© 2007 wellesley information services. all rights reserved. best practices for organizing your sap...

© 2007 Wellesley Information Services. All rights reserved.

Best practices for organizing your SAP NetWeaver BI support team

Dr. Bjarne BergDirector SAP BI

2

What We’ll Cover …

Introduction

An historical view – a Case study of four companies

Benchmarks and guidelines for number of BI support resources

Roles and Organization models – some examples

Distributed development and support organizations

Outsourcing of SAP BW development or support

Use of service-level agreements (SLAs)

Wrap-up

3

Introductory Slide

• As SAP BW systems become more established, support teams encounter a wide variety of usage, operational, and change management issues.

• BW has been around for 9 years, but only recently has best practices stared to emerge in ‘best-of-breed’ organizations.

• Today we will reveal the first empirical benchmarks on how many resources are needed to support a successful SAP BI program.

• This session offers best practices and insights on how to optimize support efforts, organization and systems.

4

In This Session We will Look at:

•A case study of four companies and explore how they implemented an SAP BI support organization.

•We will examine 7 “best-of breed” companies & look at benchmarks on how many resources a BI support organization needs.

•We will look at a survey of 103 participants to see how companies are really organizing support and project efforts.

•We will explore a recent survey of 1,889 people and see what organizations are looking at when evaluating outsourcing of SAP BI support.

•Finally, we will look at how you can consolidate these findings in a coherent and robust SAP BI support organization strategy and recruitment plan.

5


Introduction







Wrap-up

6

The BW Support Organization – 4 Case studies

There are several ways to organize a BW support team. The following is examples from real companies and their lessons learned.

Company A: A large Insurance company located in the US, with many distributed IT support organizations across the country. They have been live on BW since 2001.

Company B: A large oil and gas company with a central IT infrastructure and been live on BW since 1999.

Company C: A mid-sized home builder with a decentralized IT organization and has been live on BW since 2001.

Company D: A large global European telecom company with a very decentralized IT staff. They have been live on BW since 1998.

7


Company A: A large Insurance company located in the US, and had many distributed IT support organizations across the country. They have been live on BW since 2001.

New Central Support Model

8



New Central Support Model

Environment Management

Shared service center

Basis support

Security Group

Developerpool

IT company

This organization had two BW developer groups. One was with the financial group (they went first live with BW), and one was with the IT company (each had about 6 developers). When they merged with another large oil company, they inherited a third BW development group (with about 9 more developers).

After running this model with 3 development groups and one central support organization it was decided that the coordination effort grew to large, and standards were too hard to enforce, and a decision was made to merge all three groups into one BW developer pool with the same manager and the same organization.

Developerpool

Acquired company

9

BW Leader

ETL processingUser support

(queries)Project support

BW Leader

ETL processingUser support

(queries)Project support



This company had a small BW staff with consisting of 4 employees. Two of these functioned as backend and front-end architects.

Project teams were allowed to use consultants to develop what they wanted, but all had to pass the structured walkthrough and approval of the BW architects. This was done to enforce standards and make sure that the system developed conformed to the shared environment constraints. The BW architects spent at least 75% of their time assigned with the project teams and were physically assigned to offices sitting next to the consultants on the project teams.

SAP Support Center

SAP Helpdesk Environment Group Security group

R/3 level 1 support

Reporting Level 1Support

IS group(hardware & facilities)

MH Network Group Authoizations System support

BW & APO

SAP Support Center

SAP Helpdesk Environment Group Security group

R/3 level 1 support

Reporting Level 1Support

IS group(hardware & facilities)

MH Network Group Authoizations System support

BW & APO

10



Reporting Manager

Training leader

Power user support

Reporting Manager

Training leader

Power user support

Reporting Manager

Training leader

Power user support

Reporting Manager

Training leader

Power user support

Reporting Manager

Training leader

Power user support

Reporting Manager

Training leader

Power user support

Global Business Model Group

Reporting Group

Project Support

Environments& Basis

Global Business Model Group

Reporting Group

Project Support

Environments& Basis

Corporate Group

Production Company Sales Organization Corporate Finance

This company used a shared BW development staff consisting of the BW central “global business model group” and distributed support for their operating companies in Germany and Holland.

The central group did all projects with input and collaboration from the operating companies, but training and power user support was conducted by employees in the operating companies under the existing reporting managers.

The result was a centralized development effort, but a scalable distributed support organization.

