Issue

A decision is required whether to develop a new PPM custom app for Item creation & maintenance in-house or whether to purchase a partner solution.

Recommendation

It is recommended that a custom app is built in-house, due to the following factors:

• Significantly lower project and BAU cost
• In-house resources have experience in developing such an app
• Full influence over design to meet business requirements

Background & Context

The standard UI for creating and maintaining PPM Items is the main transaction used for working in PPM, but comes with the following shortcomings:

• Based on old WebDynpro technology; the screens are not user friendly - they are convoluted, poorly laid out and not aligned with Fiori design concepts.
• Creation of a PPM Item requires multiple steps, navigating back and forth between S4HANA and SAC Planning. The standard UI cannot guide the user through this process and gives no indication of completeness of the required data.
• Business expectations for the user interface are based on the current WeGo solution which provides a more friendly and intuitive user interface than PPM. The move to standard WebDynpro PPM screens would be considered a backward step.

SAP does not have any improvement for the UI planned on their roadmap and have suggested a partner solution from sophisTex which provides a more flexible, intuitive and user-friendly interface. The following features are included:

• S/4HANA certified Add-on by SAP ICC
• Achieves Clean Core, no impact on S/4HANA EPPM upgradability
• Delivered with a default set of configuration to reduce implementation time
• Flexibility to further customize and enhance
• Functionality for Stage Gate approval workflows.

The alternative is to develop a custom app in-house which, in conjunction with the SAP Consulting Solution for Stage Gate approval workflows, would provide the same capabilities.

Assumptions

It is assumed that:

• Both options will require internal custom development for:

• • Integration with OpenText
  • Integration with SAC
  • Automation of follow-on actions on funding approval
• The sophisTex solution will be fully tested and relatively bug-free, while an in-house development will inherently require more effort in testing and resolution of bugs.

Constraints

Impacts

The decision on UI does impact up-stream or down-stream processes or data. 

The main impacts of the decision are:

• Financial (both to the project and ongoing BAU costs)
• In-house development team effort
• Time to deliver
• Testing effort

Financial Impact

The recommended option to develop an in-house solution has a lower cost, both for the project and ongoing. The sophisTex solution has a subscription-based pricing model with ongoing costs based on user numbers.

Business Rules

N/a

Options considered

Option A: In-house Development

A new custom app is developed with the following features:

• Fiori design features
• Ability to jump into SAC Planning for maintaining project financials
• Integrated with OpenText workspace
• Integrated with SAP Consulting Solution for Stage Gate Approvals

Option B: sophisTex Partner Solution

Refer to the linked pack for details of the sophisTex solution:

Evaluation

	Option A - Inhouse Development	Option B - sophisTex Partner Solution
Financial	Lower project and BAU cost	Higher cost - both project and ongoing
Functionality	Can incorporate all require functionality and integration	Can incorporate all require functionality and integration
Flexibility		Con
Risk

See also

Change log