A multinational retailer reconstructed its integration topology, requalified four interfaces, and converted only the residual exposure to Digital Access at a defended price.
Every result on this site is anonymised at the client's request. Specific figures are real and verifiable through a confidentiality-protected reference call arranged on request.
The retailer operates roughly 1,400 stores across North America and Europe and runs a hybrid SAP estate — ECC for finance and supply chain in the parent company, S/4HANA in two recently acquired subsidiaries. Salesforce Service Cloud is the customer-record system of record, integrated bi-directionally with SAP via middleware. A custom e-commerce platform writes orders into SAP. ServiceNow integrates with SAP for incident-to-asset workflows. An EDI gateway exchanges purchase orders with several hundred suppliers.
SAP's audit notification arrived through the regional account team and was immediately escalated to a Global Audit Compliance review. The opening claim was eleven point one million dollars in indirect-access exposure, calculated by counting the unique customer records that had been touched by SAP from non-SAP origin systems over the prior two years, multiplied by a Professional user list price, with no volume discount applied.
The retailer's IT team had a defensible position but no licensing vocabulary to articulate it. Two earlier informal discussions with the account team had already conceded that the integrations existed, that they were ‘significant’, and that ‘something would need to be true-upped’. By the time the formal letter arrived, the conversational ground was already lost.
The board mandated outside counsel to take over the file and demanded a closed position before the year-end audit committee.
We took the engagement and re-opened the procedural questions from the beginning. The first letter to SAP withdrew the prior informal concessions and re-anchored the discussion on the four interfaces individually rather than as an aggregate exposure. We requested SAP's evidence base for the ‘unique customer record’ counting method and required SAP to identify, for each interface, which contract clause supported the claim.
We then rebuilt the integration topology from the architecture diagrams and the middleware logs. We documented, interface by interface, the direction of data flow, the volume of distinct documents, the human-vs-system origination ratio, and the contract-language definitions that applied. The four interfaces split cleanly into three categories: two were configuration data flows with no chargeable use under the licence in force; one was a true indirect-use exposure but at one quarter of the claimed volume; and one was a candidate for Digital Access conversion under the SAP DAE contract framework available at the time of the audit.
On the Salesforce-to-SAP customer flow, we demonstrated that the ‘unique customer record’ counting method had no basis in the contract definitions. The contract used a Document-type definition that, applied correctly, produced an indirect-use exposure approximately one tenth of the opening claim. We provided SAP with the corrected calculation and a defensible audit trail.
For the residual exposure that did warrant some form of licensing, we modelled Digital Access against three pricing tiers and negotiated a measurement cap, a six-month true-up protection window, and a definition of countable documents that explicitly excluded internal system-to-system traffic.
Settlement closed at one million nine hundred thousand dollars in Digital Access conversion costs against an opening claim of eleven point one million dollars in indirect-access exposure. The reduction was approximately eighty-three per cent. No Named User true-up was required as part of the settlement.
The Digital Access conversion was structured with a measurement cap valid for three years, automatic re-measurement on each anniversary, and explicit exclusion language for the configuration data flows that had been incorrectly counted in the opening claim. The audit-rights clause was tightened to require sixty days' notice and to define an explicit data-exchange protocol.
Total elapsed time from notification to signed settlement was sixteen weeks, including a four-week pause while SAP's regional team escalated the document-classification dispute internally.
We had already conceded the argument before we knew there was an argument. They reopened it, and turned an eleven-million-dollar number into one point nine.
Salesforce, ServiceNow, custom portals, RPA, EDI. Every interface into SAP that does not run through a Named User. We defend, requalify, and where useful convert.
Read the brief →Should you convert? At what document-price tier? We model the nine document types against your real transaction volume, and negotiate caps, floors, and re-measurement protection.
Read the brief →Diageo, Anheuser-Busch, and what the case law actually means for Salesforce, ServiceNow, RPA, and EDI in your SAP estate.
The nine document types, the volume tiers, and the negotiation levers most procurement teams never use.
How a global logistics operator reset its DAE measurement and saved $4.2M over a five-year window.
It is the opening position of a negotiation. Speak with a specialist before responding. The first conversation is at no cost and under privilege.
Contact Us →Every Wednesday. Field reports from active matters, decoded SAP communications, and what to look for in the next audit cycle. Work email only.