11

The BW Support Organization – 6 to 12 months after go-live

Company A: A large Insurance company located in the US, with many distributed IT support organizations across the country. They have been live on BW since 2001.




Co. A Co. B Co. C Co. D

Development Support

Development Effort

End-User Support

System administration

Environment support

= Centralized = Decentralized

The tendency in these companies has been to centralize as much as possible.

The development effort tends to be supported by pool resources from a centralized group, who are assigned for a substantial amount of time to the project teams on-site, either as architects, or as developers.

12


Introduction







Wrap-up

13

Benchmarking against 7 ‘best-of-breed’ companies with SAP BI

Area Company a Company b Company c Company d Company e Company f Company gIndustry Oil&Gas Industrial High-Tech Utility Manufact. Gov. Manufact.Version 3.5 3.5 2004s 2004s 3.5 2004s 3.1c

Number of executive users* 25 18 3 43 0 11 0Number of casual users* 952 408 54 28 5 105 6Number of power users* 34 21 9 17 19 7 52Number of data stores (ODS/IC/MP) 75 129 29 31 16 12 48Number of BW environments (all) 7 11 4 4 3 3 3Number of process chains 64 113 31 28 18 9 0Complexity of security (1 low-10 high) 3 6 4 3 1 2 1System data load issues (1 low-10 high) 2 7 2 3 1 2 5Number of people in non-basis support 9 7 0.5 4 1 4 1.5Number of people in basis support 2 2 1 1.5 1 1 0.5Number of people in support leadership 1 1 0.5 1 0 1 1

Total Number of support people 12 10 2 6.5 2 6 3

*numbers are real users, not named users

By examining seven companies from various industries that have implemented SAP BI/BW, we found was that consistencies had emerged within the organizations and that we now can draw some conclusions based on their SAP BI support models.

The 7 companies reviewed for benchmarks can be summarized as:

14

The need for non-Basis support people

First, we looked at factors we could remove since they were not linked to the need for non-basis support people. We found that four factors had no real impact on the need for these resources:

a. Number of power users has little impact on the number of non-basis support people you will need. (p=0.97)**

b. Complexity of security has little impact on the number of non-basis support people you will need. (p=0.85)**

c. Number of process chains has little impact on the number of non-basis support people you will need. (p=0.82)**

d. Number of data stores has little impact on the number of non-basis support people you will need. (p=0.81)**

**P is the possibility that a factor is simply due to randomness in the sample.

15

How many non-basis support people do you need?

Number of non-basis support people needed = 0.4 + 0.065(number of executive users) + 0.0069(# of casual users) + 0.31(system load issues) (Note: F-Stat=13.59; P of F = 0.03**)

Other ways to put it:

a) You need 0.4 people regardless of any size of you system.

b) Each non-basis support person can support 15.3 executives, or 144 casual users, or 3.2 load issues.

When planning development and helpdesk support staff, you need to look at number for executives, casual users and the level of load issues you have.

16

The need for Basis support people

In the second test, we looked at factors we could remove since they were not linked to the need for Basis support people.

We found that three core factors had no real impact on the need for these resources. These included:

a Number of process chains has little impact on the number of basis support people you will need. (p=0.98)**

b The complexity of the security has little impact on the number of basis support people you will need. (p=0.88)**

c The number of data stores has little impact on the number of basis support people you will need. (p=0.84)**

**note P is the possibility that a factor is simply due to randomness

17

How many Basis support people do you need?

Number of Basis support people needed = 0.49 + 0.15 (number of BI environments) Note: F-Stat=11.32; P of F = 0.02**

Other ways to put it:

a) You need 0.49 people regardless of any number of BI systems

b) Each basis support person can support 3.18 environments. With 1.5 positions you can support 6.3 environments, and with 2 full-time basis support people, you can support 9.5 BI environments

Note: Basis tasks include: OSS research, testing and application, support packs/ upgrades/ transports/ installs/ backup / disaster recovery / hardware management and other related tasks

18

The need for Support Leadership people

In the third model, we also looked at factors we could remove since they were not linked to the need for support leadership people. We found that six core factors had no real impact on the need for these resources:

a The number of data stores has little impact on the number of leadership support people you will need. (p=0.89)**

b The number of BI environments has little impact on the number of leadership support people you will need. (p=0.89)**

c The number of power users has little impact on the number of leadership support people you will need. (p=0.97)**

d The number of process chains has little impact on the number of leadership support people you will need. (p=0.54)**

e The complexity of the security system has little impact on the number of leadership support people you will need. (p=0.46)**

f The number of casual users has little impact on the number of leadership support people you will need. (p=0.26)**

**note P is the possibility that a factor is simply due to randomness.

19

How many Support leaders do you need?

