Skip to main content
    Allari - The JDE Lifecycle Partner
    01

    Stage 1

    Migration Readiness

    Know What You're Getting Into Before You Sign Anything

    If Stage 0 was about running what you have — this stage is about understanding what comes next before you're committed to it. Migration is on the horizon. An SI will eventually be under contract. Before that happens, you need an independent assessment of what the migration actually requires — custom code inventory, integration complexity, data volume, organizational capacity. The SI will scope it after you've signed. We scope it before.

    The most expensive decision in any SAP migration is made in this window. Organizations that invest in independent readiness assessment before SI selection consistently avoid the scope inflation that drives the majority of migrations over budget. This is the stage where that investment happens — when your leverage is highest and the cost of course-correction is lowest.

    Recognition Pattern

    You're here if…

    • You know S/4HANA migration is coming — the board has acknowledged ECC's 2027 mainstream maintenance deadline — but no SI has been engaged and no timeline has been set.
    • Your custom code landscape is an unknown: you don't know how many custom objects exist, how many are actively used, or what the ATC remediation scope would be for S/4HANA compatibility.
    • Your integration landscape hasn't been fully documented — the number of interfaces, the protocols (iDoc, RFC, API, flat file), the third-party systems connected, the data volumes flowing through each.
    • You've received SI proposals but have no independent basis for evaluating whether their scope, timeline, and budget estimates are realistic.
    • Your data quality is uncertain: master data governance has been informal, and you suspect significant cleanup will be required before any data migration can succeed.
    • You need a risk register and budget range before signing an SI contract — not after — because scope changes after contract signing become change orders.
    • Your internal SAP team has never been through an S/4HANA migration and doesn't know what they don't know — they need an experienced assessment of the organizational capacity required.
    • You want to negotiate SI contracts from a position of knowledge, not from a position of dependence on the SI's own assessment.

    Risk Assessment

    What's at risk

    The most expensive decision in any SAP migration is made before the migration starts. It is the decision to sign an SI contract without an independent understanding of what the migration actually requires.

    SI proposals are built on scoping exercises that serve the SI's financial model. Fixed-price contracts underestimate scope to win the deal — the margin is recovered through change orders. Time-and-materials contracts overestimate duration to protect the SI's revenue floor. Neither model is designed to give the client an accurate picture of actual migration complexity.

    The custom code problem alone justifies independent assessment. The average SAP ECC system contains approximately 22,000 custom objects and 2.7 million lines of ABAP code. Of those, 40–60% are typically unused — dead code that was never decommissioned. But the remaining 40–60% must be evaluated for S/4HANA compatibility: deprecated function modules, removed tables, simplified data model changes (ACDOCA replacing multiple CO tables), and mandatory Fiori replacements for custom transactions. Without this assessment, the SI defines the remediation scope. And the SI has an incentive to maximize it.

    Integration complexity is the second cost. Most ECC environments have 50–200+ active interfaces — iDoc, RFC, BAPI, flat file, middleware (PI/PO, MuleSoft, Dell Boomi). Each interface must be evaluated for S/4HANA compatibility. Data quality is the third. Master data in a 15–20 year old ECC system has accumulated inconsistencies that are invisible during normal operations but fatal during data migration. A pre-migration data quality assessment identifies the remediation scope before it becomes a change order.

    What We Deliver

    Migration Readiness Scorecard

    Custom Code Inventory & ATC Analysis

    Complete catalog of all custom objects in the ECC landscape: Z/Y programs, function modules, enhancements (user exits, BADIs, enhancement spots), custom tables, custom transactions. Each object classified by usage frequency (active, dormant, dead), S/4HANA compatibility status (compatible, requires remediation, deprecated), and business criticality. ATC analysis executed against the S/4HANA simplification database with findings categorized by severity and remediation effort.

    Integration Landscape Mapping

    Every active interface documented: source system, target system, protocol (iDoc, RFC, BAPI, flat file, API), data volume, frequency, business process dependency, and S/4HANA compatibility status. Integration architecture diagram produced. Each interface classified by migration impact: no change required, configuration change, redesign required, retirement recommended.

    Data Volume & Quality Audit

    Table-level data volume analysis across all clients. Identification of archiving candidates (IDOC, BDOC, change documents, application logs, spool). Master data quality assessment: vendor, customer/Business Partner, material, GL account, cost center — duplicates, inconsistencies, orphaned records. Data migration readiness score by migration object.

    Migration Readiness Scorecard with Risk Register

    A single document consolidating custom code, integration, data, and organizational findings into a scored assessment. Risk register with likelihood, impact, and mitigation for each identified risk. Timeline estimate based on actual complexity — not SI proposal assumptions. Budget range with confidence intervals. SI selection criteria derived from the actual technical landscape.

    Organizational Capacity Assessment

    How many people does the internal SAP team have? What are they doing today? How much of their capacity is consumed by run-state operations? How much would be required for migration support — design workshops, UAT, data validation, integration testing? Can the organization staff both workstreams simultaneously, or does it need structural separation?

    Engagement Structure

    How it works

    Phase 1 — Weeks 1–2: Technical Discovery

    ATC analysis executed. Custom code inventory compiled. Integration landscape scan initiated. Data volume extraction started. The technical discovery is largely automated — tooling does the heavy lifting, experienced consultants interpret the results.

    Phase 2 — Weeks 3–4: Analysis & Assessment

    Findings consolidated. Risk register drafted. Organizational capacity interviews conducted. SI evaluation criteria developed. Timeline and budget modeling based on actual complexity data.

    Phase 3 — Weeks 5–6: Deliverable Compilation & Presentation

    Migration Readiness Scorecard finalized. Risk register completed. Recommendations documented. Presentation to steering committee and executive sponsor. The client leaves with an independent assessment they own — before any SI is under contract.

    Field Evidence

    Proof

    The organizations that invest in independent readiness assessment before SI selection consistently avoid the scope inflation that drives 55–75% of SAP migrations over budget (Gartner). The 8% on-schedule completion rate (Horváth Partners, 200+ executives) correlates directly with pre-migration preparation quality.

    22,000

    Avg Custom Objects Per ECC System

    2.7M

    Lines of ABAP Code

    40–60%

    Typically Unused Custom Code

    55–75%

    Of Migrations Exceed Budget

    Know the scope before you sign.

    A 4–6 week assessment that gives you the independent technical basis to evaluate every SI proposal. No SI relationship. No implementation bias. Just the data.