SAP Master Data Governance Reviews

I am currently working with data governance and then advisory and expert for SAP Master Data Governance.

I find all of the functions and features in SAP Master Data Governance to be the most valuable. SAP Master Data Governance has data models based on the SAP ERP data model for master data.

SAP Master Data Governance's data quality management capabilities focus on data quality management because it has workflows. It contains workflows that require a minimum of three steps before you approve a record, and there are usually more steps than just three for most companies, depending on the data object. The whole purpose is to ensure that when the record gets created, it is a validated record and follows through with multiple viewers and reviewers before it gets created. It is built with the SAP data model and incorporates replication to S4 or ECC based on what the company is using.

The interface in SAP Master Data Governance is easy to use for an end user. From my point of view, if they are trained well, the business is provided with the proper training, it is easy to deploy for IT. It is important that when you begin this journey of deploying the product, that you do not approach it from a technical standpoint but involve business design from the very beginning. While it may require some change management from the business side, once users are trained properly, they have always said that this is so much easier because it does not require you to know an ERP system or transaction codes. All you do is click on your role, enter information, and you have a form structure, which is much more business user-friendly than a screen filled with data fields that require a process to follow.

Regarding what SAP can do better in SAP Master Data Governance, they have an entire roadmap of constant improvements since they deployed the product, always adding new business functionality and add-ons. Each company may have different feedback, wishing for certain features. The essence of SAP Master Data Governance is to provide structure, and from my standpoint, it offers a pretty good structure. There will always be areas for improvement; for example, when I deployed it a few years ago, their approach to internal orders for finance was still new, and they were figuring out how it would work based on organizational requirements. The financial data objects are straightforward, but financial statements are a bit more challenging. It is not a one-time deployment; it requires ongoing investment in user and product knowledge, and you need to weigh the pros and cons of any IT solution. I often advise clients to walk before they run because establishing hierarchies requires having a designed structure before implementation, though you can add that later.

For additional functions in SAP Master Data Governance, it is interesting because on my project, we are already using AI technology for data cleansing before records are entered into SAP Master Data Governance. It would be beneficial to have the Dun & Bradstreet add-on within SAP Master Data Governance. However, one must remember that for AI to work effectively, it requires good data. Without that, AI does not make a difference. SAP Master Data Governance will always require a human perspective, especially to identify duplicate records. While SAP Master Data Governance provides technical capabilities for identifying potential duplicates based on searches, it requires human oversight due to the complexity of analyzing data fields. I believe integrating AI into the product could work, particularly after a solid data migration, which ensures that the records are reliable before utilizing AI for analytics.

My overall experience with SAP Master Data Governance is approximately ten years, off and on.

I find SAP Master Data Governance quite stable as an SAP product. It has been sold to hundreds of thousands of clients worldwide since its launch in 2006 or 2007. The product has changed significantly and improved over time, offering many more capabilities than before, so I would rate it a pretty stable product.

Regarding scalability when a company is growing, you can scale SAP Master Data Governance. Scaling involves the number of users and the amount of data, which typically comes at a cost.

The main competitor for SAP Master Data Governance includes several competing products. Oracle has its business suite, and Informatica offers its information steward. Each ERP system has similar products, but it can be difficult to make direct comparisons. For instance, EBX Orchestra Networks is out of the box; I once built a data platform for 160 sites similar to SAP Master Data Governance, which allows customization for many data objects. It is important to note that using the term Master Data Governance encompasses various products that do not always serve the same purpose. Data governance is broader, involving processes, people, policies, procedures, and guidelines, so simply having a tool does not imply full data governance.

The initial setup for SAP Master Data Governance can be seen as either simple or complex, depending on who you ask. For basic users without any technical background, it could be challenging. I have worked with seasoned developers who know the product well, and they can expedite tasks quickly. However, less experienced developers might find it more difficult. I advocate that SAP certification is beneficial for the product, but I am not SAP certified myself. My familiarity with the product speaks to my experience. As with any project, the more experience you have, the quicker and more efficiently you can complete tasks. Following SAP's instructions is crucial, and having good experience helps in delivering results faster and with more creativity.

