💡 Why Every Enterprise Needs an Independent SAP Technology Architect Before Signing a RISE with SAP Private Edition Contract By Kourosh Ghouchkhani – SAP Cloud Architect | RISE with SAP Expert | S/4
- Kourosh Ghouchkhani
- Oct 11
- 3 min read
With over 20 years of hands-on SAP experience, I’ve led global S/4HANA transformations, RISE with SAP programs, and cloud migrations across AWS, Azure, and GCP for some of the world’s largest enterprises.
Throughout my career, I’ve seen both innovation and chaos — brilliant transformations and costly mistakes caused by poor architectural decisions and lack of governance.
Recently, I was asked to consult for a client who migrated to RISE with SAP Private Edition, and what I found was alarming:
A standalone SAP architecture running 24/7 global operations, full of single points of failure, with multiple overlapping support vendors, and millions of dollars wasted in license and SLA costs.
That experience reinforced a simple truth:
💬 Never sign your RISE contract without an independent SAP Technology Architect validating your design.
🚧 The Misconception: “RISE Will Handle It All”
RISE with SAP is often marketed as a one-stop digital transformation.
In reality, RISE is a commercial framework — not a technical architecture.
It defines who owns what, not how it should be built.
Without proper architectural oversight, enterprises often end up:
Accepting generic, one-size-fits-all designs that ignore global operations or compliance requirements.
Running business-critical systems on 97.9% SLAs (equivalent to ~8 days of potential downtime per year).
Paying up to 50% more in licensing to reach 99.9% uptime.
Contracting multiple 3rd parties for app and user support, fragmenting accountability.
And the biggest gap of all — no governance through SAP ALM or extensibility control via SAP BTP — turning what should be a modern, governed environment into a costly black box.
💣 How These Problems Begin
Presales Without Architecture
Many RISE contracts are sold before any deep architecture or ALM strategy review.
Technical debt starts the day the contract is signed.
Fragmented Ownership
SAP owns the SLA but outsources operations to partners. Hyperscalers host the infrastructure.
Customers handle integrations and extensions.
👉 No one owns the full end-to-end system — or the lifecycle management around it.
No ALM Strategy
Without SAP Cloud ALM or Solution Manager, there’s no traceability between requirements, testing, transports, or incidents.
This leads to weak change governance, missed regression testing, and uncontrolled modifications — exactly what Clean Core was meant to prevent.
Ignoring BTP as the Innovation Layer
Many migrations “lift and shift” Z-programs and custom code directly into S/4HANA instead of decoupling and extending via BTP.
This not only inflates the HANA footprint but locks customers out of innovation — making every upgrade a high-risk project.
Overpriced DR and SLA Models
Enterprises pay hundreds of millions to shorten DR from 12 to 4 hours because of poor architecture design — not business necessity.
Proper multi-zone, multi-region design and automation could have achieved this for a fraction of the cost.
🧱 The Role of an Independent SAP Technology Architect
A seasoned SAP Technology Architect acts as the customer’s advocate, bridging commercial, technical, and operational realities.
Before signing a RISE contract, an architect will:
Assess your landscape, integrations, and true business SLAs.
Design a scalable, fault-tolerant architecture leveraging native hyperscaler and SAP capabilities.
Implement SAP Cloud ALM for governance, traceability, and lifecycle control.
Define a BTP strategy for side-by-side extensions, integration, and innovation without compromising the Clean Core.
Negotiate SLA terms that align with business needs — not generic templates.
Govern the migration through the SAP Activate methodology to ensure best practices and quality gates are followed.
This holistic oversight prevents long-term inefficiency, compliance risk, and multi-million-dollar rework costs.
⚠️ Why SAP and Partners Often Miss This Gap
SAP remains primarily a software company, not a managed service provider. Under RISE, much of the hands-on work is delegated to certified partners.
These partners often focus on their contracted scope — not the end-to-end architecture or governance model.
Without a strong architect:
ALM remains unimplemented.
BTP remains unused or misunderstood.
Activate methodology becomes a checklist instead of a governance framework.
The result? A technically fragmented, operationally expensive SAP landscape that fails to meet its business case.
🧭 The Lesson for Every Enterprise
Before you sign a RISE with SAP contract:
Engage an independent SAP Technology Architect.
Insist on an ALM strategy for transparency and control.
Build a BTP roadmap to decouple custom extensions and preserve a Clean Core.
Validate HA/DR, integration, and SLA design against your true operational requirements.
Clarify the boundaries between SAP, hyperscaler, and operate partners — and own your architecture.
✅ In Summary
“RISE with SAP can deliver incredible value — but only when designed with architecture, governance, and extensibility in mind.”
An independent SAP architect ensures your transformation is powered by strong architecture, governed by ALM, and extended intelligently via BTP — not burdened by complexity, redundancy, or runaway cost.
If your enterprise is planning or struggling with its RISE journey, let’s connect.
I’ve helped organizations stabilize, modernize, and optimize their RISE landscapes — aligning architecture, performance, and cost for long-term success.
Comments