Number of Leadership support people needed = 0.32 + 0.012(# of executive users) + 0.09 (System data load issues) Note: F-Stat=2.211

Other ways to put it: a. The number of executive using the system drives the need for user support leadership, but you need at least 0.32 leaders regardless of number of users, or data load issues.

b. A leader can handle up to 56 executive users, or 7.3 load issues (scale 1-10)

When organizing the support leadership team, you need to look at number of executive users and the level of load

issues. The more load issues and senior managers using your system, the more support team leads you will need.

20

Testing of the Staffing Models

To test the staffing models, we estimated the needs for the original companies used in creating the proposals. We found that the government organization was overstaffed by 2 and the high-tech was understaffed by one resource. For all others we found 80%-100% accuracy.

Area Company a Company b Company c Company d Company e Company f Company gIndustry Oil&Gas Industrial High-Tech Utility Manufact. Gov. Manufact.Version 3.5 3.5 2004s 2004s 3.5 2004s 3.1c

Number of executive users* 25 18 3 43 0 11 0Number of casual users* 952 408 54 28 5 105 6Number of power users* 34 21 9 17 19 7 52Number of data stores (ODS/IC/MP) 75 129 29 31 16 12 48Number of BW environments (all) 7 11 4 4 3 3 3Number of process chains 64 113 31 28 18 9 0Complexity of security (1 low-10 high) 3 6 4 3 1 2 1System data load issues (1 low-10 high) 2 7 2 3 1 2 5Number of people in non-basis support 9 7 0.5 4 1 4 1.5Number of people in basis support 2 2 1 1.5 1 1 0.5Number of people in support leadership 1 1 0.5 1 0 1 1

Total Number of support people 12 10 2 6.5 2 6 3

*numbers are real users, not named users

A. Number of non-basis support people needed = 0.4 + 0.065(number of executive users) + 0.0069(#of casual users) + 0.31(system load issues) 9.21 6.56 1.59 4.32 0.74 2.46 1.99B. Number of Basis support people needed = 0.49 +0.15 (number of BI environments) 1.54 2.14 1.09 1.09 0.94 0.94 0.94C. Number of Leadership support people needed = 0.32 + 0.012(# of executive users) + 0.09 (System data load issues) 0.80 1.17 0.54 1.11 0.41 0.63 0.77

Total Number of support people 11.55 9.86 3.21 6.51 2.09 4.03 3.70

Overstaffed (understaffed) -0.45 -0.14 1.21 0.01 0.09 -1.97 0.70Accuracy 96% 99% 62% 100% 95% 67% 81%

Predictive needs (model predictions)

21


Introduction







Wrap-up

22

An example of a small support team

This small group is typically folded in under an existing manager, who devote only part-time efforts to SAP BI support.

The power user is normally also situated in a different organization.

Load issues 1Executive users 5Environments 4Casual users 40

System description

Support leaderPart time (50%)

Helpdesk & data loads

Full-time

SAP BI BasisFull-time/part-time

Power UserPart time (25%)

Note: These are Support models, and does not include any resources for new content development. This is assumed to be staffed separately.

23

An example of a medium support team

This medium sized is typically folded in under an existing manager, who devote only part-time efforts to SAP BI support.

The group sometimes also undertakes portal support, security, development standards and feature enhancements such as broadcasting and cockpit consolidations, but is normally not extensively involved in new content development


System description

Support leaderPart time (65%)

Helpdesk, training,user support

Full-time

SAP BI BasisFull-time

Data loads & fixesFull-time

Query & webFull-time

24

An example of a very large support team

This large team can support complex applications, cockpits, BI portals, broadcasting, while providing training and helpdesk

support as well as on-going BW production support.

Support leaderFull time

Helpdesk,user support

Full-time

SAP BI BasisFull-time


Query & cockpitsi.e. SEMFull-time


System description


Training,user support

Full-time

Portal, collaboration,KM security

Full-time

Query & cockpitsi.e. APO, CRM

Full-time

Data quality & data resource mgmt.