The main requirement for the product is that it is highly advantageous to have SAP Master Data Governance sitting on top of your SAP ERP system. It is only used for some financial data objects, business partners like customers, suppliers, and materials. I have also deployed EAM for home enterprise asset management, but it allows companies to really govern their master data before it goes into the ERP system so that you do not have your ERP system full of unnecessary records and unnecessary data storage.

SAP Master Data Governance provides significant benefits to the user; it is an expensive product, but if it is designed and deployed well, it expedites an enormous amount of effort and time. It allows global corporations to use the same platform because you can interface it with multiple ERP systems and non-SAP products.

Regarding scalability when a company is growing, you can scale SAP Master Data Governance. Scaling involves the number of users and the amount of data, which typically comes at a cost.

Rating the pricing of SAP Master Data Governance is challenging. It is an expensive product. The value for money consideration depends on organizational size. For larger organizations, it is worth the investment. For smaller organizations, it is not; I understand that. A smaller organization would likely find it too costly to consider.

The setup process for SAP Master Data Governance is not strictly on-premises; it is cloud-based. There are multiple deployment options available. SAP Master Data Governance can primarily be deployed on SAP cloud services, though it may not be limited to just that.

My overall review rating for SAP Master Data Governance is eight out of ten.

In SAP Master Data Governance, I have around seven years of experience. I'm expert in all the customization and standardization, having worked on greenfield and brownfield, standard implementation, and customizations.

I have worked on implementation, support, and rollout projects for SAP Master Data Governance during my seven years as an expert.

The best feature in SAP Master Data Governance is demonstrated in my current work on the Etisalat project in UAE, Middle East Dubai project. A customer created one request based on the roles, FL customer roles, FI customer, normal customer, and credit management. As per business restrictions, they are not allowing payment card details due to their strictly confidential nature, so we prevent that functionality. If payment details are required, SAP provides opportunities under the company code payment methods and payment types. Accordingly, the company will conduct payment transactions. If the bank customer does not have any payment options required, we will enable the bank data features at the customer level. The user will add the bank payment details, based on that the other party, such as vendors, will process the payments. The reason for not suggesting payment card details is confidentiality, so we are giving the details directly to the vendors.

Regarding SAP Master Data Governance, there is significant room for improvement particularly concerning the replication types. For example, when a vendor master is created in Ariba and a request is submitted from the Ariba system, SAP Ariba directs it to MDG. MDG verifies the details entirely through PI/PO or CPI. Once MDG verifies the data, the request is submitted to the S/4HANA system, the target. After a final approval at all levels, the vendor number is generated, and the vendor code gets passed from source to target system. This number is available in both the Ariba integration in the systems and in SAP BPT code, as well as the S/4HANA system.

I have around seven years of experience with this solution.

I have worked at the integration level, so I'm not sure about the specifics of systems deployment.

I would rate the stability of SAP Master Data Governance between eight and nine out of ten.

I would rate the scalability of SAP Master Data Governance between eight and ten.

For technical support, I rate it between one and five, as I have 1.5 years of technical experience and around two years of technical alongside five years of techno-functional consulting experience. In some critical situations, I perform as a techno-functional consultant.

Neutral

My company, Mindtree, is a partner of SAP.

When comparing SAP Master Data Governance with other governance tools, technologies such as MDM are notably different. For instance, MDG governs a process and connects with multiple systems to maintain secure data. When comparing MDG to MDM, MDG focuses on security, while MDM primarily handles data consistency.

Pricing for SAP Master Data Governance in the latest scenario depends on each version, offering a robust and user-friendly application. It's providing substantial flexibility to users. Based on this, the considerations relate to data quality and management of system applications. For example, maintaining data on material master, supplier master, and customer master requires ample space to sustain the system landscape. If not required for OCG finance, which is required only for material master, supplier master, and customer master, the pricing is relatively lower.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate SAP Master Data Governance a 10.

SAP is a closed tool. Integrating with it requires a lot of effort and money. It is also very expensive and not flexible. 

If you want to make a change, it takes 30-60 working days compared to others, where you can do things in one hour.

It is very stable. RiverFront is less stable.

If you pay them for support, they give you good people.

