Migrating from Indirect Access to Digital Access in S/4HANA

Migrating from Indirect Access to Digital Access in S/4HANA

Introduction – Why Transitioning to Digital Access is a Key Decision

SAP is actively encouraging customers to shift from legacy indirect access licensing to the newer digital access model. This push is framed as a way to simplify licensing and reduce ambiguity, especially for S/4HANA adopters.

However, making this transition is a significant decision that can have long-term cost and compliance implications.

Migrating to digital access can indeed reduce audit risk by clarifying what needs to be licensed. Read our ultimate guide to SAP Digital Access Licensing.

Under the new model, it’s more transparent which activities count toward licensing, potentially avoiding the “surprise” compliance findings common with indirect access.

But that transparency comes with a trade-off: long-term costs may increase if digital access to documents is numerous or grows over time.

Enterprises must approach SAP’s migration push with healthy skepticism, carefully weighing the compliance benefits against potential cost exposure.

In short, you need full clarity on how each model would impact your organization before committing to any change.

SAP Indirect Access vs Digital Access

Under SAP’s traditional indirect access model, licensing is tied to users (human or system) who indirectly interact with SAP.

For example, if an external application or a third-party system triggers an SAP transaction, each non-SAP user or device might require a named user license.

This user-based approach has been unpredictable and notoriously hard to manage. Many CIOs remember high-profile compliance cases (like the Diageo case in 2017) that highlighted how vague indirect usage definitions led to surprise audit penalties.

Indirect access can feel like a gray area – you’re trying to count every possible person or program that might touch SAP data, which is both difficult and risky.

The newer digital access model flips the script by licensing the outcome of those interactions instead of the users.

SAP defines nine specific document types (e.g., Sales Orders, Invoices, Purchase Orders, etc.) that count when created indirectly via third-party systems. Every time one of these documents is generated in SAP through an external system, it consumes a license allotment.

This shifts the metric from “how many users are indirectly accessing SAP” to “how many documents are being created via indirect access.” The advantage is greater clarity – if no defined document is created, you generally don’t incur a cost (read-only queries, for instance, are free under digital access).

The disadvantage is that volume becomes the driver: if your integrations create thousands of documents, your licensing requirements (and costs) scale with that volume.

Key difference:

Indirect access is essentially user-based (and was the default in older ERP contracts), while digital access is document-based.

In practice, indirect access felt like an open-ended risk – any new interface or user could suddenly introduce licensing liability. Digital access provides a framework for measuring usage in documents, theoretically making costs more predictable.

But “predictable” doesn’t mean “cheap” – it just means you have a clearer metric to watch (document counts instead of elusive user counts).

Below is a comparison of the two models:

Predictability:

Indirect access offers low predictability. You might think you’re compliant, then an audit reveals a third-party system enabled hundreds of unlicensed users in the background.

Digital access is more predictable because you’re focusing on known document types and can estimate volumes. That said, document volumes can spike unexpectedly with business growth or new integrations, so there’s still uncertainty – just a more quantifiable one.

Audit Risk:

With indirect access, audit risk is very high. SAP’s auditors love to find scenarios where indirect usage wasn’t properly licensed, and the penalties can be severe. Digital access doesn’t eliminate audit risk; it changes it.

You won’t be faulted for unlicensed users, but you will be if you undercount or underestimate documents. The audit focus shifts to verifying that you purchased enough document capacity. So the risk remains high if you haven’t put robust monitoring in place, though at least you know what SAP will be looking for (those nine document types).

Cost Exposure: Indirect access can carry unlimited cost exposure because there’s no natural cap – one stray integration can suddenly mean thousands of new user licenses owed. It’s a minefield of unknowns.

Digital access turns it into a volume game: costs are volume-driven. If your business or integrations generate more documents, you pay more. This exposure is more linear (e.g. X dollars per document or per block of documents), but it can still be significant if, say, your customer portal orders skyrocket.

In essence, digital access trades one kind of unpredictability for another: you won’t get caught by surprise “ghost users,” but you might be surprised by how many documents an active API can produce.

Read about SAP Digital Access, Documents licensing – SAP Digital Access Explained – Document Types, Counting Rules & Scenarios.

