset depreciation keys are revolutionizing asset management. This innovation is reducing implementation effort by up to 75% and slashing inquiry resolution time by up to 90%. For finance teams grappling with complex asset management and regulatory compliance, this represents a game-changing efficiency boost. 2. AI-assisted financial business insights are transforming reporting processes. By cutting time spent on cost center report analysis by up to 50% and summary documentation by up to 65%, we're enabling finance professionals to shift their focus from routine reporting tasks to strategic decision-making – a crucial advantage in today's fast-paced business landscape. These improvements are just the beginning of what AI can achieve in finance. As we enter the era of AI agents, Joule agents understand business context and will collaborate across all functions. Imagine AI agents that can perform complex supplier and contract checks before creating purchase orders or automatically classify and direct millions of service tickets to the right team. The possibilities are endless, and I am excited to see how our customers will leverage these AI-powered innovations to drive unprecedented business value in 2025 and beyond. Dr. Philipp Herzig Learn more: https://lnkd.in/e5-7P7Gx

When corporate–startup partnerships fail, it’s rarely because the tech/product/strategy didn’t work. It’s because the trust didn’t. So, how can corporates and startups build trust so the value goes beyond capital? This was one of the key questions we discussed at the NeXTT Awards panel recently. If you want partnerships to deliver value beyond capital, the foundation has to be built before the deal on shared intent, aligned ways of working, and human connection. I’ve seen the most successful collaborations follow a simple rhythm: Build trust before the deal - be transparent about why you’re partnering, not just what you’ll get. Design for mutual wins - share KPIs, not just invoices. Reduce operational friction - fast-track decisions and simplify processes. Keep relationships human - senior sponsors and everyday champions matter more than quarterly reviews. Invest in the ecosystem together - co-create, share knowledge, and celebrate wins publicly. Because trust isn’t built in contracts. It’s built in conversations, in small acts of reliability, and in the sense that both sides are equally invested in the success of the other. When both sides feel heard, supported, and respected, that’s when value truly goes beyond capital. #Startups #CorporateInnovation #Trust #Leadership #Collaboration #BeyondCapital

Innovating with SAP AppHaus: a dive into the Innovation Toolkit and its new Generative AI methods with Karen Detken 🎧 openSAP https://lnkd.in/edxK9Hpn 🎧 Apple Podcasts https://lnkd.in/dTuAZde 🎧 Spotify https://lnkd.in/dZQ75tU Our guest Karen Detken is a User Experience Designer at the SAP Apphaus, a customer innovation team at SAP. Together we explore the Human-Centered Approach to Innovation and how the SAP Apphaus supports this with methods from Design Thinking and Enterprise Architecture, as well as practical tools for fostering a culture of innovation. ℹ️ Karen describes the open and free-to-use toolkit including popular tools like Scenes and Spektrum, as well as different methods and templates to help improve business collaboration and co-innovation. 🤖 To foster AI adoption, the SAP AppHaus team developed a workshop format to explore Generative AI use cases. In this episode, Karen describes this workshop with its steps, challenges, examples and gives an outlook of an upcoming workshop format on Generative AI. Check out the links to the tools below in the show notes and try them out. Please don’t forget to share, rate, and discuss this episode with friends and colleagues. #SAPDesign #SAPApphaus #designthinking #humancentereddesign #AIAdoption

The pragmatic composability imperative    As business leaders, we’re being asked to operate with agility and deliver smarter experiences, faster decisions, and more efficient operations — through the use of AI everywhere. But here’s the reality: most enterprise technology stacks were built for a different era.    A few years ago, the MACH alliance sold many on the promise that only a pure best-of-breed approach could help businesses achieve that desired agility, through stitching together dozens of microservices and niche vendor solutions.  The result was far from glowing, and for many businesses this resulted in:  ❌ Skyrocketing integration costs  ❌ Data silos and fragmented user experiences  ❌ Vendor sprawl and support chaos  ❌ Delayed time-to-value and agility, exactly the opposite of what was promised The industry even coined a term for it: MACH-lash.    At SAP we believe that the best of suite vs best of breed debate is a false one. We believe that modern, cloud-native, modular, composable, AI-ready business suite applications alongside and targeted best-of-breed ISVs—is the answer for most. We call this approach “pragmatic composability”, and it’s predicated on intentional composition wherever it makes business sense. It’s not about technical architectural dogma. It’s about achieving concrete business outcomes for one’s specific business.    Here’s what that looks like:  ✅ A unified business suite spanning front and back office (CX, supply chain, finance, HCM)  ✅ Harmonized SLAs, UX, data models, and provisioning across the stack  ✅ Embedded AI (SAP Business AI) with enterprise-grade reliability  ✅ Open extensibility, with hundreds of pre-integrated ISVs (including many MACH-certified vendors)  ✅ A harmonized, unified and semantically rich data layer (SAP Business Data Cloud) that makes AI actionable across domains    The result? Less time orchestrating, more time innovating.  AI is the new operating system of business. But it only works if your architecture is coherent, flexible, and data-rich. That’s why our clients choose SAP—to scale AI with confidence, not chaos.  Let’s chat if you're evaluating your current CX or enterprise stack—and want to future-proof your growth without betting the farm on complexity.    #SAP #Composability #EnterpriseAI #CustomerExperience #DigitalTransformation #MACHlash #FutureReady #BusinessArchitecture #GrowthEnablement 

