# SAP Integration Readiness Assessment > Source: https://netray.co/tools/sap-integration-pattern-readiness-assessment > Publisher: Netray (netray.co), AI and integration engineering for ERP and manufacturing systems. > Section: Free Tools ## Short answer Answer ten questions about interfaces, monitoring, API use, security and ownership to see how ready your SAP integration landscape is for change. ## Category sap ## Erp SAP ECC / S/4HANA ## Audience - SAP integration architect - SAP program manager - IT manager ## Tool **Kind:** assessment **Questions:** #### Do you have a current inventory of all SAP interfaces? **Help:** Include IDoc, RFC, file, OData, SOAP and database links. **Options:** ##### No inventory exists **Score:** 0 ##### Partial list in spreadsheets **Score:** 1 ##### Full list but not maintained **Score:** 2 ##### Maintained inventory with owner per interface **Score:** 3 #### How do you monitor interface failures? **Options:** ##### Users report problems **Score:** 0 ##### Someone checks WE05 or BD87 occasionally **Score:** 1 ##### Scheduled reports or alerts for key interfaces **Score:** 2 ##### Central monitoring with alerts and runbooks **Score:** 3 #### How is middleware used for integration? **Options:** ##### Mostly point-to-point connections **Score:** 0 ##### Mixed, with some middleware **Score:** 1 ##### Most flows through a platform such as PI/PO or Integration Suite **Score:** 2 ##### Platform with standard patterns and reusable templates **Score:** 3 #### How current is your API and IDoc strategy for S/4HANA? **Options:** ##### No strategy **Score:** 0 ##### Ad hoc decisions per project **Score:** 1 ##### Written guidelines on when to use IDoc, RFC or OData **Score:** 2 ##### Guidelines enforced through design review **Score:** 3 #### How are interface technical users and authorizations managed? **Options:** ##### Shared dialog users or SAP_ALL **Score:** 0 ##### Separate users but broad roles **Score:** 1 ##### Technical users with restricted roles **Score:** 2 ##### Restricted roles, reviewed regularly, credentials rotated **Score:** 3 #### How do you handle IDoc and message error recovery? **Options:** ##### Manual fix with no process **Score:** 0 ##### Known people reprocess when told **Score:** 1 ##### Documented steps per error type **Score:** 2 ##### Automated retry plus documented ownership **Score:** 3 #### How do you test interface changes? **Options:** ##### Tested in production **Score:** 0 ##### Manual tests in quality system **Score:** 1 ##### Documented regression cases **Score:** 2 ##### Automated tests with realistic data **Score:** 3 #### How controlled is data growth from IDocs and logs? **Options:** ##### Not tracked **Score:** 0 ##### Tracked but not archived **Score:** 1 ##### Archiving jobs exist for some objects **Score:** 2 ##### Retention policy with archiving and deletion running **Score:** 3 #### How well documented are interface specifications? **Options:** ##### Only in the code **Score:** 0 ##### Documents exist but are outdated **Score:** 1 ##### Current specs for most interfaces **Score:** 2 ##### Current specs with mappings, volumes and contacts **Score:** 3 #### Do you know the volume and criticality of each interface? **Options:** ##### No **Score:** 0 ##### For a few key interfaces **Score:** 1 ##### For most interfaces **Score:** 2 ##### For all, with service levels agreed **Score:** 3 **Bands:** #### Reactive **Min:** 0 **Max:** 35 **Verdict:** Your integration landscape depends on individuals and manual checks. Failures are likely to be found by users, and changes carry high risk. **Recommendations:** - Build an interface inventory with an owner for each entry - Schedule dispatch and processing jobs and a daily check of error statuses - Replace shared or SAP_ALL technical users with restricted roles #### Developing **Min:** 35 **Max:** 65 **Verdict:** Key interfaces are covered, but monitoring, testing and documentation are uneven. Gaps appear when staff change or the landscape moves to S/4HANA. **Recommendations:** - Write down error runbooks for the five noisiest interfaces - Agree a rule for choosing IDoc, RFC or OData for new work - Set up regression tests for the most critical flows #### Managed **Min:** 65 **Max:** 85 **Verdict:** You have solid practices for most interfaces. The next gains come from automation and consistency across teams. **Recommendations:** - Automate retries and alerting for known error patterns - Review archiving and retention for fast-growing tables - Standardize templates for new interfaces #### Optimized **Min:** 85 **Max:** 100 **Verdict:** Your integration practice is well governed. Focus on keeping documentation current and preparing for platform changes. **Recommendations:** - Review the inventory against the S/4HANA and cloud roadmap - Measure interface service levels and publish them - Share your patterns as reusable guidelines ## Content **Intro:** Integration is usually where an SAP program slips, because nobody owns the whole picture. This short assessment scores ten practical areas and gives you a place to start. **Sections:** #### How to use the assessment **Body:** Answer based on what actually happens today, not what policy says. Run it with a developer, a Basis administrator and a functional owner and compare answers, as differences often reveal the real gaps. The score places you in one of four bands, each with next steps. #### What the questions measure **Body:** The questions cover visibility (inventory, specifications, volumes), operations (monitoring, error recovery, data growth), engineering (middleware, strategy, testing) and security (technical users and roles). Weakness in visibility makes every later step harder, because you cannot monitor or migrate what you cannot list. #### Using the result for S/4HANA planning **Body:** Moving to S/4HANA changes interfaces: some IDoc and BAPI scenarios continue, some are replaced by released APIs and events, and custom code may need adaptation. A mature inventory with volumes and owners lets you sort interfaces into keep, redesign and retire before the project starts instead of during testing. #### Common mistakes **Body:** Scoring on intent rather than reality is the main one. Another is treating the result as a tool decision when it is mostly about ownership, naming and routine. **Cta:** Netray works with SAP partners on integration support and private assistants over SAP data. If your result shows monitoring gaps, ask for an expert review. **Faq:** #### Does a low score mean we need new middleware? **Answer:** Not necessarily. Many low scores come from missing ownership, jobs and documentation, which you can fix inside the current setup. New middleware helps with standardization and reuse, but it will not fix interfaces that nobody watches. #### How often should we repeat the assessment? **Answer:** Once or twice a year works for most teams, and again before a major project such as an S/4HANA conversion. Compare answers over time to see whether practices improved. #### Should IDocs be replaced by APIs? **Answer:** Not as a blanket rule. IDocs remain well suited to asynchronous, high-volume business documents and are supported in S/4HANA. APIs fit synchronous, lookup and app-driven needs. Decide per use case and document the guideline. #### Who should answer the questions? **Answer:** Ask the people who run the interfaces day to day: integration developers, Basis and support. Add a functional owner for business criticality. Answers from a single manager tend to be more optimistic than reality. ## Search terms sap integration assessment, sap interface inventory, sap integration maturity, s/4hana integration readiness, sap idoc to api migration, sap integration strategy checklist, sap middleware assessment, sap interface governance --- Talk to an engineer: https://netray.co/contact?intent=erp_ai | Machine catalog: https://netray.co/agent/catalog.json