SAP S/4HANA Reviews

We are using SAP S4HANA for the OIL and GAS industry.

I have used SAP S4HANA within the past 10 Years

SAP S4HANA is highly stable.

I have found SAP S4HANA to be scalable.

The support quality depends upon the solution and the nature of the problem. It depends on which platform you working on it.

The difficulty level of the initial setup depends on the person's skills. If you know the basic knowledge of the database, then it will be easy, otherwise, it will be very difficult.

I would rate the price of SAP S4HANA a four out of five.

The price of SAP S4HANA could be cheaper.

My advice to others is for them to do their homework very well because if you move into production, you don't have any chances. Make sure your timelines are correct and select your consultant wisely.

I rate SAP S4HANA an eight out of ten.

My main use of this product is for finance and controlling.

This product would be improved by adding more reports. In the next release, I would like UDF or UDO to be added.

I've been using this solution for about two-and-a-half years.

This is a scalable solution.

This product is straightforward to set up.

I also work with Business One, and I find I need a lot of workarounds for it. But I find everything I need in S4/HANA. I recommend this solution for everyone, I think it's the best solution available. I would rate S4/HANA eight out of ten.

We use SAP S4HANA for manufacturing and financials because we are a manufacturing firm.

In an upcoming release of SAP S4HANA, chain management should be easier.

I have been using SAP S4HANA for approximately four years.

SAP S4HANA is a stable solution.

I have found scalability difficult to achieve in SAP S4HANA because the license is quite expensive. The hardware requirement is quite high and can require a large investment for scalability.

We have approximately 200 users using the solution in my organization. We do not plan to increase the usage.

We have internal support for SAP S4HANA but for the external technical support, we rarely use it. The system is quite stable and if we do follow the process, it should have no problems. 

The initial configuration of SAP S4HANA is quite difficult. The time it took for the implementation took seven months.

The implementation was done by a partner.

There is an annual license for SAP S4HANA.

I recommend this solution to others.

I rate SAP S4HANA a seven out of ten.

It is really fast. It is also very stable.

I'm not a big fan of SAP S/4HANA because it needs a lot of hardware. It is really fast, but it needs a lot of hardware. The hardware for S/4HANA is too expensive.

We have been using it for six months.

It is working fine. It is really stable. We didn't find any issue, but we have been using it only for six months.

It is scalable. We have around 100 users.

We take the first level of support from a partner. They have not been very good. We are thinking of replacing the partner.

It was not straightforward. I took a lot of time to set up S/4HANA. The installation, implementation, and analysis took more than one year.

It is very expensive. It is not cheap.

It is stable, but it is expensive, and it needs a lot of hardware. Next time, we would go for another vendor. In our experience, Oracle is better.

I would rate it a seven out of 10.

I used S/4HANA as a classical ERP system, so I used it to manage the data feeds of enterprise companies. One of them was an IT services company and the other was in the pharmaceutical business. They were two different businesses, but S/4HANA has so many modules and adjustments that you can generally adjust it to any kind of a business. 

S/4HANA can be cloud-based or deployed on-premises, but in both of my implementations, it was on-prem. 

One of the most valuable features, which we used the most, was the FI module, for finance. It involved controlling, account receivables, account payables, and complete financial steering. 

S/4HANA could be improved with better integration. At the moment, a main issue I see is that there's so much growth in the functionality, complementary modules, and cloud solutions which were acquired by SAP and which extend the functionality of the SAP ERP suite. It looks to me that they tend to acquire more and more functionality from acquisitions, but they don't invest enough effort into making them integrated with S/4HANA or ERP. I would say that the functionality is great, but integration is something which still needs more attention. Instead of focusing on acquisitions, they should invest, integrate, and better the existing portfolio of products in SAP. It would help us, as implementors, to have a more complex or compact solution. 

I used S/4HANA for about half a year, for two projects that I was running. 

I would say that S/4HANA is more of a stable product than a top-performing product, but that's because I don't have the same use cases with similar tools to compare it to. It's not fair to judge the performance if I don't have a like-to-like comparison with anything else. 

This solution is scalable. 

The technical support of SAP really depends on where your ticket is resolved. Sometimes you are lucky and you get an expert on the first trial, directly from Europe, and you get good advice very quickly and can continue with your progress. However, sometimes your tickets get stuck and maybe sent to India or sent to less experienced consultants, and you need to chase it to get your ticket resolved. It's hard to make a judgment on this because I've experienced both circumstances, either getting great support in a short amount of time or having to escalate the ticket for a couple of weeks because it's hard to reach the right expert. It's hard to compare because it depends, case by case. 

I'd say their technical support falls in the middle of the scale: it could be better, but it could be worse. At the moment, it's satisfactory, but unfortunately, this isn't always the case. 

Implementation is definitely not straightforward. It's straightforward if you have a proper expert in your sub-base team, but it's not installing Windows or Microsoft Excel. It's a corporate enterprise management system, so there are a lot of parameters you need to set up. The installation itself is the easy part, but the configuration for the business use case is complex. Typically, the installation took about one week. For the configuration, making it compliant with the business use cases, and setting up all the security and users, it took months—typically three to six months, depending on the size of the company. 

The team needed for deployment and maintenance depends on the size and complexity of the customer's business processes. It also depends on how far they would like to go with customizations because almost nobody is purchasing such an enterprise solution to use it as a standard. Almost every customer has some specific features they need to get configured, adjusted, or developed in the solution. From that point of view, it will decide the size of your team. 

