SAP Digital Access Adoption Program (DAAP) Explained

SAP Digital Access Adoption Program (DAAP)

Executive Summary: SAP’s Digital Access licensing model is a new way to license indirect use of SAP software, shifting from traditional named-user licenses to document-based licensing.

To encourage customers to adopt this model, SAP introduced the Digital Access Adoption Program (DAAP) – a time-limited (now extended) program offering steep discounts, credits for legacy licenses, and even amnesty for past indirect usage.

This article provides CIOs and enterprise procurement leaders with a comprehensive overview of SAP Digital Access vs. traditional licensing, explains how DAAP works and its incentives, analyzes the financial implications of switching, highlights key risks/pitfalls, and offers a decision framework.

We conclude with actionable guidance in “What CIOs and Procurement Leaders Should Do.”

Traditional SAP Licensing vs. Digital Access Licensing

Traditional Named-User Licensing:

In SAP’s legacy model, licenses are primarily tied to named users. Every individual who directly uses SAP software needs an appropriate user license, and historically, this was also applied to indirect access (when third-party systems interact with SAP).

Under the old model, covering indirect usage often meant purchasing enough named-user licenses or special engine licenses to account for external users or system interactions—an approach that can be costly and impractical for many scenarios​.

For example, in EDI or e-commerce integrations, countless external users or devices might indirectly trigger SAP transactions, and it’s not feasible to license each as a named user​.

This lack of a clear metric for indirect use led to high-profile compliance disputes (e.g., the Diageo and AB InBev cases in 2017). It demonstrated that the old model was not transparent or predictable.

SAP Digital Access (Document-Based Licensing):

Introduced in 2018, SAP Digital Access is a new licensing model designed to “license indirect access in a simpler, more transparent way”.

Instead of tying licenses to users, it ties them to creating certain business documents in the SAP system. SAP defined nine document types (Sales Orders, Invoices, Purchase Orders, etc.) that count toward digital access usage​.

Whenever an external (non-SAP) system triggers the creation of one of these documents in SAP, it consumes digital access capacity.

Each document type has a specific weighting factor (most count as 1 document; a few, like financial and material documents, count as 0.2). Companies purchase Digital Access in blocks of documents (e.g, per 1,000 documents/year) instead of per user​.

This model directly measures the outcome (the documents created) rather than the number of users, which SAP argues makes indirect usage licensing more predictable and aligned to actual system usage​​.

Notably, this model only covers indirect usage – you still need named-user licenses for your human users logging into SAP directly​.

However, for third-party interfaces into SAP, Digital Access aims to provide a clear metric and avoid the ambiguity of the old indirect use rules.

Key Differences – Named Users vs. Digital Access:

• License Metric: The traditional model counts users, while Digital Access counts documents. Under Digital Access, a high-volume interface that creates many SAP documents incurs license usage proportional to document count, not how many people or devices are behind it​. This shifts the cost to the business throughput (e.g., the number of orders) rather than the number of end-users.
• Indirect Access Coverage: Previously, customers attempted to cover indirect access by assigning every external user a named license or buying “interface” licenses – neither of which was very transparent. Now, indirect usage is automatically captured via document counts. If a non-SAP system creates 1,000 sales orders in SAP, those count as 1,000 documents against your license, regardless of who or what originated them. Read-only interactions and updates that don’t create new documents are free under the Digital Access model​ (only the creation of the defined document types counts).
• Transparency and Auditability: SAP’s rationale for Digital Access is that it provides an auditable usage trail. The system can measure document creation via tools like the SAP Passport and Digital Access Estimation Tool, giving both SAP and customers a way to quantify indirect use. In contrast, under named-user licensing, indirect use was often hidden or hard to quantify, leading to surprise compliance audits. Digital Access puts SAP in a better position to track license consumption objectively.
• Impact on Cost: This new model can potentially reduce costs for some customers. If you had thousands of occasional external users but only generated a few hundred documents, you’d pay for the documents only. For others, generating a high volume of documents could increase costs. Critically, SAP introduced DAAP to mitigate the financial shock and incentivize switching (as discussed below).

In summary, SAP Digital Access is optional but signals SAP’s future direction. It was born out of a need to address indirect use licensing pain points and is poised to become the norm as SAP pushes customers toward S/4HANA and “digital” metrics in licensing​.

With this context in mind, let’s examine the Digital Access Adoption Program.

What is the SAP Digital Access Adoption Program (DAAP)?

SAP launched DAAP in 2019 as a strategic program to encourage customers to transition to the Digital Access model.

Many SAP customers were (and still are) hesitant to switch licensing models due to uncertainties about cost, compliance, and the effort required to measure document usage​.

The DAAP was SAP’s response: it offers persuasive financial incentives and a structured process to make the switch more attractive.

