Issue

As ERP Rebuild evaluates its functional deployment for future state SAP S/4HANA, the decision between utilising a public cloud or a private cloud environment, on which to build business capability, is a critical consideration. This document (when completed post reviews) will provide a clear concise comparison of the primary options to inform this decision. 

Recommendation

Option A) SAP S/4HANA Private Cloud Edition

SAP S/4HANA Public Cloud, with its benefits of low touch maintenance and standardised business processes, presents a simple and straightforward solution. However, for a global chemicals company like Syensqo, the realities of running a scaled operation with multinational compliance obligations  and potential for future acquisition/divestments challenge the viability of this option in it's current offering from SAP. While SAP S/4HANA Public Cloud offers cost efficiency, the need for enhanced security, additional compliance, and control over Syensqo data favours the SAP S/4HANA Private Cloud Edition. Additionally, SAP S/4HANA Private Cloud Edition provides flexibility in project deployment options, allows Syensqo to determine its own schedule for maintenance and adoption of new technologies and business capabilities (such as generative AI), that are rapidly emerging and will advance during the lifecycle of the ERP Rebuild. Changing position on capabilities through deployment lifecycle is a likely scenario that is not supported under the constrains of SAP S/4HANA Public Cloud.

Finally, SAP S/4HANA Public Cloud is generally used for new greenfield deployments, especially for emerging companies without significant standing investments in SAP solutions. Given Syensqo's extensive implementation of SAP dating back to 2001, transitioning to SAP S/4HANA Public Cloud is not feasible. Our existing infrastructure and substantial investments in on-premises SAP solutions necessitate a tailored approach that ensures advancement in business capability that leverages on existing deployed assets and Syensqo IP. 

Background & Context

In recent years SAP has been marketing and constructing it's product offerings towards cloud subscription models, including SAP S/4 upon which it offers multiple configurations of which customers may consume, broadly these models are either public or private options. 

Assumptions

1) building on-premise data center capability is out of the question due to there being no indicators that this would be a preference and ERP Rebuild charter alignment means building a modern future proof solution which aligns with cloud.

2) Syensqo 

Constraints

Capture any constraints or limitations inherent to the recommended option. This could be aspects which, if changed or removed in future, could cause the decision to be revisited or invalidated. For example, a constraint might be that a new product has significant gaps in important functionality, which caused an older alternative to be recommended. If those gaps are closed in future, this might cause the decision to be invalidated.

Impacts

Describe the impact of the decision on other aspects such as other processes, infrastructure, other SAP modules or systems, data cleansing and migration, developments, automations, interfaces, in-flight projects, etc.

Business Rules

The decision may translate into business rules which enforce the decision and will require configuration. List these business rules here. For example, "An Outline Agreement cannot be created via the RFQ process. An awarded RFQ can only result in a Purchase Order". 

Options considered

List the options (viable options or alternatives) you considered. These often require a longer explanation with diagrams, or references to other documents (links are best, but attachments are also possible). Use enough detail to adequately explain what you considered so that a project or business stakeholder reviewing this decision will not come back and ask "did you think about...?"; this leads to loss of credibility and questioning of other decisions. This section also helps ensure that you considered enough suitable alternatives rather than just copy/pasting SAP's recommendations.

Option A: SAP S/4HANA Public Cloud

Decribe the option in sufficient detail for a reader familiar with the subject matter to understand it properly

Option B: SAP S/4HANA Private Cloud Edition

Decribe the option in sufficient detail for a reader familiar with the subject matter to understand it properly

Option C: Option Title

Decribe the option in sufficient detail for a reader familiar with the subject matter to understand it properly

Option D: Option Title

Decribe the option in sufficient detail for a reader familiar with the subject matter to understand it properly

Evaluation

Outline why you selected a position. The best format could be a pro/con table (sample below), but is up to you as the author. You must consider complexity, feasibility, cost/effort to implement, but also ongoing operational impact and cost. You must consider the program principles and explain any deviations in detail. This is probably as important as the decision itself.

	Option A -SAP Public Cloud	Option B - SAP Private Cloud
Ownership and Control	Con You do not own or control the underlying solution, relying on SAP for maintenance and update on their own schedule	Pro You have control over the solution with a dedicated cloud provider.
Security and Compliance	Con Security and compliance are primarily the responsibility of the cloud provider.	Pro Syensqo have greater control over implementing our own security measures and compliance policies to suit international regulations.
Scalability and Performance	Pro	Con
Customisation and Integration
Deployment
Management
Customisation
Updates
Cost
Integration
Data Residency
Vendor Lock-in
Performance

See also

Insert links and references to other documents which are relevant when trying to understand this decision and its implications. Other decisions are often impacted, so it's good to list them here with links. Attachments are also possible but dangerous as they are static documents and not updated by their authors.

Change log

Workflow history