Issue

SAP MII (Manufacturing Integration and Intelligence) will stop being supported by SAP after 2027 (or 2030 for extended support). There are currently two MII instances used by Syensqo:

• Composite ITAR MII (US), is already 100% managed by Syensqo
• Global MII (based in EU) is currently shared with Solvay, will be cloned

We need to identify a strategy to address this situation. This KDD document presents the possible options and identifies the best proposal, analyzing the implications and impacts under different points of view: Future Proof Solution, Scalability, Best Practice adherence,. 

Three options are available: 

• A) continue running on MII after end of official support, managing internally or via a 3rd party provider the product maintenance and adaptations
• B) substitute MII with SAP BTP connectorsIntegration Suite, and connect all MES Systems to S4 via BTP connectorsS/4HANA using the technical objects available in it (BTP Connectors)
• C) remove MII and directly connect MES systems and Labware/WEBLims to SAP S4 S/4HANA via the current StarTek platform. 

Recommendation

Option B is the recommended solution: substitute MII with SAP BTP connectorsIntegration Suite, and connect all MES Systems to S4 via BTP connectorsand Labware/WEBLims to S/4HANA using the technical objects available in it (BTP Connectors)

Background & Context

MII acts as a middle-ware to connect the MES systems and Labware/WEBLims with the following data flows (not all of them are relevant for all plants/MES systems):

• process orders from SAP ECC to MES
• production confirmations from MES to SAP ECC
• production goods movements from MES to SAP (consumption and goods receipt)

These process are in place for both WP1 (WPX in case of ITAR relevant sites) and PF1. The to-be infrastructure does not foresee an equivalent of the current WPX: https://wiki.syensqo.com/x/8EOYNQ ITAR relevant plants will run in the main S/4 HANA instance

There are no cases of direct user interactions with MII: it is used only as a middle-ware middleware between ECC systems and MES systems.

Data Analytics and Reporting Features (KPI, OEE, Data Intelligence, etc) are not used. This is valid for both MII instances.

Assumptions

• MES systems in the affected plants won't change and MES functionalities and implementations in the affected plants will remain stable during the ERP Rebuild project
• other Other functionalities potentially covered by SAP Digital Manufacturing are not part of this KDD; they are addressed here: https://wiki.syensqo.com/x/-YGMNQis addressed in separate document KDD050 - Strategy for MES systems and SAP Digital Manufacturing

Constraints

• The MII substitution will synchronize with ERP Rebuild go-lives. The new solution will be available for plants running on the new S4 S/4HANA Platform. These Go-Lives may happen in different waves, therefore MII can continue running between waves on a subset of the current plants.

Impacts

• Conveying the current MII flows via the SAP BTP connectors Integration Suite must be synchronized with the ERP Rebuild go-lives timeline, to optimize the effort and avoid temporary solutions that would be wasted in the long run.
• The affected plants and MES systems must be prepared to adhere to the unified communication protocol defined by the Star Tek layer, however, this impact is already addressed by the current Star Tek Roll-Out program.SAP Integration Suite

Business Rules

This is a pure techincal KDD, no business impact.

Options considered

Option A: Keep

MII

In this option we ignore the expiry date of MII maintenance and we keep it running for the current plants and MES systems after it.

The Risk related to this option is the need to build up an internal or 3rd party maintenance team to take care of the system after the SAP maintenance expiry. It is also a non-Future Proof and low-scalable solution. 

This Option implies very little effort both on S4S/HANA 4HANA side and zero effort on current MES systems, as it keeps all current connectors in place as they are.

Option B: substitute MII with

SAP BTP

Digital Manufacturing does not have all functionalities and connectors we had in the MII system. Despite it is the designated substitute of MII, it requires BTP components to fully substitute MII capabilities as MES-SAP middle-ware. Considering this, we think it is a much easier and manageable solution to use directly and only SAP BTP connectors for the interfaces between MES systems and S/4HANA.

There is also a potential risk related to current bespoke implementations in MII to be replicated in DM+the BTP, for this reason the Project Effort is considered to be medium for this option.

This is the option with the best compliance with the SAP standard and Road Map, however it would add further objects to maintain on top of the current Star Tek Layer. 

It would make sense only if the MES systems was substituted by SAP DM. But, as defined in https://wiki.syensqo.com/x/-YGMNQ, all the current MES systems will remain. 

Option C: Remove MII and directly interface MES systems to the current

StarTek Layer

In this option, we remove MII and we use the Star Tek layer as a middle-ware, to send process/production orders from SAP S4S/HANA 4HANA to MES systems and to collect actual confirmations and production goods movements from MES systems to S4S/HANA4HANA.

It is the option with the minimal impact, as it leverage the current Star Tek solution implementation effort. It is based on bespoke interfaces, however the scalability and future-proof of the solution are guaranteed by the Star Tek design, that defined a single standard communication protocol for all different MES systems used in Syensqo. 

This option requires that the timeline of the current Star Tek roll out program assures that all plants currently served by MII will move to the Star Tek platform before the MII end of maintenance period. 

Evaluation

The following Matrix matrix illustrates the evaluation of each option under the considered criteria:

Change log

Workflow history