Purpose:

The core goal of DAAP is to accelerate the adoption of document-based licensing by offsetting the cost and risk of switching.

SAP says, “Move to Digital Access now, and we’ll heavily discount the price and credit what you’ve already invested so that you won’t pay twice for the same capability.”

In addition, SAP used DAAP to draw a line under the contentious indirect access disputes – by offering an amnesty on past indirect use fees if you voluntarily regularize under the new model​.

From SAP’s perspective, this program helps customers “license properly” while avoiding audits and helps SAP ensure more customers are on the new metric as we advance.

Program Mechanics:

Participating in DAAP generally involves these steps (in collaboration with SAP’s Global License Audit & Compliance team or your analysis):

1. Measure Your Document Usage: Determine how many of the 9 document types your organization generates via indirect access. SAP provides two tools: the Digital Access Estimation Tool (which analyzes system logs for documents created by specified interface users) and the SAP Passport method (which tags and traces external calls in real-time)​. You can either self-measure (with SAP notes and tools) or engage SAP to perform an official measurement. This step is critical, as it establishes the “baseline” number of documents that will be licensed. Caution: Many experts advise doing an independent assessment first since the tools can overcount if not interpreted correctly (e.g., counting duplicates or internal documents)​. Accuracy here is vital – it directly impacts the cost.
2. Choose an Incentive Option: SAP offers two financial options under DAAP (often dubbed Option A and Option B) for purchasing the required Digital Access licenses. We detail these options in the next section. You can choose between a steep up-front discount or a slightly smaller discount that includes a buffer for future growth. Either way, the discounts are far beyond normal SAP discounting, making the first purchase of Digital Access licenses very inexpensive relative to the list price.
3. Trade In Legacy Licenses (Conversion Credit): As part of DAAP, SAP allows you to convert certain existing licenses into credit toward the digital documents license. If, in the past, you bought extra named-user licenses or special “Sales Order Processing” licenses solely to cover indirect usage, those may now be redundant. Under DAAP, you can hand them back to SAP for credit against your new Digital Access licenses. This helps ensure you’re not paying twice for the same need. (SAP mapped eligible license types – e.g. Sales & Purchase Order Execution, platform users, etc. – that can be converted to digital access licenses). Remember: SAP’s policy is that your annual maintenance fee after conversion should be at least as much as before​. In other words, they’ll let you repurpose your investment, but they won’t reduce the ongoing support revenue – an important financial consideration.
4. Sign Agreement & Adjust Contracts: Adopting Digital Access via DAAP may require an amendment to your SAP contract or license schedule. SAP typically issues an order form documenting the number of Digital Access document licenses, the discount applied, and any relinquished licenses. Once signed, you pay the agreed license fee (heavily discounted), and from then on, you’re licensed under the new model for those indirect scenarios. As with any SAP license purchase, you’ll also pay annual support on the new licenses as we advance. Notably, DAAP (especially in earlier phases) had a deadline – you had to execute the agreement by a certain date to get the incentives. SAP initially set the program to expire in 2021, extended it through 2022, and ultimately extended it indefinitely (as of late 2022), given customer demand. There is no fixed end date for DAAP’s discounted offerings, but SAP reserves the right to end it with notice.

SAP’s audit and license team may be closely involved throughout this process. One way to enter DAAP is to contact SAP and request a Digital Access evaluation. However, from a procurement standpoint, you’ll want to approach this carefully.

Once SAP’s auditors officially measure your usage, any significant finding will likely require remediation (i.e., you’ll be pressured to buy licenses). So, while DAAP is presented as voluntary and customer-driven, it does put SAP in the driver’s seat of quantifying your compliance gap.

Many advisors suggest measuring internally first and even engaging third-party licensing experts to verify the data before you involve SAP​.

DAAP Incentives: Discounts, Credits, and Amnesty

The DAAP offers generous incentives to make the switch appealing:

