S/4HANA Migration: SMEs 2026 Before Decision
7 Min. Read Time
SAP will end regular maintenance for Business Suite 7 on December 31, 2027. This is no longer a threat, but a date already marked in the calendars of many mid-sized businesses. Those who don’t decide in 2026 are still making a decision. Just one with fewer options and a negotiating position that weakens every quarter.
Key Takeaways
- Three years of remaining support may sound like a lot, but it’s tight: An honest S/4HANA migration costs mid-sized businesses between 18 and 30 months of project time. Those who start in early 2026 will finish with a normal buffer. Those who start in 2027 will be under pressure.
- The maintenance trap is more expensive than migration: SAP’s Extended Maintenance costs 2% on top of the maintenance contract per year from 2028. Custom Code Support from third parties is even more expensive and doesn’t provide a regulatorily reliable guarantee.
- The management question is not technical: S/4HANA is a platform decision with implications for process standardization, data modeling, and sales channels. Those who delegate this lose control over follow-up costs.
Related:RevOps: AI in CRM ends data silos / Bitkom 2026: Mid-sized businesses and ERP migration
What is the S/4HANA maintenance trap?
What is the S/4HANA maintenance trap? The maintenance trap refers to the situation of a company whose SAP ERP landscape continues to run without a clear migration path after the end of mainstream maintenance for Business Suite 7 (end of 2027). The consequence: those who stay in the existing system pay Extended Maintenance with a surcharge, lose access to new functional developments, bear the risk of regulatory changes without manufacturer updates, and reduce their negotiating room in future license or hosting discussions. The trap is not technical, but a gradual shift in the risk profile at the expense of management.
What stagnation really costs
In the past 12 months, we’ve been involved in a number of S/4HANA decisions for mid-sized businesses. The managements we’ve worked with all had similar reflexes. First, the question about the project budget. Then the desire to postpone the decision by a year. Then the search for a maintenance option as a bridging solution.
The honest answer looks the same in almost all cases. Delaying by one year costs between 4% and 7% of the later project budget. This is made up of three components. Firstly, the daily implementation rates of established partners are rising faster than general inflation because the consultant supply is narrowing towards 2028. Secondly, custom code adaptations become more expensive every year because fewer developers are actively working with ABAP 7 extensions. Thirdly, the negotiating position vis-à-vis SAP itself shifts.
Those who negotiated license terms in 2024 still had a good hand. Those who negotiate in 2027 will be sitting at the table with the date stamped on their forehead.
Three migration paths, three trade-offs
The decision-making logic in mid-sized businesses boils down to three realistic paths. Each has a clear profile and a price that management needs to know.
Path one: Brownfield conversion. The existing ECC is upgraded to S/4HANA, with the data model and custom code migrating along with it. Advantage: short project duration, typically 14 to 18 months, with less change management required. Disadvantage: all legacy issues from the past 20 years remain in the system. If you have a grown ECC with 140 Z-reports and a custom materials management extension, you’ll be carrying that baggage along.
Path two: Greenfield with S/4HANA Cloud Public Edition. Standardization on SAP’s cloud setup. Advantage: significantly lower total cost of ownership over five years, as maintenance and updates are handled by the manufacturer. Disadvantage: less customization allowed, and the business model must align with SAP’s standard setup. We’ve seen mandates where this worked well, but also two that reverted to on-premise after 18 months.
Path three: Selective Data Transition. A deliberate selection of what is migrated and what is rebuilt in the new system. Advantage: a pragmatic cut, leaving legacy issues behind in a controlled manner. Disadvantage: high project effort, high demands on internal stakeholders who must actively support the trade-offs. This path requires a strong internal project team; otherwise, it risks devolving into an uncontrolled Greenfield project with a customization appendix.
What management must decide by 2026
The path decision is not the first step. Before that, there are a series of management questions that many mid-sized businesses haven’t honestly answered. We’ve grouped them into four blocks.
First: Which processes are currently a competitive advantage, and which are industry standard? Everything that’s standard belongs in S/4HANA’s standard workflow. Custom code at this point is an expensive legacy issue, not a differentiator.
