Stock Room Management Comparison with EWM

[prakashpol1]

This blog post will help readers to understand the key differences between Stock Room Management (StRM) and Extended Warehouse Management (EWM).

Differences between Stock Room Management and EWM-Basic, EWM-Embedded Advanced and EWM on Decentralized on S/4 HANA are compared and listed here for developing better understanding amongst WMS selection decision makers.

In my previous blog, "Should I migrate LE-WM to Stock Room Management?" I have captured the functional differences between Stock Room Management and LE-WM. This is a second blog in the same series to throw more light on its functional comparison with EWM.

Also refer my latest blog which provides deep insight into the options to be considered when the legacy LE-WM is found to be not compliant for stock room management (What Options to Consider if Legacy LE-WM is Not Compliant for Stock Room Management during S/4HANA M...).

I have summarized the functional and key product differences in the below table based on various features and comparison parameters.

Features/Comparison parameters	Stock Room Management (with HUM)	Basic Embedded EWM on S/4 HANA	Advanced EWM Embedded on S/4 HANA	EWM Decentralized on S/4 HANA
Architecture	Part of S/4HANA ERP	Part of S/4HANA ERP	Part of S/4HANA ERP	Separate Application on S/4HANA
SAP Future Innovations	Not supported	Improvements limited to Basic features will be added in future S/4HANA versions	Future Innovations for the warehouse capabilities will be delivered by SAP only for EWM component of S/4 HANA.
License	Included in the SAP S/4HANA Enterprise Management license.		Advanced EWM will require the Classic SAP EWM Component License
Futuristic Warehouse Modernization Outlook	Very low	Low	High	Very High
Barcode Scanning/Mobile Execution	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Bin to Bin transfer	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Basic Inbound	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Basic Outbound	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Physical Inventory	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Complex Processes like process oriented or layout-oriented storage control	No	Yes	Yes	Yes
Internal Warehouse Movements	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Wave Management	No	No	Yes	Yes
Cross-docking	No	No	Yes	Yes
Serial Numbers	Yes through HUM	Yes	Yes	Yes
SSCC Numbering of HUs	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
MFS Support	No	No	Yes, with restrictions	Yes
WM-PP Interface (Production Integration)	Basic Integration	1. Delivery-based Integration 2. Advanced Production Integration 3. Direct Production Integration 4. MES-Driven Staging	1. Delivery-based Integration 2. Advanced Production Integration 3. Direct Production Integration 4. MES-Driven Staging	1. Delivery Based Integration 2. Advanced Production Integration 3. MES-Driven Staging
WM-QM Integration (Quality Management Integration)	Basic	All major QM integration scenarios covered. Basic EWM is integrated into Quality Management (QM) using inspection lots of origin 17.	All major QM integration scenarios covered.	All major QM integration scenarios covered.
Physical Inventory	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Integration with S/4H Core	Very tight ERP integration	Tight ERP integration	Tight ERP integration	Robust ERP-Interfacing mechanism
WM-SAP TM Integration	No	Yes	Yes	Yes
Technical Migration Complexity from Old SAP WM	Low	Medium	Medium	Medium to High
Complexity of warehouse supported	Low complexity	Medium	Medium to High complex	High to very high complex
Recommended for	Small size warehouses with manual operations without any advanced requirements and having pre-defined set of lean processes e.g.: - Quick adoption of legacy Classical SAP WM managed manual warehouses without any process changes - Small warehouses e.g. Affiliates managed small warehouses, MRO warehouse or stores with bin to bin transfer need	Small to medium size warehouses requiring full stock transparency and control -  Small Raw Material warehouses -  Medium size, own operated distribution centers with less complexity of operations	For medium to  large warehouse requiring advanced & optimized warehousing features, typically for - the medium complex distribution centers managed by own WMS with very limited MFS/ASRS - Integration with small to medium production sites with less complex manufacturing Integration need in which  the decoupling of WMS from production is not the core requirement.	For all medium to very large complex warehouses with optimized warehousing features. Best suited for the heavily automated warehouses for business models consisting of decoupling of WMS from MFG IT landscape- - Production warehouses connected to local MES systems, - SCM hubs - Advanced and very large warehouses looking to implement Next-Gen technologies for warehouse automation (like IOT, Smart robots etc.)

 

Conclusion

With all evaluating parameters mentioned in above comparison table, it is worthwhile to reiterate in this blog too that one should carefully evaluate all the warehouse key business parameters and requirements along with the long term business plan and based on this detailed evaluation business can take conscious decision on choosing specific WM solution (StRM vesrus EWM)in order to get best ROI from the IT investment of migrating to new age S/4 HANA release.

 

References

1. Should I migrate from LE-WM to Stock Room Management? by Prakash Pol


2. 2881166 – FAQ : Stock Room Management


3. Chapter 2.12.3.2.1 Stock Room Management of the Feature Scope Description of SAP S/4HANA 2020 (You can find the link to the Feature Scope Description of SAP S/4HANA 2020 in the Product Documentation section)


4. Note 2577428 – Road map for LE-WM in SAP S/4HANA


5. 2270211-  – S4TWL – Warehouse Management (WM)

[happyab]

First of all, good work and nice overview.
Basic EWM or full EWM can both be run as embedded. In your comparison you compare it with the full embedded EWM. It would be usefull to add basic embedded EWM to that list as well.