SAP consulting isn’t dying. But it is being rewritten. And AI isn’t replacing consultants — It’s replacing how they work. Here’s what I’m seeing 👇 1. Configuring transactions? ↳ AI will soon do it faster than we can. ↳ What remains valuable is the why, not the how. 2. Copy-pasting specs into SPRO (SAP configuration) ? ↳ That era is ending. ↳ The future is in challenging specs, not just implementing them. 3. “Being good at SAP” won’t be enough. ↳ You’ll need to be good at logistics, supply chain, finance, production. ↳ Processes first. Screens second. 4. Juniors trained on navigation only? ↳ They’ll struggle. ↳ The ones who understand business flows will thrive. 5. The “hybrid” consultant won’t be a coder. ↳ They’ll be a process analyst. ↳ Someone who says, “This setup is inappropriate — here’s why.” Configuration will be assisted. Automated. But real-world decisions? Business trade-offs? Best practices? Those stay human. SAP consulting isn’t disappearing. -> It’s evolving. P.S. : The train’s already moving. Jump on — or risk getting left behind. #SAP #SAPConsulting #SAPExperts #SAPAI #FutureOfSAP #S4HANA #DigitalSAP #ProcessDesign #BusinessProcess #BestPractices #AIinSAP #SAPSkills #FunctionalConsulting #SAPCareer #ERPTransformation #SAPCommunity #HybridConsultant #TechAdoption #ChangeManagement #NextGenConsultant #SAPProcesses #SAPMindset #DigitalConsulting #BusinessTransformation #SAPProjects #SAPPeople

SAP's Strategy and the Power of Diverse Perspectives This week's discussions surrounding my blogs on Frank Albrecht's observations about the role of "non-SAP" partners and the potential of Agentic AI within the SAP ecosystem have been incredibly insightful. The diverse perspectives shared, particularly by Shaurin Shah, Wayne Holtham, and David Hilcher, have enriched the conversation and prompted me to delve deeper into these issues. Concerns from ERP Veterans The concerns raised by these ERP veterans highlight a growing unease with SAP's current strategy. Shaurin Shah emphasizes the limitations of SAP's ERP systems, particularly their focus on "purchases" rather than "people," which can hinder innovation. He suggests that decoupling AI and machine learning components from the core SAP system could foster innovation and allow customers to retain ownership of valuable business knowledge. Wayne Holtham criticizes SAP for competing with its partners and pushing immature products onto customers, eroding trust and damaging relationships. David Hilcher points to SAP's "Eurocentric" culture as a root cause of its problems, where a "one-size-fits-all" mentality and a lack of customer-centricity stifle innovation and fail to meet diverse customer needs. Addressing the Concerns These concerns raise important questions about SAP's future direction. To remain a leader in the ERP space, SAP needs to address these issues head-on. Collaboration and Customer Centricity: SAP should re-evaluate its relationship with partners, prioritizing collaboration over competition. Actively listening to customer feedback and needs is essential for delivering mature, customer-centric solutions. Embracing Openness and Flexibility: SAP could benefit from embracing a more open and collaborative culture, both internally and externally. Balancing standardization with flexibility and customization will be key to meeting the diverse needs of its customer base. Innovation and Adaptation: Decoupling AI and machine learning components, as suggested by Shah, could allow for greater innovation and adaptability. Embracing new technologies and business models is crucial for SAP to remain competitive in the rapidly evolving enterprise software landscape. The Way Forward The SAP ecosystem is at a crossroads. By addressing the concerns raised by ERP veterans and embracing a more open, collaborative, and customer-centric approach, SAP can continue to thrive and deliver value to its customers. For a more in-depth analysis of these issues, please refer to my white paper: [Concerns from ERP veterans over SAP's current strategy] https://lnkd.in/eXz7hQWG Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this blog post are my own and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any company or organization.