S/4HANA Digital Access Migration Options

When planning a move to S/4HANA (or even if you’re already on it), you have a few migration options regarding indirect vs digital access licensing:

• Stay on Indirect Access: It is perfectly valid to do nothing and remain on the legacy indirect access model (SAP even states existing customers can choose not to switch). This means continuing to license indirect usage via named user licenses or older package licenses (e.g., external order licenses). The benefit is that you avoid the immediate cost of buying digital access licenses. However, the risk of audit claims remains. If your indirect usage isn’t tightly controlled and well-documented, you’re betting that SAP won’t find any compliance gaps – a risky bet. This option might be viable in the short term for organizations with very limited third-party integrations, but it requires constant vigilance. Essentially, you’re retaining the status quo with all its pitfalls (and SAP’s auditors are only getting more aggressive over time).
• Move to Digital Access (Full Conversion): This involves formally converting to SAP’s digital document licensing model. In practice, it means purchasing a Digital Access license for your S/4HANA system and possibly trading in some of your existing user licenses for credit. SAP has offered conversion incentives, like the Digital Access Adoption Program, where customers get discounts or credits for making the switch. Going this route can eliminate the indirect use ambiguity – you pay for a known quantity of documents, and SAP agrees not to chase you for indirect named users. It often comes with a one-time cost (buying a block of documents) and then annual support on that. The challenge is estimating the right number of documents. If you convert fully, you want to avoid overbuying (wasting money on unused capacity) or underbuying (risking compliance issues if volumes are higher). Still, for man,y it brings peace of mind – you address the indirect access problem head-on and move forward under clearer rules.
• Hybrid or Temporary Approaches (Compatibility Models): Some organizations choose a middle path, at least for a transitional period. A hybrid model could mean maintaining your indirect access licenses for certain processes while incrementally adding digital access for new integrations or high-volume areas. For example, you might keep older contract protections or engine licenses (like a legacy Sales Order Processing package license) in place. Still, for a new e-commerce integration that will generate tons of orders, you opt to license those via digital access. SAP has at times provided “compatibility” licensing arrangements – essentially bridging options to ease into digital access without a full cut-over. An example is the temporary use of Compatibility Packs or specific engine metrics that cover indirect use in S/4HANA, which can defer the need for digital access licenses. These hybrid approaches can buy time to analyze usage and let you migrate in phases. The downside is complexity: you will be juggling two licensing models and must be careful not to double-pay or leave a gap. Also, many of these compatibility arrangements are time-bound (for instance, some legacy indirect use allowances or packs expire by 2025), so they are not a permanent solution. Still, as a short-term strategy, a hybrid approach can reduce immediate costs and risk while you prepare for a full digital access decision down the road.

Choosing among these options depends on your risk tolerance, the maturity of your SAP contract, and how much indirect use you have.

Some companies negotiate to retain the old model until a natural contract renewal or S/4HANA upgrade, then switch when they have maximum leverage.

The key is planning – whichever option you pick, have a roadmap so you’re not caught off guard by audits or deadlines.

For commercial insights, SAP Digital Access Pricing in 2025 – How to Calculate & Optimize Costs.

Steps to Plan a Transition to Digital Access

If you decide to evaluate or pursue a move to digital access, it’s critical to plan carefully. Rushing in without data can lead to overspending or exposure.

Here are the steps to methodically plan a transition:

1. Run SAP’s Digital Access Estimation Tool: Start by measuring your actual indirect usage. SAP provides tools (commonly known as the Digital Access Estimation Tool) that analyze your system and estimate how many of those 9 digital documents you’re generating via indirect access. By running this tool (or engaging SAP’s audit team to do an official measurement), you get a baseline count – e.g. how many sales orders, invoices, etc. are created by external systems in a year. This data is the foundation for all further planning. Tip: Treat the results cautiously. These tools can sometimes overcount (for instance, counting both a sales order and the invoice it later generates). Still, it’s the best starting point to understand your exposure in the digital access model.
2. Map Document Creation Volumes Across Systems: Don’t stop at the raw numbers – dig into where these documents are coming from. Identify all third-party applications, interfaces, or integrations that create documents in SAP. For example, you might find that your e-commerce platform is responsible for 80% of the sales orders, or a logistics system creates thousands of material documents. Create a map of “which external system triggers which document type, and how many per month/year.” This exercise not only validates the numbers from step 1, but also highlights which business processes drive your indirect usage. It’s crucial for predicting future trends – e.g., if your customer portal usage is growing 20% year-over-year, expect document counts to rise similarly. Mapping volumes by source will also help in conversations with SAP (you can explain exactly what is driving the need) and internally (business owners of those systems need to be aware of the licensing impact).
3. Compare Costs: Indirect vs Digital: With usage data in hand, perform a cost comparison between staying on the current model versus moving to digital access. This means calculating what it costs now to license indirect use (perhaps you have X named users for external parties, or you’ve been theoretically under-licensed, which is a risk cost) versus what it would cost to license the document volumes under digital access. SAP sells digital access in blocks (often in bundles of documents per year). Price out how many blocks you’d need for your estimated usage, and include the annual maintenance on those licenses. Then compare to the status quo: are you likely to face an audit true-up on indirect use? How much would additional named users or engine licenses cost to properly cover the same usage? This scenario analysis will reveal the break-even point.
   In some cases, if you have a moderate amount of indirect use, you’ll find digital access is actually more expensive than just buying a few extra named users. In other cases (lots of external activity), digital access might be cheaper or at least gives you cost certainty. The goal here is to clearly understand the financial trade-offs.
4. Identify Negotiation Windows: Timing can significantly influence the deal you get from SAP. Look at your upcoming negotiation windows – for example, do you have a major S/4HANA project on the horizon? Is your ELA (Enterprise License Agreement) or SAP annual renewal coming up? These are leverage points. SAP is often more flexible on pricing when tied to a larger sale or renewal. Many customers have gotten the best terms on digital access by bundling it as part of a broader S/4HANA migration or as they move to a RISE with SAP subscription. Identify these windows early. Ideally, plan your digital access decision to coincide with one of them. That way, you can negotiate from a position of strength, saying, “I’ll consider digital access as part of this bigger deal, but I need X, Y, Z concessions.” On the flip side, avoid making this move in a vacuum during a low-leverage period – you’ll likely pay more and have less negotiating power.

