Issue

The ERP Rebuild project will introduce SAP S4/HANA as the the ERP system for Syensqo, instead of the current different ECC systems. Meanwhile, Sysensqo is running a project to introduce an external planning system: Maestro.

We must define the boundaries between S4 HANA and Maestro functionalities and the data flows to be implemented between the 2 systems.

The planning process is composed by the following elements:

• Sales and Operations Planning
• Demand Management
• Material Requirements Planning
• Detailed Scheduling - Capacity Levelling
• Order Management
• Production Plan Fine Tuning and Shop Floor operational management
• Exception Management

The different options analysed in this document explore different combinations of execution of each of these steps in Maestro and/or S4/HANA and/or MES systems.

In particular:

• Sales and Operations Planning: Maestro
• Demand Management: Maestro
• Material Requirements Planning: Maestro and/or S4/HANA
• Detailed Scheduling - Capacity Levelling: Maestro and/or S4/HANA
• Order Management: S4/HANA
• Production Plan Fine Tuning and Shop Floor operational management: S4/HANA and/or local MES
• Exception Management: S4/HANA and/or local MES

Recommendation

Option B is the recommended one: Maestro will take care of S&OP, Demand Management and MRP. This includes Sales Forecast, Customer Requirements, Indepndent Requirement and high level production plan. S4/HANA will be the master system for Production Planning and FIne Scheduling, via MRP and PP/DS functionalities. This is considered the best balance between a flexible and scalable planning model and the simplicity of the interfaces.

Background & Context

At the moment in Syensqo the tools and methods for production planning are not harmonized:

S&OP is executed in some cases in Dynasis, in many cases in Google Sheets or local tools. The same is valid for Demand Management.

MRP is mostly running in SAP ECC, even though it is largely used by some plants, almost ignored by others, that are re-planning manually their production disregarding MRP results.

Fine Scheduling and Capacity Levelling is performed in Google Sheets, Local Tools or just manually.

Shop Floor management (urgencies, outages, last minute changes) are managed mostly visually directly in the shop floor and are visible only after actual confirmations. 

The scope of Maestro project (Kinaxis) is to substitute Dynasis and provide a unique standard tool for S&OP and DM across all Syensqo.

Maestro Project does not include Fine Scheduling and Capacity levelling at the moment. 

Assumptions

Important to note that other external systems, like Google Sheets, Excel, local tools, are not part of the model anymore, each plant will identify S4/HANA or Maestro as the MRP and Fine Scheduling system. This is valid for all 3 options.

S4/HANA is the master system for all relevant master data (Material master, Vendor, Customers, BOM, Recipes/Routings, Production Versions, Product costing, etc.)

S4/HANA is the master system for Stock and Process/Production Orders.

Constraints

Order Management must be in S4/HANA as this is the system where Product costing and Actual costing happen. 

S4/HANA will be also the master system for Process Orders / Production Orders towards all MES different systems, likewise AS-IS model.

Timeline: Maestro project must guarantee that the functionalities of S&OP and DM will be available before the S4/HANA go-live for each manufacturing plant, or at least at the same time.

Impacts

PPDS in S4/HANA is the tool for fine scheduling and capacity levelling. It is a complete new object for Syensqo and will require dedicated analysis and training.

Analysis and visibility of the rationale behind long term sales plan will be not visible in S4/HANA, as it will be created in Maestro and we will receive only the final result of that elaboration.

The following Data flows are foreseen via interfaces:

• S4/HANA to Maestro:
  • Material Master (definition and MRP parameters)
  • Purchasing Infor Records
  • Business Partners (Vendors, Sold-To, Ship-To, etc.)
  • Quotas
  • BOMs
  • Routings and Recipes
  • Production Versions
  • Product Costs
  • Stock
  • Sales History
  • Sales Documents
  • All firm planning elements
• Maestro to S4/HANA
  • Firmed (not Dispatched) Planned Orders
  • Purchase Requisitions and Stock Transfer Requiitions (not firmed, as they will be rescheduled once Fine Scheduling happens in S4/HANA)

Business Rules

PPDS is the only tool in Syensqo for Fine Production Scheduling

Maestro is the only tool in Syensqo for S&OP and Demand Management

MRP can run in Maestro but also in S4/HANA

Options considered

Option A

Maestro is used for S&OP, DM, MRP and Detailed Scheduling, S4/HANA is used for Order Management, S4/HANA and/or MES is used for Shop Floor control, depending on the MES system functionalities available for each plant / production line. In this option the transactional data flow from Maestro to S4/HANA will include Firmed and Dispatched Planned Orders.

Option B

Similar to Option A, but here S4/HANA takes care also of Detailed Scheduling, via PP-DS functionalities. While Maestro will run MRP, we keep the option open to run MRP also in S4/HANA. This can be defined for a subset of products, by plant choice. We will have anyway MRP running for maintenance related parts, spare parts and other indirect materials. In this option the transactional data flow from Maestro to S4/HANA will include Firmed Planned Orders (not Dispatched).

Option C

Here we open up the possibility to manage MRP and Detailed Scheduling both in Maestro and S4/HANA. This will allow each GBU or plant to pick up the system that suits them better and increase the flexibility of the planning model used by Syensqo, to leverage the best of both systems.

The complexity of the interface is higher in this option, as we must design a flexible data flow from Maestro to S4/HANA; able to send Planned Independent Requirements, Firmed Planned Order, or Firmed and Dispatched Planned Orders, depending on the planning model selected by each plant.

Evaluation

	Option A	Option B	Option C
Future Proof and Scalability	Running Detailed Scheduling in a system outside the ERP will reduce the chances of integration and cross-plant / cross-company optimization. Giving to an external system the visibility of all data natively available in S4 and relevant for detailed scheduling generates a highly complex and rigid model.  Example of data required by Fine Scheduling: Cross Plant and Cross Company ongoing transfers Current Inspection Lots and related Planned End Date Stock Status (Blocked, Restricted, etc.) Availability of stock at Vendor etc.	Detailed Scheduling in S4/HANA will leverage the integration with all other ERP components: cross plant and cross company transfers, stock statuses, availability check, visibility of Inspection Lots etc. We have the possibility to run full MRP in S4/HANA. This allows to roll-out the model to new plants without Maestro, if preferred, allowing simpler and faster integration of new acquired plants.	as this option is the merge of A and B, we have the possibility to leverage the same advantages listed in option B.
Simplicity	The set of data to be exchanged between the systems is much higher than option B, the model is more complex and it is more risky and prone to extra-customization.	this is the simplest possible model we can introduce to make S4/HANA and Maestro working together.	as this option is the merge of A and B, we experience the same complexity required by option B
Reduce Training needs	We train the users to a single system for each step.	we train the users to a single system for each step, except for MRP that can run in the 2 systems and will require double training.	we need double training for MRP and for Fine Scheduling
Protect current/previous investment	current engagement of Kinaxis for Maestro does not foresee Fine Scheduling, it would require an extra investment on that side	this option is 100% aligned with the current scope of Maestro project.	this option would require both the extra investment on Maestro for Fine Scheduling and the implementation of PPDS in S4/HANA
Planning Functionalities	we have a full suite able to run all steps of production planning	we have a full suite able to run all steps of production planning	we have a full suite able to run all steps of production planning and we have the option to choice the best tool for each case for Fine Scheduling step.
Interface complexity and effort	complex and larger data set required from S4/HANA to Maestro to allow Fine scheduling there	reduced and simpler data set to exchange between the 2 systems	complex and larger data set required from S4/HANA to Maestro to allow Fine scheduling there, plus flexible interface from Maestro to SAP to allow the different models to run concurrently.

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