*** New SAP innovations only available to Cloud Customers is causing outrage ... well, is it? *** SAP's recent announcement that new innovations, particularly in the areas of AI and sustainability, will be exclusively available to GROW and RISE customers (= SAP S/4HANA adopters in a cloud deployment) has stirred up some controversy. Analysts and user groups have issued statements, with some expressing concerns like "SAP may be testing the limits of customer patience" and "SAP is causing a stir among its customers." These statements imply that on-premises customers are at a significant disadvantage compared to cloud customers. As someone who has been analyzing how various customers have been adopting SAP S/4HANA and its capabilities since 2015, my reaction is relatively laid back and relaxed. Why? Let's examine the numbers and characteristics of customers who have chosen different deployment models. The majority of "on-premises" customers have opted for brownfield approaches to migrate their legacy processes from ECC to SAP S/4HANA. Many of them continue to use SAP GUI and, if at all, employ SAP Fiori in limited areas. These customer groups did not choose to fully embrace Fiori, a key enabler of innovative capabilities. Leading the way in AI and other high-end innovations would need a complete contradictive approach, is this to be expected? The answer is no, as they need to complete other essential tasks first, such as phasing out legacy processes, mastering new capabilities, and embracing new technologies. Only after accomplishing these foundational steps does it make sense to delve into AI. Anything else, like polishing 20 years old processes by AI usage would not result in sustainable benefits for the enterprise. Another important aspect to consider is that AI, especially in conversational or generative forms, typically requires cloud infrastructure to function effectively. SAP's statement that these innovations are limited to the cloud is not meant to punish on-premises customers but rather reflects the technical requirements for these technologies to operate successfully. In light of these considerations, is SAP's announcement something that warrants outrage? Absolutely not. It's a practical alignment of innovation with the technological foundations necessary for its implementation. It underscores the importance of addressing fundamental business processes and embracing cloud infrastructure to fully leverage cutting-edge technologies like AI and sustainability solutions. #sap #ai

The endless debate in security architecture is whether to use best-of-breed solutions from specialized, experienced partners or a proprietary suite from a tech conglomerate. Recent incidents have brought this issue to the forefront, becoming the leading topic at a US CISO roundtable this week. The dangers of single-vendor lock-in within a proprietary security architecture are clear, present, and disastrous. Key Takeaways from the CISO Discussion: 1. Articulating Risk to Leadership: CISOs must effectively communicate the risks of increased dependency on a single vendor to their CFO/CEO, whom attractive enterprise licensing deals may tempt. It's crucial to highlight how vendor lock-in can limit flexibility and responsiveness to emerging threats. 2. Cost-Benefit Analysis: Consider how much you are willing to invest in mitigating major issues resulting from a tech conglomerate's "deal you couldn't refuse." While proprietary suites may seem cost-effective upfront, they can increase risk and lead to higher long-term expenses in responding to failures. The recent global outages at airlines, hospitals, and emergency services illustrate the significant costs of such failures. 3. Realistic Expectations of Integration and Automation: Evaluate whether the hope and prayer for intrinsic, seamless automation and everything centralized management from a single, confused-and-conflicted tech conglomerate are practical or delusional. Relying on one comprehensive solution from a tech conglomerate may create a "Frankenstein" system that fails to adapt to specific needs and respond effectively during urgent demands. Critical Considerations: 1. Security Operations as a Competitive Advantage: Security operations are mission-critical to an organization's ability to compete and succeed in the digital age. Relying on a "good enough is never good enough" approach can compromise your competitive edge. 3. Flexibility and Innovation: Best-of-breed solutions offer greater flexibility and the ability to integrate with cutting-edge technologies. This adaptability is essential in a rapidly evolving threat landscape. 4. Avoiding Single Points of Failure: A diverse security architecture minimizes the risk of a single point of failure, enhancing overall resilience and security posture. Ultimately, the decision between best-of-breed solutions and a proprietary suite from a tech conglomerate should align with your organization's specific needs, risk tolerance, and long-term strategic goals. One thing is certain: the choice is clear for organizations playing to win in the digital age.

Every organization I talk to seems to have discussions between IT and supply chain about planning technology (and rightly so). Advanced planning solutions vs ERP-native planning modules: the trade-off IT departments tend to favor fully integrated ERP suites for standardization, while supply chain teams often push for advanced planning solutions that better solve their day-to-day challenges. 🔹 ERP planning modules (SAP IBP, Oracle, etc.) promise seamless integration but are often rigid, require workarounds, and don't evolve fast enough. 🔹 Best-of-breed planning solutions (AI-driven forecasting, inventory optimization, supply planning) offer deeper functionality but require integration efforts from IT. 💡So who should have the final say? To me, the department using the tool the most and owning the problem should drive the decision. Supply chain teams know where and how they need improvements and that should take priority over IT’s preference for a single vendor suite. But I might be biased because I interact more with supply chain people than with IT people. ERP systems record what happens. Planning systems decide what should happen. Yet most companies still treat planning as an afterthought, locking it into their ERP rather than giving it the advanced tools it deserves. This article by Joannes Vermorel of Lokad is a good one, making the distinction between a system of records, reports, and intelligence: https://lnkd.in/eYAii6Kq On our planning podcast, we often dive deeper into these topics and I’ve also written a knowledge base on supply chain planning: - podcast: https://lnkd.in/ezusqSAE - knowledge base: https://lnkd.in/ega4Hp8R #supplychain #IT #planning #software #ERP #SAP