| Status | |
| Owner | |
| Stakeholders |
Syensqo currently has over ten different labelling applications across different domains, such as logistics, EHS, warehouse management, QM and transportation etc. Some of them, such as SAP GLM (Global Label Management), are actively used across multiple GBUs, including Aroma Performance, Composite Materials and Technology Solutions. Other applications, however, are either used by only one GBU or are no longer in use.
With the transition to SAP S/4HANA, SAP GLM is not on the roadmap for the future and will be replaced by a partner solution. Therefore, it is important to review the current labelling applications and develop an approach to help Syensqo streamline labelling processes, ensure label consistency, improve operational efficiency, and reduce maintenance costs.
It is recommended to standardize and simplify labelling applications across all Syensqo businesses using the following approach:
The table below is an overview of the current labelling related applications identified in Syensqo. It lists all the identified labelling applications, scope and main functionalities, the label type supported by the application, whether requires information from SAP and GBUs currently are using the application.
| Application | Scope | Main Functionalities | Type | SAP Related | Aroma Performance | Composite Materials | Nove care | Specialty Polymers | Technical Services |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SAP GLM (Global Label Management) | 1). Regulatory Label (Product Stewardship) 2). Custom Labels (Product Stewardship) | To generate and print: 1). Product Safety compliant labels for
2). Labels for
3). Transport Safety Labels
| Compliance Label | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | |
| Loftware Spectrum | Non Regulatory Label | To print below labels generated by SAP transactions.
| Operational Label, Customer Label, Product Label | Y | Y | N | |||
| Loftware Spectrum Web Access | One-off Static Text Label | A web portal used to print one-off labels with static text. These labels are not the same ones that are generated by the SAP transactions.
| Static Label | N | Y | N | |||
| Loftware Nice Label / Loftware Cloud | Zebra Labels and EHS Label | Used to develop (create and design) the layout of Zebra labels and EHS Label Printing. | Compliance Label | Y | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |
| Bartender | Customer Labels | Manage customer labels in supply chain. Bartender is used to print labels for tollers. It uses a license server. | Customer Label | Y | Y (EU, US) | Y (EU, US) | |||
| MarkWare | MarkWare is a Windows®-based application used to create a variety of labels, signs, tags, pipe markers, and other industrial identification. | N | |||||||
| Codesoft | RFID and barcode label software. | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | |||
| EB-SOFT | App is use for printing labels. | N | |||||||
| Techlink Labelling | System used to generate labels in GBU Fibras' Spinning department | N | |||||||
| Label View | Label tool | N | |||||||
| Labware | Label tool used in Composite GBU | Y | N | ||||||
| Material Group Labelling | Material Group Labelling (SBS Material Grouping) | ||||||||
| TBarCode | Offers barcode printing for Microsoft® Office users and software developers. | N | |||||||
| Adobe Illustrator | Manual labels | SP creates labels offline with graphic designer (using Adobe Illustrator tool), country specific. Primary packaging labels only e.g.
| Product Label, Static Label | Y (Product Label), N (Static Label) | Y | ||||
| Offline | Manual labels | Transportation labels (outer packaging) partially manually created at Spinetta plant.
| Operational Label | Y | Y | ||||
| Offline | Static labels | Additional row for static labels, where GLM is not used and label stock is supplied from 3rd parties for relevant sites. Relevant for:
| Static Label | N |
The selected labelling application(s) should be closely integrated with SAP S/4HANA. It is still possible for users to print the relevant labels directly from the selected labelling application(s) rather than derive information from SAP.
The selected labelling application(s) adhere to regulatory requirements relevant to Syensqo industry, and allows for easy updates to accommodate new regulatory requirements or changes in labelling standards.
System Limitations: The unified labelling application must support all required labelling functions and features previously covered by various third-party applications. It can be challenge to replicate the same functions. Therefore, it is important to identify and address any gaps that require custom developments to fill.
Regulatory Compliance : Ensuring that the unified labelling application(s) meets all regulatory requirements and industry standards is critical. There may be a need to use different labelling applications for the regulatory and non-regulatory labels .
