Case · 02 / Logistics

Brought contracts, suppliers and SAP delivery in a global programme into a single view.

Robust management and decision-making foundations in a fragmented multi-vendor programme.

Sector

Logistics

Project type

Global SAP S/4HANA transition

Role / Mandate

Built contract management, coordinated suppliers, quality-assured concepts

Environment

SAP S/4HANA, third-party applications with S/4 interfaces

Constellation

Multi-vendor, globally distributed

Period

2024 – 2026

Impact

Robust management and decision-making foundations in a multi-vendor programme.

Starting situation

A globally operating logistics company was in the middle of its transition to SAP S/4HANA. The supplier landscape was fragmented: several vendors with their own contracts, plus a multitude of third-party applications with S/4 interfaces. Contract matters, supplier coordination and quality assurance ran separately from the technical implementation — provisioning, migration, data cleansing and testing each formed their own strands. In addition, the review of the system landscape depended on the client concepts as well as on the test and migration cycles. In sum, the dependencies between commercial, organisational and technical topics were not consistently visible to management.

Complexity profile

Fragmented supplier landscape with contracts and negotiations running in parallel.

Numerous third-party applications with S/4 interfaces, each with its own migration and testing dependencies.

Dependencies between provisioning, migration, data cleansing and testing across vendor boundaries.

Commercial negotiations running in parallel with ongoing technical implementation.

Globally distributed participants with differing pictures of status.

Mandate

The mandate covered building contract management within the transition, supporting contract negotiations, coordinating the suppliers and quality-assuring the migration, data cleansing and testing concepts. The aim was an interface between commercial, organisational and technical topics — so that management and delivery work from the same reality.

Approach

  1. Build contract management

    Contract management was built within the transition: contracts, scopes of work and open negotiation points were captured in a structured way and assigned to the workstreams concerned.

  2. Negotiations & suppliers

    Negotiations were prepared and supported in substance, and the suppliers were coordinated across the programme phases.

  3. Quality-assure concepts

    In parallel, the concepts for migration, data cleansing and testing were quality-assured — with an eye to completeness, consistency and the dependencies on provisioning and third-party applications.

  4. Shared view

    The results were translated into overviews that connect contract status, supplier status and technical implementation in a shared view and serve as a decision-making basis for management.

Impact

Contract, supplier and technical implementation topics were brought together transparently. Risks from migration, data quality, testing and provisioning were addressed in a more structured way, because their dependencies were visible. Management was able to make decisions on a robust, consistent basis — instead of on separate pictures of status from individual vendors.

Artefacts produced

  • Contract management structure within the transition
  • Supplier overview with contract and service references
  • QA assessments of the migration, data cleansing and testing concepts
  • Dependency overview across vendors and third-party applications
  • Decision and management templates
Tools & Methods
SAP S/4HANA Contract Management Supplier Management Migration Data Cleansing QA
Further reading

Related expertise & research.

Related expertise

Transformation PMO

Technical PMO for programmes that need more than status administration.

View
Related expertise

Project Controls

Budget, forecast, KPIs and risks translated into manageable structures.

View
Related research content

IT programme steering at transitions

Why programmes lose the most at the handover points between responsibilities.

Read
Start with the Context

A multi-vendor programme in mind? Naming the bottleneck is enough.

Discuss a project All cases