By following these steps, measure, map, cost compare, and time your move strategically, you turn the migration into a data-driven decision rather than a reaction to SAP’s sales pressure.

This preparation is key to protecting your budget and ensuring compliance on your terms.

Risks of Migrating to Digital Access Too Quickly

While the digital access model can solve some problems, jumping into it too quickly brings risks of its own.

It’s wise to be aware of these pitfalls and mitigate them during your planning:

• Overestimating document counts can inflate costs: If you overestimate how many documents you’ll need to license (or if you blindly trust SAP’s initial high quote), you could buy far more digital access capacity than necessary. Unlike named user licenses, which you might have already owned, digital document licenses could be a new expense. Overestimating by, say, 2x means you’re paying for capacity you won’t use – tying up budget that could be spent elsewhere. The estimation tools aren’t perfect; they might count conservatively or include worst-case scenarios. Be careful about SAP pushing you to license “growth” that may never materialize. It’s usually safer to start a bit lean (with some buffer) and then adjust later, rather than over-commit upfront. Remember, SAP’s sales reps have an interest in selling you as much as possible now.
• SAP’s counting rules may classify more transactions as licensable than expected: The digital access model has nuances that can surprise you. For example, you might assume certain interactions don’t count, only to later learn they do. SAP’s definitions of the 9 document types are broad – a single business process might trigger multiple document types. Also, the way SAP’s tools count (e.g., counting line items individually for sales orders and invoices) can lead to higher totals than a naive expectation. There’s also the issue of subsequent documents: SAP says only the initial creation counts, but if your systems trigger follow-on processes, you need to ensure those aren’t mistakenly counted or charged. Many companies have found that their first pass at measuring digital access yielded unexpectedly high numbers because of how the rules were applied. Without deep expertise, you risk agreeing to a deal that assumes an exaggerated usage pattern. This is why involving licensing experts or doing a proof-of-concept measurement is so important – validate what truly counts before you sign anything.
• Lock-in to the new model reduces flexibility to revert: Perhaps the biggest strategic risk is that once you migrate to digital access, there’s no easy way back. Often, switching models is a one-way door. SAP typically requires you to relinquish certain old licenses (or they’ll write contract clauses that you can’t keep using the legacy model for new usage). Suppose, down the line, you find that the digital model is costing more than anticipated. In that case, you can’t decide unilaterally to revert to named user licensing for indirect use – that bridge will likely be burned. Additionally, the move might involve trading in asset credits for a discount (which is good), but that also means those old licenses are now basically gone value-wise. You also lock yourself into counting documents annually; this introduces an ongoing administrative overhead and dependence on SAP’s metrics. In short, you lose the flexibility to choose how to license indirect usage in the future. Any change (like SAP altering the document definitions or pricing) will directly hit you, since you’ve standardised on their model. This isn’t to say you shouldn’t move to digital access – but do it when you’re confident and on favorable terms, because course-correcting later is difficult.

Negotiation Leverage During Digital Access Migration

If you decide to migrate to digital access, treat it like any major software licensing negotiation. You have opportunities to secure better terms and protect yourself, especially since SAP is keen on getting customers onto this model.

