Case study iii · SAP · Audit Defence · Contingency

Manufacturing group settles an $18M SAP audit claim for $1.2M.

A global industrial manufacturer received an indirect access finding claiming $18M in unlicensed use. SAP asserted that all users of downstream CRM, MES and BI platforms required Named User licences. Existing SAP licensing was already $12M a year; the claim represented a 150% step-up.

Result · $16.8M Reduction

The engagement

What Admodum did.

Verified the scope of audit rights in the contract documents.
Technical analysis showed 8 of 12 cited integrations were unidirectional output creating no SAP transactions.
Cross-referenced the claim methodology against SAP's published indirect access policies; identified inconsistencies.
Prepared the technical and contractual response framework.
Led settlement negotiation across four rounds over five months, without litigation or escalation.

The outcome

What the client achieved.

Claim settled at $1.2M — a 93% reduction.
Digital Access Adoption Program agreed to cover future indirect access at predictable cost.
Annual SAP spend stabilised at $13M with three-year price protection.
Completed in 8 months.

The lesson

What the case teaches.

SAP indirect access audits rest on aggressive readings of contract language that often do not survive contractual and technical scrutiny. Most buyers concede too early because they lack the internal depth to dispute the methodology.

Engagement details

How it ran.

Duration: 8 months
Team: 3 senior advisors, including a former SAP licensing executive
Model: contingency, 20% of documented savings
ROI: 5x

Engage

Facing a similar situation?

A senior Admodum advisor will review your position on a private call. Engagements run as fixed fee, contingency or annual retainer.

Speak with a Senior Advisor SAP practice All case studies

Independence

Client identities are anonymised under engagement-letter confidentiality. Admodum is not a partner, reseller, or affiliate of SAP, or of any other software vendor.