Roger & Roger: preparing for SAP S/4HANA 2025 without disrupting the business

Upgrading SAP is never only a technical exercise. For Roger & Roger, preparing for SAP S/4HANA 2025 meant combining technical preparation, functional alignment and business testing, while keeping the impact on operations to a minimum.

We spoke with Koen Van Ceulebroeck, IT director from Roger & Roger and Dicofoods about the choices behind the project, the challenges along the way and the lessons he would share with other organizations preparing their own SAP S/4HANA transition.

What made Roger & Roger decide to prepare for SAP S/4HANA 2025?

Koen: Our previous SAP version would no longer be supported from January 2025, so an upgrade was necessary. We deliberately decided to move directly to SAP S/4HANA 2025 SP1 and skipped the 2023 version. We wanted to avoid completing an upgrade only to find ourselves facing another one shortly afterwards. That made us one of the first companies that made the move to SAP S/4HANA 2025 SP1.

It was therefore both a necessary step and a conscious choice to prepare for the newest target version.

What were your biggest concerns before the project started?

Koen: One of the main risks was that the target version was not yet available when we started preparing the project. We prepared everything with no clear view on the launch date in the beginning, which made us early adopters in this version.

That meant we needed to manage the technical and functional work carefully and make sure both sides remained aligned.

What were the biggest challenges during the project, and how did you address them?

Koen: Coordinating the technical and functional activities was one of the key challenges. Strong project management and careful planning helped us keep both sides aligned throughout the project. Although oXya was primarily our technical partner, they also understood the functional side and actively thought along with us, which brought real added value.

That close collaboration also meant that whenever an issue came up, we could address it directly and find a solution quickly. This was particularly important given the constraints of our production environment, where maintenance windows are limited. It required flexibility from both sides to plan and execute the work around the needs of the business.

How would you describe the collaboration with oXya?

Koen: We worked very closely with Thierry, who took the lead from oXya’s side and was our single point of contact throughout the project. He has a very structured and critical approach, which is exactly what you need in a project like this. Whenever we started looking beyond the agreed scope or risked losing focus, he helped bring us back to what really mattered.

Another advantage is that oXya works with relatively small teams who know our company and our environment very well. That familiarity meant there were very few surprises during the project. There weren’t unnecessary layers or long communication chains either. We worked with people we knew, so when something came up, we could discuss it directly and find a solution together.

That was particularly important because we operate in a production environment with very limited maintenance windows. oXya was already familiar with these constraints and showed the flexibility needed to work around them. At certain stages of the project, that meant working weekends, long days and sometimes short nights to make sure the business could continue as usual.

That level of flexibility and commitment is something we really appreciated throughout the project.

How did this project compare with previous SAP upgrades or transformation projects?

Koen: One of the important differences was the clearer separation of responsibilities.

Keeping the technical and functional responsibilities distinct created more clarity in the project. Everyone knew where their responsibility started and ended, while both sides still worked closely together.

Looking back, what was the biggest outcome of the project?

Koen: The most important outcome was that we went live successfully without the business disruption we had been concerned about beforehand. We had even cleared our calendars for Monday because we expected there might be some issues that needed our attention after the go-live. In the end, that wasn’t necessary. The business was able to continue as usual, which was probably the best outcome we could have hoped for.

Testing played an important role in achieving that. We involved process owners from the business in a structured testing approach, allowing us to validate the key processes before go-live. All business owners also joined us during the weekend to test their processes after the migration was finished. That preparation gave us confidence and ultimately helped ensure a smooth restart on Monday.

What advice would you give organizations preparing for their own SAP S/4HANA transition?

Koen: I would focus on three things.

First, clearly separate technical and functional responsibilities. Make sure everyone knows what they own.

Second, appoint one central project lead who maintains the overview and coordinates the different workstreams.

And third, involve the business early and formally in testing. Process owners should be part of the process and acceptance testing, rather than bringing them in only towards the end.

These elements help create clarity throughout the project and reduce surprises when you get closer to go-live.

Facing a similar SAP challenge?

Whether you’re preparing for a transformation, migration or looking to strengthen your SAP operations, our experts are happy to discuss your situation and share what we’ve learned from similar projects.