One of KBJ’s key specializations is the maintenance and development of ERP systems. At the same time, there are many companies on the market that choose not to have ongoing support for their systems. Leaving aside the reasons for such an approach, let’s try to list the main reasons why it’s worth partnering with an external provider:

W.B.: That’s true. Modern SAP environments are becoming increasingly complex, especially in large organizations. We see this every day, working with companies across various industries — from manufacturing and services to the public sector. For many of them, the ERP system is not just an operational tool, but the foundation of their entire business model. Ensuring the stability and performance of such installations is a major technological, human, and financial challenge.

That’s why more and more organizations are choosing to entrust the maintenance of their SAP systems to an external partner. In my opinion, three key factors drive this decision: access to expertise, operational security, and flexibility in development.

What does that mean in practice?

W.B.: First — expertise. Maintaining an in-house team of SAP specialists is difficult and expensive today. Technologies evolve, requirements increase, and the availability of experts on the market is limited. We provide access to a team that understands not only the technology, but also business processes.

Second — security. By working with us, clients gain assurance of system continuity, rapid incident response, regulatory compliance, and full control over their IT environment. We operate based on clearly defined SLA parameters and measurable quality indicators.

Third — flexibility. We don’t impose ready-made models. We adapt to the client’s organizational structure, processes, and pace of change. We can either extend the IT team or take full responsibility for system maintenance.

What about the announced end of support for older generations of SAP systems?

W.B.: Of course, the end of support for SAP ECC is a significant trigger for action, but it’s not the only one. In practice, many organizations had already recognized the need to organize and secure their SAP environment. The approaching end of standard support for older SAP ECC-based installations only accelerates decisions that were inevitable anyway.

In such cases, it’s not about “keeping the system alive”; it’s about ensuring its stability today and enabling development tomorrow — without pressure, without risk, and without costly mistakes.

How does this look in practice?

W.B.: We don’t force our clients using older SAP ERP generations into a rapid migration to S/4HANA. Instead, we support them in gradually modernizing their IT environment. A good example is our cooperation with a manufacturing sector client, where we support the entire SAP landscape in Poland — from ERP, through data warehouses and analytical tools, to dedicated SAP solutions and SAP BASIS technology support. This includes hundreds of interfaces. The overarching goal is for the client to focus on development projects, knowing that ongoing maintenance is in good hands — including the onboarding of new areas resulting from development initiatives.

We’ve been running this project for several years. To illustrate the complexity, just last year our team conducted dozens of preventive and corrective analyses, took over maintenance of several new areas, and participated in dozens of projects — both local and global. Our approach is based on precisely defined processes and indicators. The cooperation began with taking over support from a global provider — including full knowledge transfer, backlog cleanup, and database management organization. The entire process was completed on schedule and without disruption to end users.

The results? In the past year, we achieved an SLA request fulfilment rate exceeding 99%. End-user service quality ratings remain near the maximum, and the client involvement required to resolve requests is at the lowest possible level.

By choosing to work with us, the client didn’t have to build these competencies internally — they could leverage our experience and flexible cooperation model tailored to their needs. We don’t operate like a typical service provider. This cooperation is an example of a partnership model — both operationally and at the management level. Our team works with the client’s local and global structures, participates in projects, takes over new areas, and supports users in both Polish and English.

So, does external support make sense?

W.B.: From our experience, one thing is clear: well-organized, partnership-based SAP support is not a cost — it’s an investment in the stability, security, and growth of the organization. In a world where technology evolves faster than internal structures can keep up, an external partner becomes not just support, but a real element of operational advantage.

That’s why we believe that entrusting SAP system maintenance to an experienced partner is not just a response to the end of vendor support. It’s a conscious choice — based on risk analysis, needs, and capabilities. And more and more companies are making that choice.