A German automotive manufacturer with approximately 22,000 employees ran an SAP RISE migration negotiation in 2023 and 2024 that produced a 31 percent reduction against SAP's headline list price across a four year contracted term. Three commercial problems landed at the same renewal table. A 4.2 million euro indirect access claim under SAP's Digital Access framework, raised in the context of an E4M migration scoping conversation. A uniform RISE Premium Plus proposal that did not match the operational fit of the customer's modular SAP estate. And a migration timeline that SAP wanted compressed into eighteen months versus the customer's realistic capacity of thirty plus months. The buyer side framework addressed all three in parallel and produced a contracted RISE migration that closed at 31 percent off list, with a 3.1 million euro reduction on the indirect access exposure and a phased migration plan aligned to operational capacity.
The framework that produced this case is documented in the SAP S/4HANA negotiation guide. For the broader SAP commercial framework read the SAP services practice. For the indirect access analysis read our SAP knowledge hub and run the RISE TCO calculator to model the equivalent at your own estate.
1. The client
The customer is a German automotive manufacturer with operations across Germany, the Czech Republic, and Hungary. The workforce of approximately 22,000 employees splits between corporate and engineering functions in Germany (8,500), manufacturing operations across the three countries (10,500), and a dealer and field service network (3,000). The SAP estate at the start of the negotiation consisted of SAP ECC 6.0 on premise across financial accounting, controlling, supply chain, manufacturing, quality, and human resources, with a customized engineering data exchange platform and a dealer management system that integrated through approximately 4,200 RFC connections.
The client SAP estate at the start of the engagement.
| Component | Configuration | Annual maintenance |
|---|
| SAP ECC 6.0 | Financial accounting, supply chain, manufacturing, quality | 3.4M EUR |
| SAP HANA | Underlying database for ECC modules | 0.8M EUR |
| SAP HR | Core HR for European operations | 0.4M EUR |
| Custom integrations | 4,200 RFC connections to dealer and supply chain partners | (unlicensed under indirect access) |
| Total annual maintenance | | 4.6M EUR |
2. The three problems on the table
SAP's commercial team raised three issues at the same E4M scoping conversation in early 2023. The framing was that the customer needed to migrate to S/4HANA RISE before mainstream maintenance ended on ECC at end of 2027, that the indirect access exposure on the existing ECC estate had to be resolved as part of the migration commercial conversation, and that the migration itself should run on an eighteen month timeline aligned to SAP's preferred RISE deployment cadence. The three issues were intentionally bundled. The buyer side framework unbundled them and negotiated each on its own merits.
The bundling problem
SAP's commercial team's preferred negotiation pattern bundles indirect access exposure, RISE migration commitment, and migration timeline into a single commercial conversation. The bundling is intentional because it allows SAP to use leverage in one area to extract concessions in another. The buyer side response is to insist on three parallel conversations with three separate commercial frames, which removes the cross leverage and produces materially better outcomes on each individual issue.
3. The indirect access reset
SAP's preliminary scoping arrived at a 4.2 million euro indirect access claim under the Digital Access framework. The framework licenses SAP usage by document creation rather than by user count, and applies to third party systems that create documents in SAP through unmonitored connections. The customer's 4,200 RFC connections included dealer systems creating sales orders, supply chain partner systems creating delivery notes, and engineering data exchange systems creating master data records. SAP's preliminary calculation used a flat per document rate at the standard tier across all 4,200 connections.
The buyer side framework reclassified the connections into three categories. Document creator connections (creating sales orders, invoices, delivery notes) genuinely required Digital Access licensing. Service consumer connections (reading data, executing reports, calling functions without creating documents) did not require Digital Access licensing under SAP's own contractual definitions. Hybrid connections required line by line review to determine the actual license obligation. After reclassification, only approximately 1,400 of the 4,200 connections required Digital Access licensing, and the volume placed the customer in the lower tier with a materially lower per document rate.
The indirect access reclassification. From 4,200 to 1,400 licensable connections.
| Category | Connection count | Digital Access required | Annual licensing impact |
|---|
| Document creators | 1,400 | Yes | 1.1M EUR at lower tier rate |
| Service consumers | 2,200 | No | Reclassified out of scope |
| Hybrid (reviewed) | 600 | Partial (290 confirmed) | Already in document creator count |
| Total | 4,200 | 1,400 licensable | 1.1M EUR vs 4.2M EUR claim |
4. The RISE tier reset
SAP's opening RISE proposal was uniform RISE Premium Plus across all licensed users, with a four year term and a fixed annual subscription. The Premium Plus tier includes premium support, advanced analytics, and the broader S/4HANA Cloud Public Edition functional scope. The customer's operational profile did not justify Premium Plus across the entire estate. Manufacturing and quality modules required the Premium tier (for the embedded analytics and quality management capabilities) but did not require Premium Plus. Financial accounting and supply chain modules required Standard tier (for the core functional capabilities). HR modules required Standard tier with the SuccessFactors add on for talent management.
