SAP S/4HANA Reviews

We have used SAP S4HANA as a complete enterprise resource planning solution for almost every use case you can think of.

One of the most valuable features is the in-memory database.

I have been using this solution for approximately 20 years.

I have found the solution to be stable but it could improve.

The scalability is good.

I rate SAP S4HANA a nine out of ten.

Most of the modules in our corporation is on the finance module. We also use it for HCM.

I can verify and provide the overall financial aid report and also the management report. It makes it better and easier to implement. Also, it provides a better view of business operations.

You will not see convenient user experiences with SAP S4HANA's website or application. It is not mobile-friendly either. 

We have been using it for about four years.

We've been happy with the technical support.

The initial setup was quite straightforward because we started with finance.

Depending on the industry and the nature of the business, I would recommend SAP S4HANA, especially if the company has a working model like ours.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate SAP S4HANA at seven.

We are using SAP S4HANA for supply chain management, production planning, and material management. We have connected systems that have intelligent optimization for production planning outside of SAP S4HANA.

I have found the most valuable features are the interface, which is very good for all users, and the database performance is good. Additionally, we have more service APIs to communicate with third-party solutions or systems, such as cloud systems or other participants, than in our last ERP system.

In an upcoming release, it would be beneficial to have more practical intelligence in the system, such as protective maintenance, or artificial intelligence. This would not be too complicated to provide nowadays. If you have a mission learning or artificial intelligence, you have to have it in the cloud and have cooperation between the ERP and the cloud. It is not as good as it could be.

I have been using this solution for approximately four years.

We have had no problems with the stability of this solution.

The scalability of this solution depends on the hardware and the platform you use. If you have fixed hardware, then you need more effort to have scalability. If it is on the cloud, such as Azure, it is a lot easier to scale. The software itself is very practical and scalable.

The technical support is very good between the service levels. 

The installation is straightforward.

We did the implementation ourselves.

The solution is expensive. There are many discussions surrounding the topic of third-party indirect usage of SAP solutions. If you have a third-party system and you have a connection to the SAP system, should this third-party usage qualify as a cost or not. It is very complicated to handle with the SAP organization.

I would recommend those wanting to implement this solution to make sure their internal IT departments are trained well to be able to educate the teams.

I rate SAP S4HANA an eight out of ten.

We use this solution for our manufacturing processes, sales, finance, pretty much everything.

They recently restructured the database and changed the table structures, which has made it much easier to manage the processes. The processes have been reduced from almost 10 steps to four or five steps. It's really been simplified.

The theory-side of the solution needs to be improved. They need to come up with a simple way to explain to their customers how to properly use it and perform analysis and move on from there.

In the next release, I would like to see more integration scenarios with the cloud, straight out of the box.

I have been using this solution for almost two years.

The stability is good. We noticed some areas, such as health and safety that were not very stable, but the other areas are quite stable and work fine.

The technical support helped us on almost every front.

It depends on what kind of agreement you have with SAP. We have a maximum attention agreement, so it's all good. For a maximum attention agreement, there are some extra charges, but I'm not aware of how much.

The simplicity of the initial setup varies from customer to customer. For us, it was quite complicated because we needed a lot of customization, but in the end, it was ok.

We had a detailed implementation plan that we followed step by step.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of seven.

Most of our customer base is particularly interested in the finance area. This aspect of the solution is great. 

The most interesting features from the solution include the look and feel of the user interface. It's very user friendly and easy to navigate.

The performance of the solution is excellent.

The solution isn't lacking any features per se. Clients aren't coming to us and saying "we need this or that."

The cost of the solution is quite high. It needs to be adjusted.

The integration could be better. They have many different kinds of house platforms, and then it becomes complicated to have integration within all of these different systems.

I've been using the solution for five years at this point. It's been a while.

We provide technical support to our clients when they need our assistance.

We have implementation projects that help the customers start from zero all the way up to the latest version that they can use on their own. If they need existing or ongoing help with SAP, we will provide some kind of support model. We support them in case they have any problems or in case they have some version they need to upgrade.

As we are implementing the solution for our clients, the process is pretty straightforward.

Our company typically sets up the product. We implement the solution for our clients on their behalf.

The pricing of the solution is quite high. 

We are not the end customer. We are the implementation providers. We have customers and implement the solution for them and offer support to them while they are using SAP, which is an enterprise solution.

We will support any version from the previous version and also upgrade to the newest version, as per our client's needs. There are all kinds of versions of the solution that we support. We mainly work with the S/4, the core ERP solution, so the core S/4, and also the ECC, the previous version.

A company needs to be aware that it's much more helpful to be knowledgeable in the product before beginning an implementation. If a customer doesn't have experience with SAP, the implementation may be difficult. However, if they have some experience, it is a bit easier to set up everything. A company must also ensure they have in-depth business knowledge when doing a discussion in the booking.

Overall, we've been quite satisfied with the product. I'd rate it nine out of ten. If the solution offered better implementation capabilities and pricing, I'd give it full marks.

We are using using almost all of SAP S4HANA's modules, from production and planning to finance and controlling.

In terms of its most valuable feature, I would say the finance module. This is the base. Right now we're working towards the other modules as well, for lineup opportunity operations.

The common issues being raised right now by the end-users are mostly related to the usability. Especially on the Fiori interface. I think they're a manufacturing company and they're implementing lean manufacturing. They are actually counting the number of clicks and screens that are being used by their end-users so they can have a more efficient and intuitive approach on the Fiori apps.

