SAP Master Data Governance Reviews

The solution is primarily used for workflows.

For example, in Turkey, some of our customers have different material quotes, material numbers, or material types. Everything is so confusing from the main company. It's hard to go over the old data. However, with MDG, they can see all the data in the system. It allows for an effective data workflow. There are workflows for all kinds of items, including materials, data, customer's financials, vendor details, ERPs, etc. 

The solution's GUI is very good. The entire product is very user-friendly and easy to navigate. Normal users, not SAP experts, are able to get around the solution without too much trouble. 

The reporting is quite good on the product.

We've found the solution to be quite flexible.

There's a workflow in MDG. What happens is, when you end it, the materials are created. However, in Data Quote Management, when for example, you make a project, to use later you can activate Data Quote Management, and set new rules. When you check it on the Data Quote Management screen, it shows charts and analytics. You define the rule, it shows you the materials that don't fit with your rule. It's actually good practice to improve your data. You can set the workflows however you want. The analytics are largely for CFO or CEO, and they can see all data within the charts.

The implementation could be easier.

The governance of master data is difficult, and consolidating the old data is really hard. MDG projects tend to last a minimum of six months, and this is largely due to the fact that there are too many rules. 

The biggest problem in MDG is that you have to make rules and you have to set your rules very strictly and you need to prepare your data for your rules. If you don't, your old data is kaput.

The marketing of the product outside of Europe should be better. While it might be well known in places like Germany or England, it doesn't have the same recognition in Turkey. Our first MDG project was only two or three years ago. It's pretty new to the scene.

The solution is lacking configuration in one system. For example, there's a lack of country definitions, country tax category definitions in MDG, and in all ERPs. When MM projects are done, they configure everything. 

For example, my customer only does business with European Union countries. They don't define European Union country's tax number categories, however, when they deal with Israel, they don't define it in the old ERP system. It's a problem. You need to have a conversation with all seven ERP consultants and tell them to redefine this tax number category. It could be better, maybe, or easier.

I have a year's experience when it comes to dealing with the solution.

The solution is quite stable. You need to ensure the rules you create are strict, however, the performance itself is good. If you are not strict with the rules, it's hard to fix things once that happens.

The solution can scale and is expanding. For example, in the first MDG version, it was very basic. However, in newer MDG versions, SAP gets some new business objects like Data Quote Management and analytics. They are continuing to build out the product.

Currently, we have around 2,000 users at this time.

We have technical support for our company. We can open tickets if we run into issues. Typically, it takes two to three days to resolve things. It's not too difficult to reach out to them. It's quite typical and they aren't extremely helpful.

For example, when we have a problem and we open a ticket to SAP, they tend to say, "You need to check this quote". You need to check it, yet they don't define the specific problems. They say, "Check here", "Check this", "Check this quote", and we check it and we try to find the problem. They could be more helpful in that sense.

It's important, at the outset, to be very strict about the rules you are setting, otherwise, you can lose data and it's hard to fix things.

In terms of deployment and maintenance, for a simple MDG project, it depends on what data a company want. For example, one project management person is for sure needed, as well as one senior manager, one senior consultant, two engineers, and one technical consultant for sure. This is the minimum you'll need for a team.

SAP tends to sell the customer the license, however, they make money on the amount of data. 

The problem is in Turkey, there are economic issues that affect SAP's sector in Turkey. For example, five years ago, one euro was three Turkish lira, now it's nine Turkish lira, so SAP, now costs triple the amount, actually.

SAP is aware of this, and they do try to offer discounts, however, I don't know how much as I'm not in the sales meetings. It's not an aspect of the business I worry about.

I'm an SAP consultant.

I would recommend the solution to other users. It's flexible and has a good GUI. It's useful for business processes.

Overall, I would rate the product at an eight out of ten. We've been mostly pleased with the results.

What was valuable in that it forced people in our organization to standardize records. Previously, the records were not standardized so if you had a record of something, an object or whatever, there was no agreement. The technology forced us to look at our business. When you're trying to implement a technology, you need to look at your business and standardize your business if you want such a tool to work. It forced us to do that.

The workflows have been a valuable aspect of the solution. 

The solution is great at standardizing all of our records.

It's a pretty simple application and it's meant to be simple. It's not meant to do a lot of things. Instead, it's meant to do one thing and one thing only. Right now, what they have is good. 

The workflow works well, however, there's not a lot of options in defining roles. There are roles that are very specific within the MDG and we had to adapt our process to the roles that are in the workflow. I'm talking about the workflow in the roles, not access rights or things of that nature (such as access or identity management). I'm talking about how the flow works in the different types of roles. It's not very flexible.

