Organizational Models for SAP BW Project Teams in International Offshore and Onshore Delivery Structures
Keywords:
SAP BW, SAP S/4HANA, offshore delivery, onshore delivery, distributed teams, reporting reproducibility, data quality, ERP transformation, testing governance, delivery modelAbstract
This article examines the link between team organization, reporting stability, data reliability, and post-go-live trust in SAP BW environments affected by SAP S/4HANA transformation. Migration programs now unfold under budget pressure, legacy complexity, fragmented ownership, and narrow testing windows. These conditions shift part of project risk from technical conversion into coordination, verification, and decision control across delivery units. The study explains which delivery structures retain control over source extraction, transformation logic, reconciliation, and reporting validation across international offshore and onshore settings. The analytical base combines recent scholarly publications with industry benchmark reports selected for their relevance to ERP post-implementation stability, distributed software collaboration, data governance, and S/4HANA migration pressure. The article develops a conceptual reading of centralized, hybrid, and fragmented team models and formulates practical principles for team design, escalation governance, testing sequence, and monitoring. The proposed interpretation connects delivery structure with the durability of reporting outcomes after go-live.
References
[1] Holland, R. (2024, March). SAP S/4HANA migration: Benchmark report. SAPinsider. https://sapinsider.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/SAPinsider-2024-03-SAP-S4HANA-Migration-Report.pdf
[2] Chang, Y.-W., & Chen, J. (2025). An empirical investigation of critical success factors in implementing digital transformation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 217, 124161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2025.124161
[3] Chang, Y. (2025). Analyzing the impact of ERP and BI integration on business performance: The technology-organization-environment framework and balanced scorecard perspective. Journal of Global Information Management (JGIM), 33(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.4018/JGIM.389254
[4] Bernardo, B. M. V., Mamede, H. S., Barroso, J. M. P., & Santos, V. M. P. D. (2024). Data governance & quality management—Innovation and breakthroughs across different fields. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 9(4), 100598. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2024.100598
[5] Acev, D., Biyani, S., Rieder, F., et al. (2025). Systematic analysis of data governance frameworks and their relevance to data trusts. Management Review Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-025-00545-1
[6] Butarbutar, Z. T., Handayani, P. W., Suryono, R. R., & Wibowo, W. S. (2023). Systematic literature review of critical success factors on enterprise resource planning post implementation. Cogent Business & Management, 10(3). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2264001
[7] Andrade, A. S. L. de, Jackson, V., Prikladnicki, R., & van der Hoek, A. (2024). On meetings involving remote software teams: A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology, 175, 107541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2024.107541
[8] Alzoubi, Y. I., & Mishra, A. (2024). Enterprise architecture contribution in distributed agile software development. Systems Engineering, 27, 570–584. https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21739
[9] Nakayama, M., Hustad, E., Sutcliffe, N., & Beckfield, M. (2024). Organic transformation of ERP documentation practices: Moving from archival records to dialogue-based, agile throwaway documents. International Journal of Information Management, 74, 102717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102717
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Baris Ozcan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors who submit papers with this journal agree to the following terms.
