ERP ROI — Evidence over Folklore
"Improved efficiency" is not a business case. A mechanism, a baseline and an owner are.
The folklore problem
Fact: Published ERP ROI evidence is dominated by two genres: vendor-distributed review data (users reporting efficiency, visibility and cost-transparency gains — real voices, but incentivized and self-selected, as the TrustRadius finance report itself discloses) and analyst benchmark decks with percentage claims whose baselines you cannot inspect. Meanwhile survey data on S/4HANA programmes shows a majority exceeding plan and budget — the cost side of the case is routinely understated (see the five risks).
Inference: Credible ERP ROI comes from named mechanisms, each independently measurable: close-time and finance-ops hours (see faster close); working-capital release from receivables/payables discipline; coordination cost removed (the insight-to-action gap, priced); decommissioned legacy systems and their true run cost; and avoided future cost — the upgrade retest-tax a clean core eliminates. Anything that cannot name its mechanism belongs in the appendix, not the case.
Point of view: Build the case you would accept as an investor, not the one that gets the programme approved. Baseline every mechanism before signing, put a named owner on each benefit line, and review realisation quarterly after go-live with the same seriousness as programme cost. The organisations disappointed by ERP ROI are almost always the ones that never defined it.
The five-line business case
- Process cost: hours in close, reconciliation and exception handling — baseline vs target.
- Working capital: DSO/DPO/inventory days the new discipline should move, and by how much.
- System landscape: named systems to be decommissioned, with their full run cost.
- Future-cost avoidance: upgrade and audit effort under clean-core discipline vs status quo.
- Optionality: what the platform enables next (AI, new entities, M&A speed) — stated, but not monetised into the hurdle rate.
Cross-check: what SAP's own ROI worksheet gets right — and where it stops
SAP publishes its own ERP ROI calculation worksheet, and it is better than most vendor collateral — worth reading precisely because its discipline exposes what sloppy business cases skip. Three things it gets right:
- Cost both systems, side by side. The worksheet forces a full five-year cost grid for the legacy system, not just the new one — Year 1 vs Years 2–5, per line. Most internal cases never price the status quo honestly; this is the single habit worth stealing.
- The forgotten cost lines. Its four cost areas (infrastructure, software, implementation, ongoing personnel) itemise what cases routinely omit: user devices and networking, facilities, backup and disaster recovery, periodic bug fixes, software modifications and integration upkeep — the custom-code and interface maintenance that quietly dominates legacy run cost.
- Benefits canvassed per department, split by class. Direct, indirect and strategic benefits are captured department by department — a broader canvass than a finance-only view produces.
And where it stops: the worksheet ends at a simple ratio — (benefits − investment) ÷ investment. No payback timing, no discounting, no sensitivity, and no owner on any benefit line. Its department-canvassed "indirect benefits" are also exactly where folklore enters a business case, unless every line names its mechanism and baseline (the discipline above). That is the delta the sapperment workbook adds: the same honest cost taxonomy, continued through payback, sensitivity and named benefit ownership.
The workbook — run your own numbers
The sapperment ERP business-case workbook — a neutral, five-year TCO/ROI/payback model: cost categories for legacy vs new system, benefits per business area, ROI and payback with a built-in sensitivity view. No vendor assumptions, no reference prices — your inputs, your arithmetic, in one honest sheet.
Download the workbook (XLSX) →Monday-morning questions
- Which benefit lines in our current case have a baseline measured this year?
- Who owns each benefit after go-live — by name, in their targets?
- If realisation were reviewed like capex, which lines would survive?
Where this connects
The market evidence is read critically in SAP Cloud ERP in finance; the deployment economics live in SAP Public Cloud vs Private Cloud and RISE vs GROW. All tracks: Executive Clarity topic tracks.
Sources
- TrustRadius, "SAP Cloud ERP Marktbericht — Finanzwesen" (2026) — reviews marked "Incentivized".
- Industry surveys on S/4HANA programme overruns (figures as reported; populations vary).
- SAP Insights — ERP ROI calculation worksheet (© SAP SE) — cross-checked above; method credited, critique ours.
Editorial standard: facts, inference and point of view are kept separate above. Published 2026-08-03 · By Andreas BORN.