Topic starter
25/06/2026 12:46 am
TL;DR: SAP S/4HANA migration can weaken governance when custom code, integrations, and business workflows change faster than controls are remapped, according to SafePaaS. Control ownership and access continuity need to travel with the migration, or approvals, reconciliations, and exception handling can drift.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by SafePaaS: “Handling Common Challenges in SAP S/4HANA Migration”.
Key questions
Q: When does SAP migration create the most risk for IAM and controls teams?
A: Risk rises when custom code, integrations, and data cleanup happen at the same time as business process change.
Q: What are the signs that migration controls are failing in an SAP programme?
A: Common signs include unclear control ownership, inconsistent master data, unresolved interface dependencies, and users relying on old approval habits after training.
Q: What breaks when SAP S/4HANA migration is not governed as a control programme?
A: Controls tied to legacy workflows, integrations, and master data can stop matching the new process environment even when the technical migration succeeds.
Practitioner guidance
- Map controls to migration workstreams Tie each key business control to a specific migration workstream so ownership is explicit across custom code, integrations, data, and cutover tasks.
- Validate interfaces before cutover Test connectivity between the new SAP environment and ITSM systems, third-party applications, and legacy data flows before go-live.
- Treat data cleanup as governance work Review obsolete customers, unused materials, duplicates, and inconsistent master data with access and process owners, not just technical teams.
Bottom line: SAP S/4HANA migration can weaken governance when custom code, integrations, and business workflows change faster than controls are remapped.
Glossary terms: Control Continuity, Change Management, Data Cleanup, Migration Workstream
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →
This topic was modified 1 day ago by NHI Mgmt Group
25/06/2026 9:46 am
ERP migration exposes control drift before it exposes technical failure: The biggest risk in SAP S/4HANA migration is not that the platform cannot run, but that the existing control model no longer matches the new operating reality. Custom code, integrations, and business process changes can all move faster than governance can recertify ownership and authorization paths. The practitioner lesson is that migration planning has to treat controls as dependencies, not as afterthoughts.
A question worth separating out:
Q: Who should own control readiness during an SAP S/4HANA migration?
A: Business owners, IAM, ITSM, and controls teams should share accountability, but one function must own the post-go-live process map. If no one is accountable for approvals, escalation, and exception handling, users will create workarounds that weaken the new control model.
👉 Read our full editorial: SAP S/4HANA migration exposes IAM and control gaps teams miss
This post was modified 1 day ago by NHI Mgmt Group