Full-time

Note: Job areas are meant for illustrations, and will vary depending on the BI applications supported

25


Introduction







Wrap-up

26

A Survey of development and support practices for SAP BW/BI

Survey Respondends by Industry

1%

6%

1%

4%

2%

3%

49%

2%15%

12%

5%

Finance/Banking

Manufacturing

Retail

Insurance

Defense

Government

Oil & energy

Services

Transportation

Consulting

Other:

Number of Surveys by Industry

2

51

5161

12

4

2

316

Finance/Banking

Manufacturing

Retail

Insurance

Defense

Government

Oil & energy

Services

Transportation

Consulting

Other:

In 2004 and 2005 we conducted a survey of development and support practices for SAP BW/BI using participants at SAP Netweaver conferences

We got 103 responses from 11 industries.

27


Nine manufacturing companies, two transportation and one government organization had a decentralized support organization.

This was mainly by using dedicated power users as first level query support, or by having two separate data warehouse organizations that were allowed to support their respective functional areas. However, more than 4 out of 5 companies had centralized this function.

Organization of BW Support organization

17%

83%

Decentralized

Centralized

Organization of BW Support Organization

by Industry

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Decentralized

Centralized

28


Almost all companies organize their SAP BI/BW environments in a single organization. There are very few exceptions to this (96 out of 103 companies have centralized BW hardware support team).

Best practices is to have specialized competencies by leveraging basis skills in single integrated BI/BW support groups.

Organization of BW Hardw are Support organization

7%

93%

Decentralized

Centralized

Organization of BW Hardware Organization

by Industry

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Decentralized

Centralized

29


The most diversity of distributed vs. centralized development was in the area of query development.

Over 43% of the companies surveyed allowed queries to be developed by non-centralized IT staff.

Organization of BW Query Development Efforts

43%

57%

Decentralized

Centralized

Organization of Query Development by Industry

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Decentralized

Centralized

30


Almost all companies centralized ETL processes and development. Only one insurance company allowed this to be decentralized.

Best practices are to centralize the ETL development.

Organization of BW Extract, Transforms and Load Development Efforts

10%

90%

Decentralized

Centralized

Organization of Extract Transform and Load

Development by Industry

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Decentralized

Centralized

31


Almost all companies centralized the development of InfoCubes and ODSs. Only in Oil & Gas did we see some distributed development (mostly due to mergers).

Few companies allow distributed development of ODS or InfoCubes

Organization of BW Infocube & ODS Development Efforts

11%

89%

Decentralized

Centralized

Organization of Infocube & ODS Development by Industry

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Decentralized

Centralized

32


Introduction







Wrap-up

33

SAP BI support and development outsourcing

To examine what companies are really doing with outsourcing in the SAP industry, we took samples at five different SAP national conferences with a combined attendance of over 15,800 individuals.

Over a period of 8 months we sampled a total of 1,889 individuals (45 did not identify company size, so we had 1,845 usable surveys). We used a written survey with 47 questions

Employer's organization size

Niche strategy

Differentiation Low cost strategy

No stated strategy

Total number of respondents

Fortune 500 279 361 327 12 979Fortune 1000 68 135 13 12 228Smaller organizations 182 365 79 12 638

Total 529 861 419 36 1845

Source: “Factors considered when Outsourcing a Transaction System or a Decision Support System”, Dr. Bjarne Berg, University of North Carolina, 2007.

34

Trends in SAP R/3 and BI Outsourcing

The respondents reported that a BI spending on average of 10.1% of IT budgets on SAP BI outsourcing.

The major differences were in the expectation levels. Fortune-500 companies reported the highest expected growth in overall (R/3 and BI) outsourcing over the next 3 years.

The expected annual growth in outsourcing of R/3 (2007-09) was 13.4%; while the expected growth per year on SAP BI was 7.6%.

Size % of IT budget spent on OLTP

outsourcing today

% of IT budget spent on DSS outsourcing

today

Expected % of IT budget spent on

OLTP outsourcing within 3 yrs

Expected % of IT budget spent on DSS outsourcing

within 3 yrsFortune-500 11.9% 10.5% 20.1% 17.6%

Fortune-1000 11.4% 9.1% 16.4% 13.6%Small organization 12.0% 10.5% 15.1% 12.8%

Average 11.8% 10.1% 17.2% 14.7%

Current Spending and Expectations


35

Most Important factors for DSS outsourcing

1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50

Uncertainty in our long-term DSS technology choice

Our unfamiliarity with outsourcing in general

To take advantage of different education systems at our service partner's location

The number of available outsourcing service providers

The complexity of DSS

Knowing the service provider's employees

The service provider working in a similar industry as our organization

To provide 24 hour DSS operations

To reduce overall costs

To improve our DSS flexibility and agility

To take advantage of the skilled workforce of our service partner

The service provider's experience with performing similar activities as us

The service provider's current overall investments in DSS

Our unfamiliarity with DSS technology

To reduce labor costs

The service provider's prior experience with the DSS technology

The service provider's employees' understanding of our needs

The trustworthiness of the service provider's employees

The service provider's expertise with outsourcing in general


36

What are companies looking at when outsourcing SAP BI

Large companies are viewing costs as the most important factor.

