Skip to Content
Technical Articles
Author's profile photo Prakash Pol

Stock Room Management Comparison with EWM

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, I had 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.

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/4 ERP Part of S/4 ERP Part of S/4 ERP Separate Application on S/4
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 Basic Can support delivery-based Integration Advanced Advanced
WM-QM Integration Very basic Basic Advanced Advanced
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)

Assigned tags

      11 Comments
      You must be Logged on to comment or reply to a post.
      Author's profile photo Axel Breiter
      Axel Breiter

      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.

      Author's profile photo Dominik Tylczynski
      Dominik Tylczynski

      Hello Axel Breiter

      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

      Author's profile photo Axel Breiter
      Axel Breiter

      ...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?

      Author's profile photo Dominik Tylczynski
      Dominik Tylczynski

      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.

      Author's profile photo Prakash Pol
      Prakash Pol
      Blog Post Author

      I have updated the comparison by including Basic Embedded EWM.

      Author's profile photo Prakash Pol
      Prakash Pol
      Blog Post Author

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

      Author's profile photo Prakash Pol
      Prakash Pol
      Blog Post Author

      I have updated the comparison by including Basic Embedded EWM.

      Author's profile photo Dominik Tylczynski
      Dominik Tylczynski

      Hello Prakash Pol

      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

      Author's profile photo Prakash Pol
      Prakash Pol
      Blog Post Author

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

      Author's profile photo Geoffrey White
      Geoffrey White

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

      <Rapidfs

      Author's profile photo Dominik Tylczynski
      Dominik Tylczynski

      That's the difference that Prakash Pol has already highlighted:

      Complex Processes like process oriented or layout-oriented storage control No Yes Yes