Here are key negotiation strategies to consider:

• Ask for conversion credits for legacy licenses: Most SAP customers considering digital access have already invested heavily in traditional licenses (named users, engines, etc.). When migrating, don’t pay twice for the same usage. SAP has, in many cases, offered conversion credits – essentially letting you trade in the value of unused or redundant licenses toward the cost of digital access. For example, if you bought a bunch of extra named user licenses in the past to cover indirect scenarios, ask SAP to credit their license fee towards the document licenses. Ideally, you want a near 100% credit: every dollar you spent on those now-obsolete licenses applies to the new model. This was a core part of SAP’s Adoption Program (some customers got credits or discounts that effectively meant a free conversion). Even if you’re past the formal program window, bring it up. Emphasize how much you’ve already invested under the old model – it’s reasonable to expect a break when shifting to the new one.
• Negotiate document caps or tiered pricing: One of the biggest concerns with digital access is an unexpected surge in documents, which can lead to significant costs. To alleviate this, negotiate protections into your contract. A common ask is a volume cap – for instance, agree that your license covers up to a certain number of documents per year. If you accidentally go over, SAP will not immediately penalize you or will allow a grace period. Alternatively, negotiate tiered pricing for growth. Maybe the first 100,000 documents cost X per unit, the next 100,000 cost a bit less, and so on (a volume discount built into the contract). At minimum, try to lock in the price for additional documents if you need to buy more later (so SAP can’t gouge you in year 3 when you’re committed). Another angle is an annual true-up cap – e.g. any overage in a year can be purchased at the same discount as the initial purchase, or limited to, say, 10% over the licensed volume. The goal is to avoid open-ended financial exposure. Make SAP share some of the risk of growth, especially since they tout digital access as “scalable” – insist on scalability with predictable cost.
• Bundle the migration with broader S/4HANA or RISE deals: As mentioned earlier, aligning your digital access move with a larger negotiation can significantly improve your leverage. If you are in the process of moving to S/4HANA, use that to your advantage – SAP wants those conversions to be success stories and may throw in incentives. For example, you could negotiate that as you migrate to S/4HANA, you’ll adopt digital access, but you want a heavy discount or even some free initial volume as part of the deal. Similarly, if you are considering RISE with SAP (the cloud subscription offering), note that RISE inherently changes the licensing model (many indirect usage scenarios are included or handled differently under a subscription). You can negotiate the terms of digital access as part of your RISE contract. SAP might be willing to be more lenient on digital access charges if it means landing a big RISE contract. Always look at the total relationship: SAP cares about your overall spend and commitment. By bundling, you make the digital access just one component of a bigger agreement, giving you more chips on the table to trade. For instance, you might agree to a longer-term S/4HANA commitment or additional cloud products in exchange for a deeper discount or favorable terms on digital access. This way, both sides win – you get a safer deal, SAP gets the migration it wants.

In all negotiations, maintain a buyer-first mindset. SAP’s sales team is motivated to transition you, but you should only do it on terms that make sense for your business.

Leverage whatever you can from your past investments, competitive alternatives, and the timing to ensure the digital access model is adopted in a way that minimizes risk and cost.

Checklist – Planning Your S/4HANA Digital Access Migration

Before finalizing any move from indirect to digital access, use this checklist to ensure you’ve covered all the essential planning and protections:

• Run a Digital Access estimation tool to calculate your document counts. Get a data-driven view of how many documents your interfaces create.
• Compare indirect vs. digital licensing costs under multiple scenarios. Model best-case, worst-case, and expected costs for both models.
• Document all systems and integrations that trigger document creation. Know exactly where indirect usage comes from in your landscape.
• Negotiate conversion credits for any existing licenses you’ll retire. Ensure you get financial credit for the investments already made under the old model.
• Secure contractual caps or protections against unbounded cost growth. Include terms that guard you against volume spikes or price hikes.
• Align the migration with S/4HANA upgrades or RISE negotiations. Timing the switch during a broader SAP deal can yield better discounts and terms.

By following this checklist and the guidance above, you can approach the transition to SAP’s digital access model in a practical, strategic way.

The goal is to mitigate compliance risk without handing SAP a blank check.

With careful planning, you can turn SAP’s push for digital access into an opportunity to negotiate a fair, future-proof licensing agreement for your S/4HANA landscape.

Read about our SAP Advisory Services

Do you want to know more about our SAP Advisory Services?

Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.

Name *

Email *

Company

Message *

Submit