Positive

RiverFront is a more modern and cost-effective solution compared to MDG. It is flexible and designed to handle big data, which MDG does not support well. MDG was developed in the 1970s, making technology outdated, while RiverFront was developed in the 2010s, incorporating more recent advancements. When dealing with large datasets, such as millions of records, MDG can face performance issues. In contrast, RiverFront is specifically built to manage massive datasets, particularly in sectors like retail that handle tens of millions of records. In terms of technology and performance, RiverFront significantly outperforms MDG.

When deploying SAP, you can choose between on-premise or cloud-based solutions, offering flexibility. SAP is widely used worldwide, with many vendors providing support and expertise. With the right vendor, scaling your SAP system becomes straightforward.

It took us a few years to deploy it with the external vendor, which generally put ten people internally.

It depends on how the project is managed internally. Key factors include how the team approaches the project, the KPIs to measure progress, and ensuring that efforts align with achieving ROI. While we have had a very successful MDG deployment for the past nine years and are satisfied with the results, it's important to remember that software alone accounts for only about 15-20% of a project's success. The strategy and execution of the deployment determine the majority of the outcome. ROI is more about how the project is implemented than the specific software used.

It is very costly and needs a lot of knowledge.

We were using SuccessFactors for both e-learning and HR.

Deploying MDM software in a large organization presents significant challenges due to resistance to centralization and changes in established workflows. The key difficulty lies in convincing people to adapt to more structured processes, which may reduce the flexibility they're used to. 

This challenge isn't specific to the software itself but rather the shift in how people are required to work. It's important not to underestimate the functional impact of such a change, especially from a user adoption perspective.

Overall, I rate the solution a five out of ten.

I've got clients from multiple industries who use the solution across the industries, including consumer products, FMCG, the high-tech industry, services clients, and resources. We use the solution for central finance-related clients, the customer services department, sales and distribution, and the manufacturing process.

I like how the solution integrates with other SAP tools and third-party solutions.

We are trying to get the cloud solution of SAP Master Data Governance for multiple clients, which requires more improvement. Bill of materials (BOM) creation in manufacturing needs to be enhanced in SAP Master Data Governance.

Clients have also suggested improvements in managing a hierarchy and ensuring that you maintain and work on the hierarchy side.

I have been using SAP Master Data Governance for at least 12 years.

I rate the solution’s stability a nine out of ten.

I would recommend the solution for medium and large enterprises.

I rate the solution’s scalability a nine out of ten.

The solution's initial setup is complex and takes a couple of weeks.

SAP Master Data Governance is an expensive solution.

The solution's competitors are Informatica MDM, Microsoft MDM, and Oracle MDM. SAP Master Data Governance is better because it integrates well into the SAP ecosystem.

I would recommend the solution to other users.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

The standard SAP MDG solution is for business partners, materials, and financial master data. For retail, you can manage products and materials through Article Master Data.  

The validation and derivation rules are one of the advantages for maintaining data quality. We can also build approval processes and governance within the system. These are the two main advantages.

Integration:

We can use both inbound and outbound interfaces for integration. SAP MDG has built-in integration capabilities with multiple systems/streams. We can also create custom interfaces if needed, for example, with Adobe or other upstream or downstream systems. It's reasonably good.

When I think about data integration, it is very smooth and simple to upload or download data to and from SAP MDG. There are multiple processes in MDG for this.

Instead of ABAP coding for some workflows, it would be helpful to have alternative solutions. Many people are not proficient in ABAP. If there were easy, configurable options or templates, it would be beneficial.

So, any user has to understand the coding process to work with the product. We need technical support to understand the coding. There is a lack of resources who have this knowledge. If one resource is handling the product and needs to hand it over, it is difficult for a new resource to understand the coding.

It would be great if there were more straightforward configurations, like in other SAP modules, such as sales and distribution or materials management. These are configurable without much technical understanding.

If there were a data quality tool within the product, or some kind of consolidation with MDG, it would be good. Currently, data quality management and consolidation are separate tools.

There is a lack of clarity on how to create Bills of Materials (BOMs) and routings. There is some standard solution for that, but it needs improvement.

I have been using it for almost 12 years now.

Stability is quite good. I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. 

I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten. So it's a bit complex to scale, and it is also very costly. People are saying that mid-sized companies cannot afford SAP MDG. They may go for SAP for other modules, but managing master data seems quite expensive for mid-sized companies.