Medium companies are looking at internal factors.

Small companies are looking mostly at supplier factors

Factors considered when outsourcing IT

2.25

2.50

2.75

3.00

3.25

3.50

3.75

Fortune-500 Fortune-1000 Smaller org

Supplier factors

Internal factors

T echnology factors

Costs

Company size influences what factors an organization considers important when outsourcing a SAP BI organizationTip

37

What is most important when outsourcing SAP BI support

Questions and average scores OLTP DSS DifferencesOur unfamiliarity with OLTP/DSS technology 2.06 3.39 1.32*To reduce labor costs 3.07 3.41 0.34*Knowing the service provider's employees 2.42 2.74 0.32*The service provider's expertise with outsourcing in general 3.56 3.77 0.21*The trustworthiness of the service provider's employees 3.50 3.66 0.15*The service provider's current overall investments in OLTP/DSS 3.18 3.30 0.12*The service provider's employees' understanding of our needs 3.44 3.53 0.09***To take advantage of different education systems at our service partner's location 2.18 2.27 0.09***The service provider working in a similar industry as our organization 2.68 2.76 0.08The complexity of OLTP/DSS 2.70 2.73 0.03To improve our OLTP/DSS flexibility and agility 3.08 3.05 0.02The service provider's prior experience with the OLTP/DSS technology 3.57 3.50 0.07To take advantage of the skilled workforce of our service partner 3.18 3.08 0.09***The service provider's experience with performing similar activities as us 3.38 3.27 0.11**The number of available outsourcing service providers 2.59 2.44 0.15*To reduce overall costs 3.05 2.89 0.16*Uncertainty in our long-term OLTP/DSS technology choice 2.23 2.05 0.19*To provide 24 hour OLTP/DSS operations 3.03 2.77 0.26*Unfamiliarity with outsourcing in general 2.65 2.11 0.54*

Factor that are more important to a DSS outsourcing

effort

Factor that are more important to

an OLTP outsourcing effort

No major differences

*Significant at 99% confidence level, two-tailed matched pair t-test of sample means assuming equal variance.** Significant at 95% confidence level. *** Significant at 90% confidence level.

Technology uncertainty & Labor costs are the more important for outsourcing the SAP BI organization than for the R/3 support.

38


Introduction



Roles and responsibilities – skills and training




Wrap-up

39

Four decisions - when considering SAP BI support outsourcing

Only when reporting is standardized, non-regulatory, and not a source of core competitive advantage

should SAP BI outsourcing be considered

Data Management Review - “Outsourcing a DSS -when does it make sense? “ Dr. Bjarne Berg, July 2004

40

Outsourcing risks

In a recent research paper of 137 companies, it was found that there were three factors that could predict outsourcing success. The factors were:

- Interdependence with other processes (APO, budgeting, planning forecasting have high interdependence and is therefore not good candidates).

- Complexity (the more complex, the less likely of success)

- Strategic importance to the enterprise (basic reporting is not a strategic capability and can be outsourced).

Mani, D. Barua, A., and Whinston, A., Successfully Governing Business Process Outsourcing Relationships, MIS Quarterly Executive, Vol, 41, 1, March 2006

41

What to explore when negotiating an Service Level agreement (SLA)

1. Bargain for compensation at beginning – be careful of creeping cost escalations and know what you are committing to..

2. Limit your vulnerability by dual sourcing (more than one vendor)

3. Demand payment schedules for each task (this is the only way to really see what the contract is costing you).

4. Watch out for partial contracts, there is a temptation to cut quality

5. Avoid any vague commitments or language, if it cannot be measured, it won’t.

Carl Shapiro, Hal R. Varian: ”Information Rules: A Strategic Guide to the Network Economy” Harvard Business School Press

Spend serious time in writing an SLA, even when dealing with internal service providers – the costs of omissions and switching costs are very high.

