Adecco: 12M euro off Oracle support, the hybrid way.

Adecco saved 12 million euro over three years by running a hybrid Oracle support model: Oracle support where roadmaps justify it, third party support on stable systems, and terminations on what nobody used.

What problem was Adecco solving in its Oracle estate?

Adecco, a global HR services leader, carried Oracle support across a large, mixed estate: Oracle E Business Suite systems on active roadmaps, database fleets in steady state, and licenses idled by consolidation. One support model covered all three at full Premier rates.

The estate followed the usual global pattern: country level contracts, uneven documentation, and a support bill that grew by uplift regardless of what the systems beneath it were doing.

• Active tier: systems with funded upgrades that genuinely consumed Oracle Premier Support value.
• Stable tier: steady state systems patched rarely and upgraded never.
• Idle tier: licenses and support lines surviving past the systems they once covered.

Why not simply negotiate the Oracle support rate down?

Because Oracle support pricing is anchored to license purchase value under Oracle lifetime support policy, and direct rate relief is the one concession Oracle almost never grants. The structural levers, termination and support model choice, are where the money moves.

How does the hybrid support model actually work?

The hybrid model assigns each system a support source based on its three year roadmap. The decision is operational, not ideological: who fixes what, at what speed, at what price, for this specific system.

What made the split work at global scale?

Country level CSI structures were sequenced so that terminations and moves never broke a discounted license set in a way that triggered repricing on the surviving Oracle lines. The order of moves, country by country, was modeled against the Oracle price list before execution.

How were security and patching handled on the third party tier?

Through the provider's virtual patching and configuration hardening model, scoped system by system before the move. Stability requirements, not marketing claims, set the acceptance bar, and no severity one incident on the moved tier was attributed to the support change.

What did the hybrid strategy deliver?

The program removed 12 million euro of support cost over three years. The stable tier move contributed roughly half, terminations roughly a third, and avoided uplift on removed lines the remainder.

• Savings shape: run rate reduction landed in year one and compounded as uplift no longer applied to removed lines.
• Service outcome: ticket resolution on the moved tier met or beat the prior baseline in the program's measurement.
• Strategic outcome: the active tier kept full Oracle support, so no funded roadmap was put at risk.

What did the program cost to run?

Advisory, legal review, and transition effort consumed well under one year of the achieved annual savings. The payback period on the program itself ran in months.

How can other global estates apply this model?

The hybrid model transfers to any estate large enough to have genuinely different system tiers. The discipline is in the tiering and the sequencing, not in the contracts.

1. Tier every Oracle system by funded three year roadmap, not by sentiment.
2. Price terminations first; idle lines are the free money.
3. Model repricing exposure before any country level move.
4. Scope third party support system by system with stability acceptance criteria.
5. Keep a watch list tier that re evaluates annually as roadmaps change.
6. Document the re entry cost to Oracle support before you need it.

When does the hybrid model not fit?

Small estates where one tier dominates, and estates heading into a major Oracle replatform within two years, where the disruption cost of a support split outweighs the spread it captures.

Where the common advice on Oracle support strategy is wrong

The standard framing makes Oracle support a binary religion: stay loyal for safety or move everything to third party for savings. We disagree. In roughly 30 to 40 Oracle support engagements Fredrik Filipsson worked between 2024 and 2025, the binary choices consistently underperformed: full loyalty overpaid 40 to 60 percent of the estate, and full exit stranded funded roadmaps that genuinely needed Oracle patches and upgrades. The buyer side move is the split, with tier assignments driven by funded roadmaps and the sequencing modeled against repricing clauses. Vendors on both sides of this argument sell the binary because it is simpler to pitch; the money is in the hybrid.

What the engagement data shows

Three cuts of our advisory engagement file frame the size of the opportunity.

What to do next

Five moves turn this analysis into a lower invoice on the next renewal.

A sequence you can run this quarter

1. Tier your Oracle systems by funded three year roadmap.
2. Identify and price idle support lines for termination.
3. Model repricing exposure for every planned move, per country.
4. Run a system level fit assessment for third party support on the stable tier.
5. Negotiate the keep tier with Oracle from the smaller, cleaner base.
6. Set the annual tier review and document Oracle re entry costs.

White Paper · Oracle

Oracle Third Party Support

When third party support is the right call for Oracle Database, Apps, and Middleware. Read it free.

Read the white paper

Frequently asked questions

How much did Adecco save with hybrid Oracle support?

12 million euro over three years. Roughly half came from moving stable systems to third party support, a third from terminating idle lines, and the rest from uplift that no longer applied to removed spend.

What is a hybrid Oracle support strategy?

A split model: Oracle support on systems with funded upgrade roadmaps, third party support on stable steady state systems, and termination of support on idle licenses, with annual tier reviews.

Is third party support safe for production Oracle systems?

On stable tiers, our engagement file says yes when scoped system by system with stability acceptance criteria. The moved tier at Adecco met or beat prior service baselines, with no severity one incident attributed to the change.

Can you return to Oracle support after leaving?

Yes, at a re entry premium that should be priced before the move. Every tracked re entry in our file was negotiated successfully when roadmaps changed.

Why not move the whole estate to third party support?

Because active roadmap systems genuinely consume Oracle upgrade and patch value. Full exit strands them; the hybrid captures the savings without that strategic cost.

What estate size justifies the hybrid model?

From roughly 5 million euro of annual Oracle support upward, where the stable tier is large enough for the spread to outweigh program and transition costs.