If the cost were lower, it could be suitable for mid-sized companies. An attractive offer would be a discount on MDG for SAP users. They are already spending a good amount on SAP modules, and they may hesitate to spend more on master data management. They might not be able to manage all master data instantly with MDG. If they want to maintain certain data, there's another subscription. Pricing information is not readily available.

Also, there is no clarity and direction on how to manage bills of materials (BOMs) or routing in MDG. There is documentation, but no client has implemented it yet.

We are supported by SAP and have contacted them. Their response is okay.

Positive

Informatica is the market leader for master data management, according to my understanding. They offer more flexibility in the product.

The initial setup is simple. The process is standard and easy to activate. The only challenge I see is the workflow configurations and body configurations. It is a lengthy process to configure and takes a lot of time.

I work in a consulting company. In my previous product-based company, we used SAP MDG but not the cloud version. It was on-premises.

Now, many clients go with the hybrid model.

Overall, I would rate it a seven out of ten. SAP MDG benefits from being an SAP product. If a company's ERP system is SAP, they prefer MDG, as integration is easier. 

Many people are now going with the S/4HANA deployment instead of the hub deployment, so everything is in a single system. This is how SAP is positioning itself. Otherwise, I think Informatica is preferred because of its flexibility. I don't have any hands-on experience with Informatica, so I cannot recommend it.

I can recommend it. I come from an SAP background and have experience with MDG. 

As a consultant, the use cases for SAP Master Data Governance include creating customers and suppliers.

As a consultant, I think the best advantages of the product are to have a consolidated database of master data, which really stands out. The main purpose of SAP Master Data Governance is maintaining a single source of truth for enterprise data.

It helps a lot and works quite well. We have been implementing these initiatives in many countries, and most end-users are happy to find their supplier and customer data in one place.

I don't see any disadvantages or areas for improvement that I can think of, to be honest.

It's sometimes challenging when you have to develop custom fields, but then usually it works, even when deploying specific changes for a specific country. It's usually doable, but it needs many custom activities to be aligned.

The challenging part is that it takes much effort because it needs extra build initiatives by ABAP logic, and many technical people need to be involved. It's not straightforward sometimes. When deploying MDG to a new country with requirements to onboard suppliers with specific fields that are not in the standard template of MDG or S/4HANA, you need to build those new items. These are usually fields that need to be added into the existing interface, systems, UI, and NWBC. Unless it's part of the SAP standard, it can create extra work and needs significant technical involvement. That is one of the main disadvantages.

I have been working with this solution for two years.

As for installation, I have no idea if it is straightforward or can be quite complex to install.

The solution is quite stable overall.

Regarding the scalability of SAP Master Data Governance, it is easily scalable when dealing with customers and suppliers. It can be easily scaled up to meet the needs of the client or the client's countries.

The technical support from SAP depends on the client and how it is agreed. You usually have an SAP consultant fully dedicated to the project, so they are quite responsive and proactive when it comes to answering questions, solving problems, and giving advice. The support we get from them is fairly good.

Subjectively rating support from one to ten, where ten is the best, I would give it eight out of ten.

Positive

I haven't worked with any other master data governance solution apart from SAP.

I work mainly with SAP solutions, specifically with SAP Master Data Governance.

I work mostly with S/4HANA and SAP Master Data Governance around vendor master and customer master creations.

I use MDG's advanced data validation rules every day. It depends on how the user creating business partners is aligned with the data, but it helps enhance data quality and reduce errors because otherwise, we would have many errors in the system.

In terms of integration capability, it's mostly easily integrated with S/4HANA because the current standard solutions are used. It's fairly uniform with what S/4HANA provides in terms of integration.

From a pricing perspective, I cannot comment as I'm not in charge of those aspects.

My overall rating for SAP Master Data Governance is 8 out of 10.

My technical expertise allows me to provide end-to-end implementation support, including managing interfaces between applications.

We use it for data consolidation, DQM (data quality management), data validation, UI application, and more within the SAP application landscape.

One of the key benefits comes from the data quality features. In large-scale industries with significant amounts of master data, avoiding duplication is crucial. Duplicate entries can negatively impact business operations.

Data quality features also ensure data consistency. By connecting to a central system, we establish a single source of truth. Then, we can reliably distribute this accurate data across all connected systems.