Overall, they just a little bit more flexibility in terms of assigning roles or adding new roles. We have a longer approval process, so we need to break it down into more roles than what is typically available and we need to hard-code it.

We've been using the solution for years.

The solution is stable. However, it depends. Just straight technology-wise, it's stable. 

It's not very scalable. 

We ran into all kinds of issues in trying to capture items. It ties into SAP. MDG is based on the fields and the data points or attributes that are collected. It's not the application that is not scalable. Rather, it's the data model of the application. MDG is based on the SAP application data model. However, due to the fact that the SAP application data model is not very scalable, MDG is not scalable.

I've never personally dealt with technical support. It's the IT team that usually handles any problems. The CVO office is not doing any type of IT support maintenance. We're more about the policy and directions on the data management overall. Therefore, I wouldn't be able to comment on the technical support of the solution.

That said, my understanding is that the relationship we have with technical support is good.

The application itself is not very complex to implement. It's rather straightforward. However, that said, to make the application work, you need to look at your business. You need to look at whatever data assets you want to govern and make sure they are standardized. Then you need to have agreements. It's all about data governance. If you don't have a strong data governance framework set up already around your data assets, the implementation of the application can get very complicated. It's not a technology issue. It's a business problem. 

If you don't know who makes the decision on what and who approves what, you will run into problems. To give you an example, if you have a material of some sort, such as a pencil, you need to ask: what are the data points or the data attributes associated with that pencil that makes it a standard record, and what would you want to govern, and which data attributes are you governing? Are you governing everything about it, or just a few attributes? All those decisions need to be made beforehand. If you don't have good data governance that tells you who has the authority to make that decision, that's where you get into negotiation and it becomes very long to implement that application.

It's not about the tool itself. Configuring an application is easy. It's rather about how do you integrate that application into your business and operations. That's where it gets tricky. Most of the time, people are not ready for that. That's the whole point of having any type of project led by IT rather than business. IT just focuses on the application and they don't focus on the business processes. That's why, sometimes, applications fail, because it was too focused on the technology and not enough on how that technology relates to the business.

I don't have any details in regards to the licensing costs related to the solution. IT tends to take care of licensing and procurement.

We're clients. We don't have a business relationship with eh client.

We've been implementing the solution for a number of years, as it's a National Defense project. The entire project is ongoing.

Due to the nature of the project, we don't have anything on the cloud.

Overall, I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

The solution is for creating and managing a Master Data across an organization. We implement the solution for customers to streamline the creation, inundation, and dilution of Master Data across domains, such as financial masters.

The main use case is to increase data quality by starting to create the right data with the right people and distribute it to the consuming systems. We want to enable users to be able to identify the golden record for all of a particular Master Data set. For example, to prevent a unique customer from getting mixed up in the use cases. Bringing in data standardization, to prevent users from spending too much time on the creation of the Master Data. This can be done via the implementation of business tools by the customer or sometimes the company itself, preventing the overload of data. Lastly, data enrichment can also be achieved.

Our organization was able to gain more trusted data. For example, if there is a historical record of, five materials but on data profiling, we found that 20% of it cannot be used. With analytics, they can rely on the record of the remaining 80% of the data and it can be used as needed.

The crude operation, creating, reading, updating, and deleting are more streamlined. 

There are data stewards who can take complete control of the information and the creation of the data which goes through them. They are the single point of contact to ask if a particular record is correct or not.

Some of the features that I have found to be beneficial are the search and uploads functions. The tool that allows you to find out the life cycle processing time.

The ability to see who changed values.

The configuration is not difficult technically, it allows many people the ability to use it.

It offers a standard security application to be used on a cell phone, this feature is good from a mobility standpoint.

The tools have been improved quite a lot over a period of time with data mining rules.

The UI could improve by being more neat and clean. Sometimes users find it difficult to use it.

When using the solutions I feel the performance could improve.

The solution is stable. I do not see any challenges. We did have some bugs, but not to the extent which is in our regular business operation. We have always had the appropriate help to solve the issues.

I have deployed the solution for customers requiring the basics or on a vanilla configuration. I then deployed a customized configuration for customer requiring more. It is quite scalable and I definitely do not see any problems.

Some of our customers have approximately 100 - 250 users. Some of the positions of the people using the solution are requesters, data approvers, data receivers, and analysts.

The technical support we have experienced is good. They have been responsive for about 90% of the year.

The setup is straightforward but could be improved.

We have a team that does the deployment of the solution which took four to five days.
Deployment is not too difficult but implementation involves requirement gathering, deployment, and then configuring and customizing the tools. It goes through the life cycle of testing which takes more time. 