The RISE tier reset. From uniform Premium Plus to mixed tier deployment.
| Module | Original (Premium Plus) | Renewed (mixed tier) | Saving |
|---|
| Financial Accounting | Premium Plus | Standard | 32% per user |
| Supply Chain | Premium Plus | Standard | 32% per user |
| Manufacturing | Premium Plus | Premium | 18% per user |
| Quality | Premium Plus | Premium | 18% per user |
| HR (with SuccessFactors) | Premium Plus | Standard + add on | 22% per user |
5. The phased migration plan
SAP's preferred eighteen month migration timeline was operationally infeasible for the customer's customization scope. The buyer side framework negotiated a thirty month phased migration aligned to operational capacity and risk tolerance. The phasing reduced operational risk and aligned the SAP commercial commitment to the customer's actual migration capacity rather than to SAP's preferred deployment cadence.
- Wave 1 (months 1 to 12). Financial Accounting and Supply Chain to RISE Standard. Lowest customization scope, highest reuse of standard SAP functionality, smallest operational risk in the migration.
- Wave 2 (months 13 to 24). Manufacturing and Quality to RISE Premium. Material customization in production planning and quality management. Aligned to seasonal manufacturing cycles to minimize disruption.
- Wave 3 (months 25 to 30). HR migration to SuccessFactors-integrated RISE Standard. Sequenced after the operational modules to allow process refinement.
- Out of scope. The customized engineering data exchange platform and dealer management system retained on legacy ECC under extended maintenance, with a planned future migration outside the contracted term. Removed approximately 18 percent of the original RISE scope from the four year commitment.
6. The final settlement
The final SAP settlement versus the publisher's opening proposal.
| Line | Publisher opening (4 yr) | Signature (4 yr) | Reduction |
|---|
| RISE subscription | 52.0M EUR | 34.4M EUR | 34% |
| Indirect access (Digital Access) | 4.2M EUR (one time) | 1.1M EUR (one time) | 74% |
| Migration credits | n/a | 2.8M EUR (offsetting) | Credit applied |
| Extended ECC maintenance (out of scope estate) | n/a | 3.6M EUR (4 yr) | New line item |
| Total commitment (4 yr) | 56.2M EUR | 36.3M EUR (after credits) | 35% combined / 31% off RISE list |
The 31 percent off list reduction reflects the closing position on the RISE subscription line measured against the standard SAP list pricing for the Premium Plus uniform proposal. The 35 percent combined reduction includes the migration credits applied and the indirect access savings net of the one time settlement payment. The cumulative four year saving is 19.9 million euros. The phased migration also reduced operational risk by aligning the SAP commercial commitment to the customer's actual migration capacity, and the extended ECC maintenance line preserved the customer's optionality on the legacy engineering and dealer management estate.
FAQ
What is E4M and what was the audit risk?
E4M is SAP's Engagement For Migration program, designed to incentivize legacy ECC customers to convert to S/4HANA RISE through migration credits and contractual restructuring. The audit risk arises when SAP's commercial team uses E4M scoping conversations to identify license shortfalls in the customer's existing ECC estate, particularly indirect access exposure under the Digital Access framework.
What was the indirect access exposure?
The customer had approximately 4,200 third party systems calling SAP through unmonitored RFC connections, including dealer management, supply chain partner systems, and engineering data exchange. SAP's preliminary scoping arrived at a 4.2 million euro indirect access claim. The closing settlement reduced this to 1.1 million euro by reclassifying many of the connections as service consumer rather than document creator and negotiating Digital Access pricing per document at the lower tier.
What was the RISE migration phasing?
The phased migration ran across three waves over thirty months. Wave one moved the financial accounting and supply chain modules to RISE Premium Plus over twelve months. Wave two moved the manufacturing and quality modules over the following twelve months. Wave three retained the legacy ECC components on extended maintenance for the customized engineering and dealer management estate, with a planned future migration.
How was the 31 percent reduction achieved?
The reduction came from four sources. The indirect access claim reduced from 4.2 million euro to 1.1 million euro through Digital Access reclassification and tier negotiation. The RISE pricing reduced from a uniform Premium Plus deployment to a mixed Premium and Standard tier sized to operational fit. The migration credits applied at the higher rate available under E4M for committed migration plans. The contracted term included a defined exit clause for the legacy ECC estate.
How long did the engagement take?
Fourteen months end to end. The first three months were the inventory and indirect access analysis. Months four to seven were the Digital Access reclassification and the RISE pricing model. Months eight to eleven were the commercial paper, the redline, and the migration phasing negotiation. The last three months were the escalation through SAP regional management and signature on the phased migration contract.
Does Vendor Shield cover SAP RISE migration work?
Yes. The Vendor Shield subscription covers SAP in every tier including RISE migration scoping, Digital Access exposure analysis, indirect access defense, tier modeling, and migration phasing negotiation.
