Issue

As part of AS-IS process analysis, we've noticed there are more than 10 third party applications related to labelling process in Syensqo. Some of them are actively used in multiple GBUs, such as SAP GLM (Global Label Management) are currently used in Aroma Performance, Composite Materials and Technology Solutions. And others are either only used by one GBU or may not in use any more. 

With transition to SAP S/4HANA, it is a good opportunity to review the approach of labelling process going forward under the principle of standardization and simplification. 

Recommendation

It is recommended to standardize the labelling processes and applications across all the Syensqo businesses by using the approach:

• Inventory: Catalog the current labelling applications (e.g., SAP GLM, Loftware), including understanding the application specific functionalities, roles in regulatory and non-regulatory labelling and the way of integration with SAP.
• Identification: Determine if there are overlapping functions among these applications or if some are underutilized. Also, analyze the labelling requirements to ensure efficient and accurate material handling, tracking, and delivery. 
• Implementation: Implement a centralized labelling system to handle all labelling needs. This could be part of SAP (for example SAP GLM) or an integrated third-party system (for example Loftware).  

An in-depth analysis will be required to inventory the current labeling applications and identify any redundancies. Consequently, the selection of the final labeling solution, whether SAP standard or a third-party application, will be made during the Detailed Design phase, following the completion of the relevant analysis tasks.

Background & Context

The table below describes the overview of the current labelling related applications identified in Syensqo.

Note:

The abbreviations in the matrix stand for below GBUs:

AP - Aroma Performance, CM - Composite Materials, NC - Novecare, SP - Specialty Polymers, TS - Technology Solutions   

Assumptions

• The chosen standard solution will closely integrate with SAP S/4HANA.
• The chosen standard solution adheres to regulatory requirements relevant to Syensqo industry, and allows for easy updates to accommodate new regulatory requirements or changes in labelling standards.

Constraints

Capture any additional constraints that the chosen alternative (i.e. the decision made) might impose on other parts of the overall design, solution, or processes.

• Legacy System Dependencies

  • Integration Challenges: Integrating or migrating data from existing third-party applications to a new standardized system can be complex and resource-intensive.
  • Customization: Some legacy systems may have customized features or integrations that are not easily replicated in a new system.

• Regulatory Compliance

  • Compliance Risks: Ensuring that the new standardized system meets all regulatory requirements and industry standards is critical.
  • Adaptation: There may be a need to adapt the new system to handle specific regulatory labeling requirements that the old systems managed differently.

• System Limitations

  • Functionality: The standardized tool must support all required labeling functions and features previously covered by various third-party applications.

Impacts

• Operational Efficiency

  • Streamlined Processes: Standardization can streamline labeling processes, reducing complexity and redundancy.
  • Consistency: Ensures consistency in label formats, designs, and compliance across different departments and locations.

• Integration

  • System Integration: Standardizing tools can simplify integration with SAP S/4HANA, potentially reducing integration issues and improving data accuracy.

• Cost Implications

  • Initial Costs: There may be significant upfront costs associated with transitioning to a new standardized system.
  • Ongoing Costs: Maintenance and support costs could be lower due to reduced number of tools and simpler integration.

• Change Management

  • Training Requirements: Employees will need to be trained on the new standardized system, which may involve time and resource investment.
  • Adaptation Period: There may be a learning curve and adaptation period for staff as they adjust to new processes and tools.

• Training and Documentation: Provide comprehensive training for end-users on the new standardized labeling process and system. Update documentation and standard operating procedures (SOPs) accordingly.
• Support Structure: Establish a support framework to assist users during the transition and address any issues promptly.

Downtime: The process of implementing and transitioning to a new standardized system may cause temporary disruptions in labeling operations.

Transition Period: Migrating from multiple tools to a standardized system can be disruptive and time-consuming.

Future Proofing

• Scalability: Ensure that the standardized labeling solution can scale with future growth and adapt to new requirements or technologies.
• Technology Upgrades: Stay informed about advancements in labeling technology and consider periodic reviews to incorporate new capabilities or improvements.

APIs and Middleware: Ensure that the labeling solution provides APIs or middleware for seamless integration with SAP S/4HANA.

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: Standardize Labelling Applications Across Company

Use a single labelling tool for all the labels across company.

Option B: Standardize by Regulatory Requirements

Use a central labelling tool for Regulatory Labels and another one for Non-Regulatory Labels

Option C: Keep All the Active Labelling Applications

Keep all the labelling tools currently in use.

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	Option B
Efficiency	Reduces the number of tools and processes, leading to more streamlined operations and simplified processes. Eliminates redundant systems and processes, reducing duplication of effort Con	Pro Pro
Data Accuracy	Single Source of Truth: Consolidation into a single system helps ensure data accuracy and consistency across the organization.
Cost Saving	Fewer systems to maintain can lead to lower overall maintenance and support costs. Standardizing may reduce the number of software licenses required.
Standardization	labeling solution provides APIs or middleware for seamless integration with SAP S/4HANA. A standardized system can offer better integration with SAP S/4HANA, improving data flow and operational efficiency. Con	Pro Pro
Data Synchronization	support real-time data synchronization between SAP and the labeling system. Con	Con
Compliance and Customization	be able to handle compliance requirements and support customization as needed for different types of labels.	Con
Scalability and Performance	can scale with your business needs and maintain high performance
Change Management Efforts	Employees accustomed to existing tools may resist transitioning to a new system, affecting productivity initially. Transition Period: Migrating from multiple tools to a standardized system can be disruptive and time-consuming.
Flexibility	One-Size-Fits-All: A standardized system may not be flexible enough to handle specific or unique labeling requirements that the legacy systems addressed.

By standardizing the labeling process and applications, Syensqo aligns with the principles of simplification and efficiency, reduce the complexity of your IT landscape, and potentially lower costs while maintaining compliance and improving operational effectiveness.

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