• Option A – “15% Growth”: You agree to license 115% of your measured document volume, effectively pre-paying 15% extra to cover future growth. In return, SAP charges you only for that 15% increment. In other words, you pay for 15% of the documents but receive 115% of the licenses​. This translates to roughly an 85% discount on the total license volume. SAP calculates the price using its standard volume-discounted rate for 115% of your documents, then applies the program so you only pay 15% of that volume. Restriction: This must be a standalone order (no mixing with other purchases), and no additional discount beyond the program terms can be applied.
  Pros: You get more capacity than you currently need, providing a cushion if your document count grows. Sometimes, the effective unit price can be slightly lower than Option B because you’re licensing a larger volume (higher volume tier discount).
  Cons: You pay more upfront than Option B (since you’re buying 115% vs 100%). If your usage doesn’t grow as expected, you essentially bought 15% too much capacity (though your cost was heavily reduced anyway). Maintenance costs will also be calculated based on the larger number of licenses (see Financial Implications section). SAP consultants note that Option A tends to cost about ~11% more money than Option B for ~15% more licenses – a cost trade-off vs. headroom.
• Option B—“90% Discount”: You agree to purchase 100% of your measured document licenses (no extra) and get a 90% discount​. In essence, you pay 10% of the list price for the number of documents you need. Restriction: The 90% discount applies only to the Digital Access SKU on that order; you can’t combine it with other deals or negotiate further discounts.
  Pros: Simpler to understand – you pay 10% of the list for exactly what you need. It minimizes your upfront spend and lowers your annual maintenance base (since maintenance will roughly be on 10% of the list cost). If your indirect document volume might decrease or stay flat, Option B avoids over-provisioning. It’s the absolute cheapest initial cost.
  Cons: You get no built-in buffer. If your document count grows beyond what you licensed, you’ll need to buy additional licenses later at standard pricing (with no 90% off safety net). That future purchase could be far more expensive per unit. Essentially, you save ~5% more upfront cost than Option A but forego the 15% extra capacity​. If growth is likely, this option could cost more in the long run than Option A.

Both options result in dramatic cost reductions for the initial adoption. By design, SAP made the first hit of Digital Access almost painless in pricing terms – an 85–90% reduction off list price is far beyond normal discount levels in enterprise software.

SAP’s willingness to offer this underscores how badly they want customers to use the new model​. Importantly, SAP has stated that these incentives are one-time only for the first purchase.

After you’ve adopted Digital Access via DAAP, any subsequent license needs (additional document blocks in future years) will be negotiated at standard discounts, with no guarantee of these ultra-deep cuts. CIOs should thus treat this as a unique window of opportunity and ensure they size their initial purchase wisely.

Legacy License Credits:

As mentioned, DAAP also allows the conversion of certain existing licenses to offset costs. For example, you might now trade those in if you previously bought 500 “SAP Platform” Named-User licenses solely to cover a B2B portal’s indirect use.

SAP would credit its support value towards 100,000 digital document licenses. In an ideal scenario, some companies could achieve a “zero net cost” migration, using 100% credits such that no new license fees were paid​.

In practice, SAP requires that your annual maintenance after conversion be at least the same as before, so you might end up with no new spending, but you continue paying the same support (just now on Digital Access instead of the old licenses).

This can still be advantageous: it resolves compliance risk without increasing the budget, assuming you have sufficient shelfware to convert.

It’s worth carefully inventorying your entitlements to see what could be leveraged (common ones include engine metrics for order processing, deprecated indirect use licenses, or unused named users earmarked for interfaces)​.

Amnesty for Past Indirect Use:

One of the biggest carrots in DAAP is that SAP promised not to charge for past indirect usage if you adopt the new model moving forward. In other words, by signing up, you wipe the slate clean. SAP “waives possible additional charges over the last few years” for indirect use that wasn’t properly licensed​.

This amnesty is hugely significant—it addresses many CIOs’ fears: “If we measure and find a huge gap, will SAP back-charge us for the last 5 years?”

Under DAAP, the answer was no; SAP would not retroactively bill past indirect access fees as long as a customer complied with the program. However, this amnesty was implicitly a one-time offer tied to the program.

If a customer chooses not to adopt Digital Access and is later found out of compliance, SAP reserves the right to seek back maintenance and penalties (the stick to the DAAP carrot). We’ll discuss this risk more in the Pitfalls section.

Still, it suffices to say that DAAP’s incentive package of 90% forward-looking discount + no look-back penalties is extremely attractive compared to the alternative scenario of an audit.

Program Status:

Initially, DAAP was slated to end after a couple of years. SAP extended it multiple times due to customer interest. As of Q1 2023, SAP has extended DAAP indefinitely (no official end date), though they can terminate the offer with notice.

For customers, the 90% discount (Option B) or 115%-for-15% deal (Option A) is still on the table for the foreseeable future.

Nevertheless, SAP’s sales teams often urge customers to act sooner rather than later, hinting that these deals won’t last forever.

It’s wise to view that with a bit of skepticism (given the “last chance” has been extended before), but also not to assume it’ll be around indefinitely. The program could be withdrawn if SAP feels the majority has transitioned or if corporate strategy changes.

Financial Implications of Switching Under DAAP

Adopting Digital Access through DAAP has significant financial ramifications that CIOs and procurement leaders must analyze from multiple angles:

1. Up-Front License Cost vs. Staying Put:

The most obvious impact is the one-time cost of acquiring the Digital Access licenses. With DAAP, this cost is heavily discounted (10–15% of the normal cost). For example, if your measured indirect usage normally costs $1 million in SAP list price, under DAAP, you might only pay $100k—$150k.