In terms of what features should be included in the next release, there would be too many to mention. I would probably say right now, as part of the planning session, they're going to go through the entire gamut of features where they can improve and where we're lacking in some parts. We're planning to implement a trial for support and warehouse management. But it's a big list right now and I can't think of anything specific. 

In terms of what could be improved, I would say the usability aspect of it for the users. Additionally, from the corporate perspective, some of the more stringent integrations across modules and also allowing integrations from third-party applications.

I have been using SAP S4HANA for three years.

I would not say it is a 100% stable. There still are some large issues here and there. But I guess over the course of using it for the last three years, and with some of the changes that have been put in place by our IT team, I would say it is around 70% stable.

In terms of scalability, I wouldn't count it as easy. I would probably say it's medium complex. 

We currently have around 100, 150 people using it.

In terms of support, there still are some places here and there for them to improve. But their support is mostly stable right now.

The initial setup was very complex.

During the initial setup we made use of an SI, solution integrator vendor, for the implementation. It was a combination of the SI and some internal resources.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate SAP S4HANA a seven.

Our company analyzes material inventory and then processes the financial accounting which is handled by the system we created using the product.  

The most valuable feature is that the reporting is fast. We can see the results from that in that our commissions come in fast. That is the main advantage.  

This is an integrated system so it is very complex. It is not like Windows or like Microsoft products where you can use Word or you use Excel and it is familiar and easy to use. The interface is something that is very confusing from my point of view. It can and should be simplified. It needs some work on the front end to be more user-friendly and customizable to the user's needs.  

It is not a very good product from the perspective of ease-of-use. Trying to implement it is like you want to prepare some food. You have raw materials like spices in a pile but there is no recipe as to how to mix them. It is a recipe missing the proportion to mix the spices in.  

In the case of S/4HANA, that recipe depends on how the organization requires it to operate. A better result depends upon the implementation partner's decisions in handling the wide range of choices offered by the product. If these decisions are not good, once the product is already developed, you may come to know after years of using it that it was not implemented optimally. Then you end up making customizations and work-arounds because of this initial implementation. That is bad practice. Customization and work-arounds will only lead to more complexity. It is a very big product that can not be understood in a short span of time and implemented quickly. Meticulous planning is ultimately important.  

A lot depends on the implementation partner and if they understand your needs. An implementation partner who rushes in too quickly with a solution can get it wrong and that can cause major problems in the long run.  

We started the implementation of S/4HANA in 2017.  

Any glitches and problems would all depend very strongly on the implementation, predominately. Our integration is very near perfect, but it needs a highly skilled team taking lots of time to understand and maintain it properly. Because implementation is less customized it is better than in most other industries. When it comes to our own industry and our own investment in our industry with our own company stressors, it has to be customized properly.  

One person will not be able to understand and manage all the processes of the modules. That is not practically possible to have that type of skill set. The product needs to be managed by a well-integrated team that can work together and separately with their own responsibility for maintenance and execution.  

Ultimately one person will need to have an in-depth knowledge of how the parts work together to orchestrate the result. All this has to come together at the time of designing. All of the team will be working with some lack of knowledge about the whole of the system or the in-depth knowledge of some other team member's roles. The integration of the team is as important as the integration of the product. 

The scalability of S/4HANA is as good as it can be. The reason that we moved from our old ERP was a lack of scalability. That is exactly the reason. We moved to S/4HANA because we knew the scalability was good.  

We use it company-wide on a daily basis and across multiple websites now. If we need to it is possible to scale up from there in whatever way we need to.  

Our specialized support team does sometimes work with SAP support. The support is good but it may depend on what you can provide. Sometimes we can trace volumes ourselves and we can get the solutions from that. It can often minimize the time it takes to get a solution. Using SAP to provide the solution takes more time. But sometimes we need them to keep moving ahead.  

We were having trouble with our other ERP solution which is a product that has not been very successful outside of Arab countries. That learning experience is why we are in a good position to implement S/4HANA as a better solution.  

The installation setup requires specific knowledge of the system and how it works. I am not from the technical side myself but I know a lot of configuration is required. It is more-or-less complex depending on the scope of how the product will be modeled for use.  

For the installation, we appointed a separate SAP IT partner. Along with that, our entire company was involved with implementing this project.  

It definitely requires maintenance from SAP support as well as our own specialized teams.  

This is an expensive product.  

My recommendation to people considering S/4HANA as an ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) is to invest in it if they can afford it and need it. But, I strongly recommend that the implementation should be considered very carefully. SAP software is a very capable solution but it is only worth it if you approach it knowing that you will be spending three, four, or five years just to be able to understand it fully. It is not just an investment in capital, it is an investment in learning and time.  

It is definitely a good product. It is costly and needs a quality team for maintaining and integrating the product.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would have a hard time making a rating of SAP S/4HANA that is useful for every user. If someone already has some expertise in ERP expertise, it is different than if they have none. The solution itself can be a ten for one aspect of its function and it can be a three or four in other aspects depending on what the user needs and understands. Cost-wise it can be anything from one to ten depending on the value it provides to the organization investing in it.  

Personally, from the functionality point, I think it is one of the best products. The integration is good and the SAP team helps with their continuous support to help users reap the fruit of their investment in the software system. We took the time to have the knowledge of business and how the product could work for us to make adopting this product a success. In our case, I think the solution is around a seven-and-a-half out of ten.  

S/4HANA BASIS administration and technical architect solutions.

We have implemented for one of the customers and gone live recently, and its greenfield implementation. The customer was very happy as the implementation time took less than 6-8 months.

Easy integration with other tools.

• S/4HANA 1610: We found very less Fiori apps — a few apps not working.
• All module Fiori apps need to be tuned.