The customization was done easily, we followed a structured approach and we take into consideration the comments of the customers and we collaborate with them. It went well.

The implementation strategy we used mostly was a hybrid of waterfall. This means before we go ahead and even configure the tool, some requirements are needed to be formalized and signed off.

The solution requires maintenance after a couple of months, but it still requires attention, the use is like a journey. You are always making changes as the customers will change. This aspect will always require observation.

We have been able to provide better customer service because when you have the customer data sorted, you can better sell to your customers and the shipment are accurate.

We no longer have duplicated data on the systems, this is a saving for the company.

The cloud solution is subscription-based, it is paid monthly or quarterly. If the solution is on-premises, it is a one-time fee. As far as I am aware, there are no additional costs.

The amount of time a user might use the solution all depend on the customer's needs. You do not create a Master Data link on daily basis. It can take a bit of time in a week. If your business has two domains and both are being implemented, it doubles up the usage and could require more attention.

I would advise others before getting involved in a solution like this to look at the foundation of their organization and consider their strategy before moving forward.

I would recommend this product.

I rate SAP Master Data Governance an eight out of ten.

Our primary use for the product is for master data management and the company IP.  

I think it is quite difficult to say which feature I like the most because it is just a company process management tool. We have to use it. It manages a perspective of what we do. The most valuable thing is what it does. 

What SAP needs to do for this product is to improve the user-friendliness of the dashboard to make sure they are going to have a more user-friendly product in the future. Another task for SAP is to accommodate China's local requirements because this product is still a global one. Sometimes what the module does will not fit so well for Chinese user requirements. It needs to be more global-aware.  

We have been using SAP Master Data Governance for about 10 years.  

Stability is built into the product.  

I do not think that there are any scalability issues with SAP. We have had no problems and expect to increase usage.  

Our company has global support from SAP. They are responsive and do what we need.  

The cost of the product is not ideal. It will be matched centrally by the global act for us. We have some help with the cost.  

I would recommend SAP MDG to others who are looking into implementing it. If a company is already using SAP, then there is no doubt that it is a good choice. MDG is the preferred choice for SAP users. If they do not use SAP, the choice will be based on the detailed requirements for the company — the business requirements — to pick the right product.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate SAP MDG as maybe a seven-of-ten.  

We're a consulting company in the area of procurement solutions, where product and supplier master data builds the base for any Spend Analytics, Strategy and any Automation Scenarios. Majority of our customers use SAP MDG especially for Supplier Master Data.

Our customers are integrating their central SAP MDG with procurement solutions for self-registration and supplier profiling including supplier qualification, supplier performance and development. The central SAP MDG is also used as master data hub to distribute Central Master Data and Supplier Master Data into the different back end systems like SAP ERPs and Non SAP ERPs and others.

A good solution for large enterprises. 

The price can be improved.

It follows the SAP standard rules and governance for master data operations and follows change and release management rules according to SAP standards for IT operations. It offers the full SAP administration and governance, and it's quite a stable and professional product.

SAP Master Data Governance is a scalable product.

Technical support depends on the size and type of company. Multiple support levels are available.

Installation is straightforward. I don't think there's a big difference between this and other products.

I would recommend SAP Master Data Governance to new customers, especially large companies. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would give SAP Master Data Governance an eight.

I work for a train company on the IT side of master data management. We are customers of Master Data Governance and I'm a functional consultant of master data. I implement the solution across our numerous locations.

The product is very useful in terms of building master data and in terms of our code. It is a very solid product and provides corrected data. This is a solid packet and a good tool. 

I'd like to see more flexibility which is currently lacking. They need to add a cloud option as well as multiple creations. We're looking for a better mass upload.

I've been using this product for three years. 

I believe the latest version is scalable and compatible. I don't have any hands-on experience as yet.

Technical support provides a good service for us. 

We also use Oracle solutions in the SharePoint portal. Oracle is not controlled the way SAP is. Controls and validations are limited.

If you work in a well-controlled environment, implementation is easy. 

Licensing costs are a little on the high side. 

I rate the solution seven out of 10. 

SAP Master Data Governance is used for enterprise architecture.

SAP Master Data Governance integrates well.

I have been using SAP Master Data Governance for three and a half years.

SAP Master Data Governance has been stable.

I have found SAP Master Data Governance to be scalable.

We have approximately 500 people using this solution in my organization.

We have consultants that handle the maintenance and support of SAP Master Data Governance.

We have an enterprise license. The whole SAP landscape pricing model is based on the number of users, and the number of transactions. The price could be better, there is always room for improvement in the price.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate SAP Master Data Governance a nine out of ten.