User Adaptation: Users accustomed to different labelling applications may face difficulties adapting to a new, standardized application. Comprehensive training will be necessary to ensure that all users are proficient in the unified labelling application(s).
Scalability: Ensure that the standardized labelling solution can scale with future growth and adapt to new requirements or technologies.
Implementing a standardized and simplified labelling solution in a SAP S/4HANA project involves several potential impacts, both positive and challenging.
Operational Efficiency
A unified labelling solution can streamline labelling processes across different business operations, including logistics, warehouse management, EHS and transportation etc.
A unified solution ensures consistency in label formats, designs, and compliance across different departments and locations, which helps reduce redundancy and improve operation efficiency.
Label Consistency
Label formats and structures may vary among different label applications. Mapping and transforming data from these diverse formats into a consistent format for the unified application(s) can be complex.
If historical labelling information in multiple applications need to be migrated to the unified application(s), ensure that relevant historical information remains accurate and accessible.
Cost Implications
Initial costs for implementing a unified labelling solution can be significant, including software, integration, and training expenses etc.
Over time, standardization and simplification can lead to long-term cost savings through reduced maintenance, support, and licensing fees for multiple applications.
Change Management
There will be a learning curve and adaptation period for end-users not only requiring to change over to the unified labelling application(s), but also for those currently using the unified application(s). Comprehensive trainings are required as well as updating documentation and standard operating procedures (SOPs) accordingly.
Consolidate from multiple applications to a unified system can be disruptive and time-consuming. A support framework should be established to assist users during the transition and address any issues promptly.
Stay informed about advancements in labeling technology and consider periodic reviews to incorporate new capabilities or improvements.
The approach for the future labelling solution is to standardize and simplify by consolidating the company’s current labelling applications.
Transitioning from multiple labelling applications to a unified solution fully integrated with SAP S/4HANA environment is a significant task that involves careful planning and execution.
Catalog Existing Applications: Identify and document all current labelling applications, their functionalities, user base, and integration point.
Evaluate Usage and Value: Assess how each application is used and its value to different business units. Determine which applications are critical, obsolete, or redundant.
Gather Stakeholder Inputs: Engage with stakeholders from various GBUs to understand their labelling needs and preferences.
Document Requirements: Define clear requirements for labelling that align with SAP S/4HANA capabilities and business needs.
Standardize and Simplify Applications
Identify Common Needs: Look for common labelling requirements across different GBUs to standardize processes and reduce complexity.
Leverage SAP Standard Solutions: Explore SAP’s standard labelling solutions and features in S/4HANA, such as GLM.
Compare Existing and Future Capabilities: Perform a gap analysis between the functionalities of current applications and the capabilities of unified solution.
Determine Customization Needs: Identify any gaps that require custom development to fill.
Implement and Deploy Unified Solution
Migration: Ensure that data and labels from legacy applications are accurately migrated to the unified system, including required historical data and current labels.
Go-Live and Post Support: Prepare for a smooth go-live and support teams are ready. Offer ongoing support and address any issues that arise after the transition to ensure stability and user satisfaction.
The selection of the exact labelling application(s), either a single application across all functions and operations or split by regulatory requirement, will be made in the Detailed Design phase, following the completion of the relevant analyses and tasks required by the above approach.
Identify all current labelling applications and understand their functionalities, user base, and integration point.
Migrate all the active applications in future SAP S/4HANA environment. If application requires data from SAP or feed the data back to SAP, consider to establish interface between the labelling applications and SAP.
Option A - Standardized and Simplified Solution | Option B - 1 to 1 Migration Solution | |
|---|---|---|
Operational Efficiency |
|
|
Standardization and Uniformity | |
|
| Cost Saving |
|
|
Flexibility and Scalability |
|
|
Change Management Efforts |
|
|
Consolidate and unify the labeling applications helps Syensqo streamline the labelling processes, ensures the label consistency, improves the operation efficiency and reduces maintenance costs. Therefore, adopting standardization and simplification is recommended for the future Syensqo labelling solution.
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.