[DominikTylczyn]

Hello prakashpol1

That's a very informative comparison indeed.

However the integration point doesn't seem to be right:

Integration with S/4H Core

Very tight ERP integration

Very tight ERP integration

Robust ERP-Interfacing mechanism

It implies that embedded EWM is as tightly integrated with S/4 core as stock room management is. It's not true actually.

Stock room management integrates with S/4 core really tightly without any internal RFC calls. Whereas embedded EWM still requires integration through qRFC calls. That's is getting better with each release though.

Also the terminology between S/4 core and EWM is misleading e.g. S/4 core outbound delivery replicates to outbound delivery order in embedded EWM. So we have two different terms for essentially the same business object. Stock room management doesn't have such issues.

Therefore I'd suggest updating this point to:

Integration with S/4H Core

Very tight ERP integration

Tight ERP integration

Robust ERP-Interfacing mechanism

Best regards

Dominik Tylczynski

[DominikTylczyn]

Hello happyab

That's a really good point. In my opinion basic EWM is just like LE-WM, with all the EWM hurdles but without any EWM benefits.

Cheers

Dominik Tylczynski

[former_member770253]

In contrast to Stock Room Management or WM, EWM has flexible process and layout control, which enable dynamic adaptation of the system processes ...

<Rapidfs

[happyab]

...no expert but not so sure... at least Basic EWM has FIORI Apps which Stock Room does not have.
Isn't the integration into PP also better?

[DominikTylczyn]

That's the difference that prakashpol1 has already highlighted:

Complex Processes like process oriented or layout-oriented storage control

No

Yes

Yes

[prakashpol1]

Thanks Dominik and I agree, it's a very valid observation, I will update it based on your suggestion.

[DominikTylczyn]

I tend to find LE-WM / stock room management integration good enough. Also I am not a huge fan of Fiori apps in the warehouse management operational space. In my mind Fiori apps are not better just because they are Fiori. They need to bring better functionality or better user experience to beat SAP GUI transactions.

Basic EWM is perceived by SAP as a functional replacement of LE-WM. Given the availability of stock room management option I'd rather go for that instead of basic EWM for simple warehouses. One of the reasons is a thin line between basic and advanced EWM. You'll know you stepped over it during license audit. Sure you can use the /SCWM/RP_COMPLIANCE_CHECK  to check the basic EWM compliance. But that's a retrospective check. In a matter of fact stock room management has the same risk, however it's easier to manage.

[prakashpol1]

Thanks Axel for your feedback. I have updated the comparison by including Basic Embedded EWM.

[prakashpol1]

I have updated the comparison by including Basic Embedded EWM.

[prakashpol1]

I have updated the comparison by including Basic Embedded EWM.

[perlundh]

Hello Dominik!

Just need to jump in here for other potential readers. Basic EWM is nothing like LE-WM. It is two completely different solutions/products. Apple and Orange. Wine and Beer.

What do you mean with all EWM hurdles but without any EWM benefits? Basic Embedded EWM is EWM.

Yes, SAP have locked down things in Basic EWM where Wave Management probably is the one most companies will be missing and push them towards paying extra licenses. Not nice but reality.

I also liked the more simple world of LE-WM where you don't need an "internal interface" with everything that comes along, but it seems like that time has passed.

[DominikTylczyn]

Hello perlundh

Indeed EWM and LE-WM are two different products, even though there are many similarities e.g. stock placement and stock removal strategies are similar, organizational structures e.g. warehouse number, storage type, some of the transactions are named almost the same e.g. LS01N vs. /SCWM/LS01 etc. Still the products are different, as you say apples and pears.

When embedded EWM has been introduced to S/4HANA, SAP found itself with two lines of code covering warehouse processes e.g. LE-WM and EWM. Again, I'm not saying LE-WM and EWM are the same, I'm saying they both are to be used to manage warehouses. That is not optimal situation from the software provider point of view. So SAP decided to phase out LE-WM and make customers use embedded EWM instead. Given the much broader functional scope of EWM as compared to LE-WM, subset of EWM functions has been designated as basic EWM, which can be used without additional licenses.

The functional scope of basic EWM is roughly what is available in LE-WM, or put it the other way around - if a functionality is not there in LE-WM, it doesn't count as basic EWM, for instance slotting, labor management, kitting, cartonization planning are not available in LE-WM, therefore they are outside of basic EWM scope. Those functions require additional EWM license.

There is the same deal with TM and LE-TRA. Subset of TM functions roughly equivalent to LE-TRA is called basic TM and doesn't require additional license fees. E.g. transportation planning cockpit or package builder are not there in LE-TRA, so they are not part of basic TM.

[kuoli_jing]

Thanks for sharing a wonderful blog, much appreciated.