If you have a small- to mid-size company—one hundred employees, compact business processes—then you can do it in a couple of months with five people. If you have an enterprise company with thousands of employees around the globe, then it takes almost an indefinite number of consultants because it depends on the complexity of your setup. So the minimum team of five could set it up in a couple of months for a small- to mid-sized company, but it could be a team of twenty to fifty people if you have a complex environment. 

I have implemented this solution for two customers. 

This is not the cheapest solution on the market, so you need to invest seriously in it. As a solid product, it has a solid price. It's definitely one of the more expensive tools on the market, but it's also one of the best products on the market. 

You need to pay for licensing. There are multiple models, but typically, it's a yearly subscription. Usually, when you implement it from scratch, you don't just purchase it for the first year, but for three or five years. 

Compared to similar products, I rate SAP S/4HANA an eight out of ten, because it can always be better. 

I would definitely recommend S/4HANA to those considering implementation. The greatest and biggest enterprises use SAP solutions. If you have a really serious business and you're looking for a rock solid solution with all the modules and functionalities you may need, then SAP is definitely one of the best options. On the other hand, you need to have a business which is profitable because this solution is not cheap, and implementation projects are neither cheap nor fast. You need to invest seriously in such a solution, but it pays off because there are no risks of malfunctions. You have enough contractors on the market who can help you with the solution, so you can always get support. 

We are in the progress right now in achieving the maximum utilization of the SAP HANA. We are exploring most of the available features.

I find the Production Planning Cockpit (PPC) and Material Requirements Planning (MRP) most valuable modules.

In a feature release, they could improve by adding budgetary features.

I have used SAP S4HANA for approximately three years.

SAP S4HANA is stable.

As for our requirements, SAP S4HANA has been scalable. We can extend our requirement to the system. We are using the new enhanced feature and there are many features that are available for the system allowing scalability.

We are receiving technical support from a local team here from India.

The price of SAP S4HANA is reasonable.

I would advise others when implementing to work very closely with the SAP team. When we are migrating from a legacy system to any newer system or SAP, we need to work on the mass uploading requirements, such as the master data, or open items, such as assets. We need to make another clean system before uploading all the data to the system.

I rate SAP S4HANA a seven out of ten.

Because I'm a procure-to-pay consultant, I mostly look at that angle, and I have a bit of experience with sales and distribution. I also like the integration between S/4HANA and other ERPs because S/4HANA is a suite. For example, the integration between S/4HANA and EWM Transportation Management, and Ariba.

The procure-to-pay solution in the Contract Management angle could be better. If you look at it on Ariba, the Contract Management Life Cycle for Ariba is more robust. You can create documentation, SLAs, and NDAs. Apart from the procurement aspect of the contract, you have the legal side, but Ariba cannot do that.

From what I've seen, the features of the procure-to-pay model in S/4HANA and their Contract Life Cycle Management side primarily focus on the procurement side. I believe it would be good if this solution could handle a part of the legal side.

They will incorporate Extended Warehouse Management and Transportation Management into the S/4HANA cloud. Most big companies that use a solution like S/4HANA have a legal department within the organization. Suppose they can incorporate that to be in S/4HANA suites; I think it'll be good. It will be just like what we have with Transportation Management and Extended Warehouse Management.

The user interface could be better. They have too much information on the interface, and our customers still keep complaining that it looks complex. Even though many things have changed, they still complain that the interface or the screen they see is a bit complex. It's only when they see the Fiori interface that their mind becomes a bit calm.

I've been using SAP S4HANA since 2018.

SAP S4HANA is a stable product.

SAP S4HANA is scalable. That's one of the main benefits of using SAP solutions. Most SAP solutions are scalable.

In Nigeria, we have to consider currency conversion rates with the Euro and Dollar that impact the final cost. But I believe that it'll be cheaper in the cloud where SAP has to do the maintenance of the server and more in the long run. 

I would tell potential users that S/4HANA is suitable for big companies. It comes with best practices and handles most processes, be it simple or complex. SAP also has almost 50 years of experience in the supply chain and financial industry. They should go for it, but they should stick to the best practices and not do much customization.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give SAP S4HANA an eight.

We use SAP S4HANA in a distribution business. We have the main site which purchases all material for management and then it goes through the main warehouses to the distribution sites. Finance controls, sales, and distribution are already there with the treasury added on top of the project.

The solution could improve by making customization easier. The on-premise version is a lot more flexible.

I have been using SAP S4HANA for approximately two years.

SAP S4HANA version 1909 is stable. We have not gone live with 2020 yet.

SAP S4HANA is scalable in terms of infrastructure scaling. The solution does not cover all aspects of the business. For example, there is no final solution from SAP for point of sale. They have no specific point of sales solution, you have to build something to cover this area.

Our project is at a large company with 8,000 employees.

We had an issue with localization, there is some sort of localization for S/4HANA for a specific country. We did not face a lot of trouble with the support. The response was good, but overall it seems the process itself takes too much time. You have to go through specific steps waiting for a reply and then the escalation takes more time. The support could improve their speed.

The SAP cloud itself was not easy to implement any project because it is very hard to do any customization for the business requirements.

SAP S4HANA is expensive and for smaller businesses, it is very difficult for them to have the budget.

My advice to those wanting to implement SAP S4HANA is to make sure they have their blueprint and design. People have specific imaginations but things can turn out differently. Align very well with the business and identify your scope correctly to be sure you are following a solid plan along with the project lifecycle.

I rate SAP S4HANA an eight out of ten.