Second: How robust is the current data model? A migration is the last realistic opportunity to clean up master data and material masters. If you miss this chance, you’ll be carrying old problems into the new system.
Third: Who needs to support the project? Management decides, the CFO pays, and the CIO builds. In mid-sized businesses, however, a fourth person often determines success: the person with the most process knowledge, who may have been with the company for 15 years and knows the ECC inside out. Without them, there’s no clean data transfer.
Fourth: How does the company handle conflicts between standard and special cases? This question may seem soft, but it’s the toughest of the four. It determines whether the project follows a standard path or spirals into customization.
Platform decision, not software update
An S/4HANA migration is rarely just a software project in mid-sized businesses. It shifts three things simultaneously: the data model is reset, processes are standardized, and the contractual basis with SAP is renegotiated.
Treating it as a software update means giving up control of the first two topics and losing negotiating leverage on the third. We often see CEOs who, at project kickoff, have only a technical goal on their slide. Eighteen months later, those same CEOs are discussing whether the implemented data model fits their sales logic. This discussion belongs at the beginning, not the end.
Honesty is required: not every migration is a success. The mandates we know ended up with operational efficiency gains ranging from +12% to zero change, with significantly higher license costs. The difference rarely lay in the technology; it almost always lay in how honestly management had examined its own process portfolio beforehand.
Migration Path Comparison: Brownfield vs. Greenfield
Brownfield (Conversion)
- Project duration 14 to 18 months, shortest path
- Custom code migrates, less change management required
- Risk: legacy issues remain in the new system
- License negotiation remains similar to the current situation
- Suitable if the process portfolio is largely viable
Greenfield (Cloud Public)
- Project duration 24 to 30 months, but a clean break
- Standard setup, low Total Cost of Ownership over five years
- Customizing reduced, business processes must adapt
- License costs more transparent, dependence on SAP’s roadmap increases
- Suitable if standardization is a strategic goal
Frequently Asked Questions
When exactly does regular SAP maintenance for Business Suite 7 end?
Mainstream Maintenance for SAP Business Suite 7 ends on December 31, 2027. From 2028, Extended Maintenance is available, but with a surcharge on the maintenance contract. Companies without a migration path by the end of 2027 will either continue with increased maintenance costs or lose manufacturer support.
Which migration path is suitable for which mid-sized company?
Brownfield conversion is suitable for companies with a viable process portfolio and a reasonable custom code proportion. Greenfield with Cloud Public Edition is suitable for mid-sized companies that approach standardization strategically. Selective Data Transition is the most demanding variant and requires an internal project team with high resilience.
What is the typical effort required for an S/4HANA migration in mid-sized companies?
Realistic project duration is between 18 and 30 months, depending on the chosen path and the complexity of the existing landscape. Budget range, depending on company size, is between one and six million Euro for implementation, licenses, and change management. Companies that calculate with significantly lower numbers either plan too small or shift costs to the period after Go-Live.
What happens if the migration is not completed by the end of 2027?
The company automatically switches to Extended Maintenance mode with a surcharge. New regulatory requirements are implemented more slowly or not at all. The negotiating position with SAP during license renewals deteriorates. Operational operations remain initially stable, but the risk profile shifts noticeably in favor of the manufacturer.
What role does the company’s own data model play in the decision?
A central one. The migration is the last realistic opportunity to consolidate grown master data and material masters. Companies that ignore data quality transfer old problems to the new system. Companies that clarify the data model question before deciding on a path gain significant speed during the project.
Editor’s Reading Recommendations
- RevOps: AI in CRM ends data silos
- Bitkom 2026: 33 percent AI cost overrun rate for CFOs
- Gartner: $2,520 billion AI spending in 2026
More from the MBF Media Network
- cloudmagazin: Platform or Facade: What Platform Engineering Must Deliver in 2026
- cloudmagazin: Compliance Costs: Architecture is Key
- Digital Chiefs: AI Governance 2026: System-Level Instead of Use-Case-Level
Source: Wikimedia Commons / Vladislav Bezrukov (CC BY 2.0)