Skip to Content

As part of consulting engagements most of the NW architects face this situation to propose or to compare the JAVA WD and ABAP WD as development option. Previously we used to provide this analysis as qualitative analysis. As we have ABAP WD also evolved in the market, now we can go for a quantitative analysis that gives more confidence to customer to take decision which technology they should go for development.

This methodology gives a weighted average for the options based on the rating and weightage decided based on the conditions that influence the technology.

Matrix for calcualating weighted average:

 

Criteria

Weightage

(Yours)

Weightage

(Clients)

ABAP WD

JAVA  WD

Number of RFC/BAPI Calls

 

 

<=2

2-4

>=5

<=2

2-4

>=5

 

 

 

 

 

 

Number of Screens

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Number of Third party systems involved

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interface complexity with third party systems

 

 

Low

Medium

High

Low

Medium

High

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advantage from methodology

 

 

 

 

Mobile application support

 

 

 

 

Performance

 

 

 

 

SAP focus in this area

 

 

 

 

Change management

 

 

 

 

Reusability from existing applications

 

 

 

 

UI Design efforts

 

 

 

 

Support Expertise

(Subject Matter Expertise availability in the Market)

 

 

 

 

Scalability (in terms of  H/W resources)

 

 

 

 

Available Standard SAP application mapping

 

 

 

 

SAP business Workflow Integration

 

 

 

 

Parameter description:

Number of RFC calls: This parameters is used to measure the calls to Sap which in turn says how many roundtrips involved in the application and how the BAPI or RFC execution effects the application execution.

Number of Screens: This parameter is taken into consideration to measure the look and feel based on screen mix and matches. Like one application can start with some selection initially and next step might be a form with 3 or four text and text area fields. In this case some other screens are also involved once you submit the form which is simple control based forms (like HTML), it is suggestible use control based design in all forms.

 

Third party systems involved: This represents non sap systems involved in the application.

 

Interface complexity: This is the parameter in combination with above parameter will decided which technology better supports the application when third party interfaces are involved.

 

Advantage from methodology: This is case specific as project is using RUP model for project execution.

 

Mobile application support: This parameter is used to measure supportability for mobile applications.

 

Performance: This is application performance in terms of response assuming system is scaled as per requirement (Ex: H/W for number of users). This can be split into two parameters application performance in terms of response and load (Number users, usage data is available this can be measured).

 

SAP focus in this area: This is in consideration with present information and applications availability. Like all self service applications are developed in JAVA Web Dynpro (XSS packages).

 

Change management: This parameter is used to measure change management relatively between the options.

 

Reusability from existing applications: This parameter is to measure UI reusability, that can help in UI design.

 

UI Design efforts: If a custom form is to be built from scratch this parameters measure design efforts in different technology. This parameter is used to show the difference in design efforts between form based technology and simple Web Dynpro

.

Support Expertise (Subject Matter Expertise): This parameter is used to measure risk factor in terms of subject expertise availability and off hand solution availability when OSS message (Online support service) is created. This matters especially when solution deal with newly introduced technology. And expertise availability in Market also matters in solving critical issues before creating OSS message for SAP help.

Scalability (in terms of  H/W resources): This is related to cost factor indirectly. When system is to be scaled as per the usage parameters WAS JAVA server setup needs less H/W configuration compared with WAS ABAP server.

 

Available Standard SAP application mapping: This is to support the business decision when business wants to use standard available SAP applications with some changes.

 

Workflow Integration: Some applications may need integration with backend SAP workflow system. This will also influence the development technology

 

Scoring guidelines:

 1) Scoring:

 1=Less supported by the option

 2=Partially supported by the option, some enhancements needed

 3=Fully supported by the option

           (Where criteria is not a value proposition direct scoring is given. If criteria is based on value proposition, given values for scoring decide scoring)

2) Future integrations are considered as third party systems

3) If the difference of weighted averages between the options is 0-0.05(end values include) the decision can

     be taken by means of case based parameters.

Exceptions:

1) If a criteria is not applicable in application, in scoring all options score one point, irrespective of values or description (High, Medium, Low).

2) In standard SAP applications case the option in which, application is delivered by SAP, will get 3 scoring and remaining options get 1 scoring.

To report this post you need to login first.

2 Comments

You must be Logged on to comment or reply to a post.

  1. Yariv Zur
    Hi Raveendrababu,
    Very nice analysis!
    Is there anyway I can contact you through mail? Can you drop me a note – yariv dot zur at sap dot com?

    Thanks,

    Yariv.

    (0) 

Leave a Reply