| Status | |
| Owner | Antonio Zappone |
| Stakeholders | Gilles Madjarian, Selim Ulhasan |
Issue
Succinctly describe the issue or problem statement that this Decision addresses. Why is a decision required? What business or technical problem does it address?
A decision is required as to whether to transition Treasury operations from Quantum to SAP S/4HANA, and whether a change in scope should be requested in order to bring Treasury operations into the ERP Project.
Recommendation
Summarise the recommendation being made for the reader, leaving the pro/con evaluation and exact decision-making process to the subsequent sections.
Background & Context
Explain the context in which the decision is being made.
Quantum
Quantum is an application owned by FIS, as is a common application in the market to manage Treasury operations.
The Quantum system was implemented for Treasury operations in 2023 ????, and the existing 5 year license expires in 2028????.
- The Treasury organisation are unsatisfied with the Quantum system functionality and the support from FIS is also unsatisfactory.
- Dissatisfaction with FIS, the supplier of Quantum, due to operational challenges and support issues.
The current treasury processes are heavily reliant on manual interventions and face significant challenges due to system limitations and supplier issues.
S/4HANA
The Treasury Operation modules in S/4HANA are;
- TRM: Treasury Risk Management
- CM: Financial Cash Management
A scope review was performed to determine whether S/4HANA has the functionality to manage Syensqo Treasury activities. The outcome of the review highlighted that SAP has a high fit level, along with the opportunities to make improvements.
INSERT TABLE FOR INSTRUMENTS
License Costs
Quantum
SAP ECC (existing Licenses utilised by Treasury)
S/4HANA
- TRM License Cost: 300k upfront, plus 73k annual maintenance fee.
- CM License Cost:
Implementation Costs
Quantum: Cost to improvement and close gaps
S/4HANA Implementation Cost
Example: 3.5 FTEs over 36 months.
Assumptions
Clearly describe the underlying assumptions which informed or limited the choices available, or impacted the decision: cost, schedule, regulatory requirements, business drivers, country footprint, technology, etc. Include links as necessary. This section is important because a future change in circumstances might invalidate some key assumptions, which then prompts a decision to be revisited.
Additional review and assessment will be conducted for the implementation timing after the decision of the KDD is concluded. However, it is assumed that if Treasury operations are to transition to S\4HANA, it will likely occur beyond the group 1 go-live.
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.
If Treasury operations are to transition to S\4HANA, the intercompany loans will transition fully to TRM. There is an integration impact on IHB, and the associated loans with the affiliates.
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".
Not applicable at this point of the decision making process
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: Continue Treasury Operations activities in Quantum as-is
Describe the option in sufficient detail for a reader familiar with the subject matter to understand it properly
Option B: Continue Treasury Operations activities in Quantum, but set-up a project to improve the functionality
Describe the option in sufficient detail for a reader familiar with the subject matter to understand it properly
Option C: Transition from Quantum to S\4HANA as part of the ERP Rebuild project
Describe the option in sufficient detail for a reader familiar with the subject matter to understand it properly
Option D: Option Title
Describe 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 | Option B | Option C | Option D | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Criterion 1 |
|
|
|
|
| Criterion 2 |
|  Con |
|
|
| Criterion 3 |  Pro | Con | Con | Pro |
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.