42

What to explore when negotiating an Service Level agreement (SLA)

6. Don’t reveal too much about vulnerabilities and phase in the outsourcing before making grand commitments.

7. Avoid creeping lock-in by proprietary standards and methodologies.

8. Keep info on usage to yourself – the vendors may try to price by benefits.

9. Assess early the magnitude of switch costs if you should become unhappy with your vendor selection.

10. If you give the vendor more business, do you get cumulative volume discounts? – the benefits of scale should be shared…

Carl Shapiro, Hal R. Varian: ”Information Rules: A Strategic Guide to the Network Economy” Harvard Business School Press

The closer you are to the industry (SAP) standards, the easier it is to find trained resources and it also gives you more flexibility in the future

43

What to include in a SAP BI -SLA

1. When must data stores be loaded by (time)- What will happened if a persistent problem occurs (“swat” teams?)- Who are responsible for fixing process chains and who pays?

- Do you get a discount for each datastore that is not loaded in-time?

2. How should software fixes be applied- When will service packs, OSS notes and fixes be applied- Who pays for it- Who is responsible for testing of them

3. When will the system be upgraded- When will upgrades occur, how is the pricing determined- Who pays for it and who is responsible for testing- Outage committeemen's

4. Minimum up-time and target up-time- What is uptime defined as (data store loaded vs. queries available vs.

security fixes applied, vs. portal uptime vs. 3rd party reporting tool uptime vs. network uptime etc..

- What are the penalties (money) for missing the up-time requirements?

44


5. Issues log- What issues must be logged?- Who owns the log? – do you have access?- Can entries be updated, or must an audit trail be preserved?

6. Backup and disaster recovery- What is included in the backup and when is it taken- When will restore abilities be tested- How fast must restore occur, and what data stores and users will first have

access (priority list)

7. Who owns the data- If you switch vendors, who owns the data?- How will you get access to the data? – do you get full insights to all?- Who of the vendor’s employees gets access to your data, can they share it with your competitor?

8. Service tickets- When will service tickets be monitored?- What are the categories and who will resolve them?- What are the resolution process and timelines?- How are customer and support satisfaction measured?

45


9. Escalation process- What will happened if an issue cannot be resolved by the vendor and your SLA manager- What are the steps needed to terminate the contract and are there any

payment/ fault payments

The more details you put into the contract up front, the easier it will be to measure and the more likely you are to have a successful relationship

46


Introduction



Roles and responsibilities – skills and training




Wrap-up

47

Resources

• Dr. Bjarne Berg’s resource site http://csc-studentweb.lr.edu/swp/Berg/BB_index_main.htm

• BW Organizational Survey Results from“Managing the BW Project” at the BW and Portals Conference 2004– Dr. Berg

• http://csc-studentweb.lr.edu/swp/Berg/articles/organizational_survey_results_-_2004.ppt

48

Resources

• Factors considered when Outsourcing a Decision Support System, a large-scale survey of ERP practices

• http://tinyurl.com/3a9zjl

• Data Management Review - Outsourcing a DSS -when does it make sense? Dr. Bjarne Berg- July 2004

• http://tinyurl.com/2pr9nq

http://csc-studentweb.lrc.edu/swp/Berg/Articles/DMReview/Outsourcing%20a%20Decision%20Support%20System%20%E2%80%93%20When%20Does%20it%20Make%20Sense%20%20DM%20Review%20%20Industry%20Led,%20Industry%20Read.htm

49

7 Key Points to Take Home

• Don’t underestimate the support needs of a successful SAP BI program. You are doing data warehousing, you are not building a data warehouse – it is an ongoing process.

• The support organization should in general be centralized, the only area where support could be decentralized is the query development and fixes.

• Benchmarking against best-of-breed SAP BI organizations can provide realistic inputs to you support models

• Don’t add your organization to the exiting SAP support organization by default.. Sometimes it makes more sense to align it with other reporting organizations.

50

7 Key Points to Take Home

• If you are looking to outsourcing, be very clear on why you are doing it and what factors you are considering relative to your company’s competitive strategy and company size.

• Write very detailed Service Level Agreements and detailed consequences of missing performance targets.

• Don’t underestimate the need for on-going training and recruitment into your support organization. These skills are in high demand and most companies sees high turnover among these resources.

51

Your Turn!

How to contact me:Dr. Bjarne Berg

[email protected]

© 2007 wellesley information services. all rights reserved. best practices for organizing your sap...

Documents