For example, if a company has numerous internal systems, we can maintain all the data in one central location and distribute it seamlessly and securely. Data consistency is a major advantage.

Moreover, we can configure SAP Master Data Governance to establish data accuracy rules.

With SAP Master Data Governance, we can maintain workflows with multiple approvals. Previously, we needed approval from different teams and, finally, from our coding team. 

Now, we can manage a multiple-step approval process. We can even assign a single master data record to two people for parallel approval. This flexibility in workflow management allows us to streamline the upload process and manage tasks efficiently within SAP MDG.

So, the workflow management in SAP Master Data Governance benefited your organization.

Data replication is crucial. We maintain master data in a central location, and then need to replicate it across potentially 10 to 50 systems. Consistency across these systems is important, which is where data replication comes in. We can replicate using IDocs, or more commonly now, web services.

There were challenges with handling multiple values within a single input field at the screen level.

Think of a typical e-commerce website where you manually provide values. SAP MDG is designed for single values, so we sometimes need to multiply values within a specific input field. We've addressed this by using a custom enhancement or an add-on application (I'd need to confirm the correct technical term for "EAP application").

Forms can also be tricky. We sometimes need to use input tokenizers, especially when there's a potential for conflicts at runtime. Dynamically managing the appearance of these elements has been a challenge that we've successfully resolved.

I have a total of eight years of experience, with four years in development related to SAP Master Data Governance.

There will always be some issues with stability. Should any stability problems arise, we can usually sort them out.

It's not inherently unstable. The solution is designed to be stable if you follow the implementation steps correctly. Sometimes, issues arise from miscommunication or misalignment between teams – the security team, authorization team, technical functions, etc. Everyone needs to be in sync. 

For example, if a workflow isn't activated properly, we'll face problems, and then we need to analyze the data to find the cause. These technical challenges happen, but if you follow the steps diligently, there shouldn't be any major stability problems. The sync between teams is essential. 

I'm from the technical side, but there are functional experts, basis teams, and security who have their own processes that I may not be fully aware of. Sometimes, updates or installations initiated by one team might cause an issue in an area I'm working on. We need to check all of these aspects when troubleshooting.

It can scale. For example, we have a material master setup where we're currently running about a million records. At times, the business might initiate bulk changes due to updates in codes or security protocols. 

We can handle those changes through backend jobs. We've managed tens of thousands of updates within 30 to 60 minutes, and we can also replicate these changes to all connected systems.

So, the business can initiate significant updates with 10,000 or more changes. We can handle even more than 10,000 changes without issue. I've seen up to 40,000 updates processed simultaneously. The key is to do this in batches to avoid impacting ongoing business operations. 

When we have large updates, we coordinate with the Basis team to temporarily increase work processes on the application side. We stagger the data updates so we don't overload the network – ensuring a smooth process with minimal impact.

When we have an issue that we can't resolve internally, we raise an incident ticket through the SAP support system. If the problem is with standard SAP functionality, they'll address it directly. 

If the issue is related to our custom logic, they'll analyze it within our Master Data Governance environment. You need the proper licensing for SAP to provide that level of support.

Generally, the support is good. For non-critical issues, we raise incident tickets and might need to wait or escalate to get an immediate response. This delay can be frustrating sometimes.

Positive

A common alternative to SAP MDG is Stibos STEP. Currently, many companies are interested in Stibos. It offers flexibility, like a "blank page" for customization. Technical users can do a lot with it. 

Stibos does allow some custom logic using JavaScript, but it's not as extensive as a full programming language.

I prefer SAP MDG. While Stibos offers a lot of initial flexibility, it can lead to stability issues long-term. If different developers customize differently over time, you can encounter problems. 

With SAP, there are more restrictions, but the experience of supporting multiple organizations forces SAP to build in safeguards that help maintain stability. Also, SAP allows for the customization we need.

The initial setup involves multiple systems, typically including KMMBP and replication links. A significant portion of the work (around 70-80%) is coordinating with the Basis team to enable the various components required for SAP Master Data Governance. Once enabled, there is an additional configuration. 

For testing purposes, you could have a basic setup within three months, but for full business use and customizations, it can take longer. Also, there are often three distinct master data areas to manage.

