The “App Store” analogy and the integration feasibility gap
Continuing the thought process on the "Apple Effect" and the SAP ecosystem, observations on how this plays out during tool selection remain relevant.
In SCM architecture, a tool like o9 Solutions acts as a specialized app on the S/4HANA "OS", much like a third-party mobile app. Yet, while consumer integrations are invisible, enterprise-level plumbing is where most projects face their biggest hurdles.
Observations from the demo floor
Having sat through vendor evaluations for planning tools, a consistent pattern emerges: the focus is almost exclusively on UI-driven functionality like Demand Sensing, Capacity Constraints and Scenario Planning. While these are vital, the underlying integration flow is rarely explored in depth during selection.
Showing a live integration is often difficult during a demo, as it requires complex setup on client systems or a significant vendor investment in a digital core sandbox. Yet the feasibility and usability of that integration define the total cost of ownership.
The variable needs of integration
Integration requirements are not one-size-fits-all. They shift based on industry and specific planning needs:
- Scalability and data latency. A retail environment might demand Near-Real-Time (NRT) data sync for rapid response, whereas heavy manufacturing might prioritize massive parallel processing for scale over immediate speed.
- SAP IBP integration. For many, CI-DS remains the primary ETL for time-series data, keeping the core stable. Simultaneously, the adoption of Real-Time Integration (RTI) for order-based planning shows a clear move toward reducing data latency. The focus is on a deeper, native connection to the Digital Core.
- o9 Integration 3.0. In parallel, o9 is advancing its Integration 3.0 architecture. With a Spark-based, configuration-driven (low-code) engine, the intent is to improve usability and processing scale, making the tool a more flexible participant in the broader cloud data ecosystem.
Final thoughts on selection strategy
After 20 years in Supply Chain IT, my conclusion is that the plumbing is just as critical as the planning logic itself. Functionality sells the tool, but the feasibility of the data flow determines whether the tool actually gets used.
Instead of focusing solely on feature checklists, discussing the integration architecture and how it aligns with specific industry needs is one of the most critical factors in a tool selection process.
What are your thoughts on these integration patterns for 2026?