I just got an email from a colleague from Singapore where a close colleagues had gone to perform a 'BI HealthCheck' for a Fortune 100 company's new BI initiative in one of their divisions.
The customer used Cognos so gave their contract to an offshore company with the following assumptions:
1. As the requirement was to replicate Cognos reports there was no need for an onsite resource
2. The requirement was to copy the Cognos reports exactly
3. This despite moving a lot of the source system from legacy apps to SAP.
This is like my rich grandfather (Iwish I had one) going to a Toyota store and demanding a Ford T Series as of today. When the dealer says it will cost more, my grandfather says thats no problem, when he is told that Toyota can place a Prius engine in a Ford T Series exterior chassis -Grandpa again says no again. This is certainly not a recommended path and this is exactly what happened in the above case. He not only wants it for homself but for all the employees in this company - compulsory.. Our above case is no diffwrent - we are using a 2012 technology to try and copy a 1998 design in totality..
So what is wrong in this scenario, to some it should sound as very familiar...
Rule 1: If you are coming from legacy to SAP ECC do not try to replicate the reports as CC can deliver so much more
Rule 2: When you move from ECC to BW do not try to duplicate the ECC reports 1:1 in BW
Rule 3: If you are coming from Legacy to BOBJ 4.0 do not try to replicate the legacy reports as is to BOBJ 4.0
The key here is the difference between the technocratic view of report delivery vs. the BVA concept that we should not be delivering reports in the first place. A DW, BI or HANA is not there to deliver reports it is there to ehance the decision capabilities of the users and thereby the organization.
Thus the company above should have analyzed what decisions each of the reports assisted with and then chosen the best BOBJ OLAP tool to deliver that decision assistance.