SAP Master Data Governance is a licensed product. While there might be no upfront cost for the MDG component itself, you still need to pay for user authorizations. Licensing can be structured with different terms, like paying an annual fee based on the number of users.

Previously, SAP MDG likely had its own specific license with terms based on years of use. The MDG component itself might be included in broader SAP licenses now, but you'll still need to pay for the user credentials to access it.

And the installation of the software itself is completely free.

I do recommend SAP MDG.  SAP is moving towards a cloud-based solution for Master Data Management. This might involve a subscription-based model and would be delivered as a web application. 

SAP continues to develop and improve its MDM tools, so it's a good choice for the future.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. While it's not perfect, it's a robust solution, and the workflow management is a significant strong point. The rest of the functionality is also very good.

We use the platform for centralizing and streamlining the management of an organization's master data.

With MDG, we have established an efficient process for easily managing country-specific data. At an enterprise level, it has proven valuable in imposing control over master data changes across different countries.

The product is easy to use and is beneficial from a data governance perspective.

The platform's pricing needs improvement.

We have been using SAP Master Data Governance for five years.

It is a stable platform.

We manage 400,000 SAP Master Data Governance users. It is a scalable platform and is used very regularly.

SAP provides efficient technical support services.

We used JD Edwards before. We switched to SAP for better scalability.

The initial setup process has medium complexity. It is easy to use once configured. However, in a few countries, the implementation for JD Edwards was more flexible than SAP.

SAP Master Data Governance is an expensive product.

The integration capabilities of SAP Master Data Governance are exceptionally high, making it a standard asset in our operations. It integrates with various products and platforms, including the NetPass Platform, using the SAP framework.

I rate it a six out of ten.

SAP Master Data Governance functions as a standard data model, offering users both an inbuilt and custom data model. Regardless of the type of data or attributes involved, users can add, delete, and decompose fields and attributes based on the specific data model, whether it pertains to suppliers, customers, finance, or master data. Once the governance process is completed, the data can be seamlessly moved to the target system, showcasing one of the key advantages of SAP Master Data Governance.

SAP Master Data Governance is a very good product, allowing users to identify duplicate records easily. In the solution, you can store records as golden records and monitor data quality. For consolidation purposes, the solution allows you to use the bulk data.

In my experience with SAP Master Data Governance, I have primarily dealt with the custom data model, involving the addition of new fields under BP categories or vendor sections. When a custom field is added at the product's UI level, data retrieval from the third-party system becomes possible. The SAP Master Data Governance API operates in the background, incorporating the workflow. Once the workflow is triggered, the change request linked to the BP number is updated at the table level, as per the custom data table number requirement, and then the details are pushed to the target system. The aforementioned process stands as an advantage of SAP Master Data Governance.

As per my knowledge, I have not faced any issues with the product till now.

Looking at the market today, I can say that the main competitor for SAP Master Data Governance is artificial intelligence. In SAP Master Data Governance, a user needs to select where a file should be uploaded or downloaded from in some of the cases in SAP Master Data Governance. It would be better to integrate artificial intelligence into SAP Master Data Governance so that a user does not need to track file locations. For example, be it files in formats like PDF, CSV, and XML, the artificial intelligence technology will help users pull the files automatically and help with the uploading or downloading part, which, in turn, will take less time.

In general, I want artificial intelligence added to SAP Master Data Governance since I feel it is one of the areas where the solution has certain shortcomings.

I have been using SAP Master Data Governance for five years. I am a customer of SAP.

It is a stable solution.

I have experience with ABAPer. I moved to SAP Master Data Governance from ABAPer while working as a technical consultant. After I learned the functionalities of SAP Master Data Governance, I became a functional consultant.

The initial setup of SAP Master Data Governance is very easy. My company has experience with SAP Master Data Governance Versions 8.0, 9.0, 9.1, and 9.2, and SAP S/4HANA 1709 and SAP S/4HANA 1909, the latest updated versions.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

I am very happy to work with SAP Master Data Governance.

I rate the overall tool a ten out of ten.

The solution is used in Life Cycle Data Management where it can be stored in cheaper storage options like Amazon and OpenShift. It has helped with data retention.

It is robust solution. 

SAP should come up with specialized services as per their customer's requirements.

I have experience with SAP Data Governance. 

It is a good and robust solution. I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.