Maximizing the value of OneStream when migrating from SAP BPC

Implementation approach

Before I go into further detail about the best implementation approach, I want to make it clear that both SAP BPC and OneStream are very good, flexible consolidation systems, with OneStream being one of the logical choices when you are a customer going through a vendor selection process to replace SAP BPC.

At the beginning of implementation, it is important to establish a clear end goal and ambition based on design principles. For example, a design principle could be:

"using standard functionalities as much as possible"

We see that many SAP BPC customers are now replacing their consolidation system because of the expiration of support. Without this trigger, the SAP BPC system might have continued to function for many years, but now the customer will be busy transitioning to the new system. Here we see a few key approaches:

Migrate as much as possible one-to-one from SAP BPC to OneStream

Of course, it is tempting to do this. The user is faced with a new system and process, so it seems attractive to provide a system that is as similar as possible to the one he or she is used to. Moreover, there are often many good solutions in the current system that would be useful to adopt in the new system. But the biggest pitfall is that migrating one-to-one will always be a much more difficult implementation process than expected. Essentially, the new system will not bring anything new and, moreover, will adopt the problems or shortcomings of the current system. As a result, current bottlenecks will not be resolved.

Redesign the consolidation system and process based on the core functionalities of the new consolidation system

In this approach, the requirements will be no different than in the previous approach, but the design will be based on how OneStream's best practices can best meet these requirements. In addition, changing a consolidation system provides an excellent time to fix problems or inefficiencies caused by the current system, or to clean up the hierarchies.

Based on our experience implementing consolidation systems, we see that this approach leads to better results. However, it requires that the consultant has a good understanding of the current system, and that the client has a good understanding of how the new system will work.

Most importantly, the client must be willing to "let go" of certain aspects and the client and consultant must work closely together and understand each other well. This collaboration is essential for a successful implementation that truly leverages the benefits of the new system.

Conclusion and advice

As mentioned earlier, both SAP BPC and OneStream are very good consolidation systems in which "anything" is really possible. However, the way something is set up sometimes differs. An example of a difference is the way of consolidation: in SAP BPC, not only do you run a consolidation as a separate task, but you also run opening balances separately. In OneStream, when you run a consolidation, all calculations, translations, and so on, are done at once. However, you have to pay close attention to which consolidation entity you select when running the consolidation.

Another example is that from the end-user perspective, SAP BPC is heavily Excel-based, while OneStream takes a different approach to the user experience, although it also provides a good Excel interface. However, attempts to rebuild the exact same Excel-based forms in OneStream will not lead to the best results. Instead, follow our suggested approach:

• Keep in mind the requirements
• See how OneStream can best meet these requirements
• Implement using OneStream's best practices
• Involve users in getting used to the new solution. Eventually they will understand why something is new, as long as you explain what will be new and why it is different

If you are interested in more details and examples, please do not hesitate to contact me or my colleagues.