Skip to content

When to request an independent SAP BTP architecture review

Use this page to decide whether the issue should stop being internally absorbed. If the decision no longer converges, move to a fixed‑scope review.

Decision triggers

Why continuing internally may feel safer — and still increase risk

Familiar delivery motions lower friction, not risk. When the failure is jurisdiction across boundaries, more implementation entrenches the wrong contract and delays the decision.

What you probably do not need me for

What to send

Send one structured page:

  1. Landscape — S/4, BTP runtimes, entry surfaces, identity
  2. Divergence — what works where; what fails where
  3. Timeline — go‑live, rollout, recent changes
  4. Ownership — who holds what today
  5. Decision — the choice that cannot converge
Send structured summary Use intake template See verdict services

Which service path this usually maps to

What happens next

I confirm whether the situation matches a boundary failure pattern. If appropriate, we proceed with a fixed‑scope review, audit, or verdict authority format — defined in writing, time‑bounded, and outcome‑specific. No sales funnel.

Related entry points: SAP BTP Architecture Review · SAP BTP Extension Audit · SAP BTP Post-Go-Live Failure Assessment

For the model behind this assessment, see the Boundary Model. For essays, see Insights.