In contrast, if you don’t switch and later face an audit, you could be asked to pay that full list price (or close to it) for compliance, potentially a $1M hit you haven’t budgeted for. Thus, DAAP can now be seen as paying a small premium to avoid a large, unpredictable liability later.

Many CIOs compare this to an insurance policy or “settlement” to cap their indirect access exposure. If you believe your current licensing might not cover all indirect use, DAAP turns an uncertain risk into a fixed, discounted cost.

2. Use of Credits (Avoiding Waste):

One attractive aspect from a budget perspective is leveraging sunk costs. If you have already invested in extra licenses for indirect scenarios, converting them means you’re not wasting that money.

The accounting may shift those assets into a new category. While SAP’s rules ensure they keep your maintenance money​ (so you’re not likely to save OPEX immediately), you at least avoid additional license spend. This can be presented as protecting your past investments – a positive for procurement optimization.

Be sure to calculate how much credit you can realistically get: inventory all eligible licenses and get a valuation from SAP for conversion. The credits can sometimes cover a large portion of the digital access requirement, making the net new cost very low.

3. Support/Maintenance Fees:

Remember that any SAP perpetual license has an annual maintenance fee (typically ~20-22% of the net license price) for support. The good news is that because DAAP dramatically lowers the net license fee, your maintenance is also lower than it would be at full price.

For instance, if a license would cost $1M list and you pay $100k, your annual support might be around $22k instead of $220k. However, maintenance is recurring, so over 5 years, that $22k/year adds up.

Procurement should factor the NPV of maintenance into the cost of adoption. Option B (90% off) will carry lower maintenance than Option A (since Option A involves more licenses, even though you didn’t pay for them, SAP likely calculates maintenance on the net fee you paid – which in both options is around 10-15% off list, so perhaps similar maintenance actually).

One nuance: if you converted lots of existing licenses, your maintenance on those carries over (often at the same total amount). Net-net switching might keep your support costs flat or even reduce them slightly if the new net license cost is lower than the old licenses you dropped. Just be cautious: if you add new net capacity beyond credits, your support bill will increase (albeit modestly due to the discount).

4. Future Growth and True-Up Costs:

Financially, one of the biggest questions is: What happens if our document usage grows beyond what we purchased? Under DAAP, the initial purchase is cheap, but any additional purchase later will be at normal pricing (you likely won’t get 90% off again).

If your company’s digital interactions are expected to grow significantly (say you’re opening new channels, APIs, and partners that will drive up document counts), you could face a budget spike in a few years.

For example, if you licensed 1 million documents now, but in 2 years you need another 500k, those might cost you $500k (just illustrative) at a standard discount, with $110k/yr maintenance – a substantial new cost.

This is why forecasting is crucial: if growth is expected, you might either choose Option A to get that 15% extra now or at least be prepared to negotiate when the time comes.

On the flip side, if your indirect usage could decrease (maybe you plan to retire a legacy interface or a business line), there’s a risk you’ll have bought more capacity than needed and be stuck paying maintenance on it. Option B’s lower commitment might be better if downsizing is possible.

In any case, build scenarios for high, medium, and low growth and consider each scenario’s 5+ year total cost. Even with some growth, the cost under Digital Access may be comparable to or lower than continuing to add named users under the old model, but you need to validate that.

5. Comparing TCO of Old vs. New Model:

A thorough financial analysis should compare the total cost of ownership under two scenarios over a multi-year horizon: Status Quo vs. DAAP Adoption. For the status quo, include the cost of maintaining additional named users or any risk reserve for potential audit penalties. (While hard to quantify, you might assign a probability and potential cost to an indirect access compliance event – essentially the expected value of an audit hit – to model the risk-adjusted cost of doing nothing.)

For the DAAP scenario, include the DAAP license fee, any new maintenance, and potential future license top-ups at full price if anticipated. Also, factor in any savings from licenses you could retire on.

Customers sometimes find that over a 5-10 year period, Digital Access could cost more than just using existing licenses, especially if their indirect use was minor or already covered. In other cases, especially with a big compliance gap, DAAP is far cheaper than the alternative (a one-time audit fine or forced purchase).

The outcome highly depends on each customer’s situation (volume of documents, existing license surplus/deficit, growth plans, etc.). The key is not to be dazzled by the 90% discount alone but to evaluate the long-term costs.

SAP’s materials even acknowledge that the Digital Access license can be expensive for some without the DAAP discounts. So, make sure the economy holds up once those discounts expire.

6. Opportunity Cost and Negotiation Context:

It’s worth considering how adopting DAAP fits your broader IT sourcing strategy.

For instance, if you’re also negotiating a new S/4HANA contract or considering a move to RISE with SAP (the subscription cloud bundle), how does a DAAP purchase interplay with those?

Some enterprises have used the DAAP process as leverage or as part of a larger negotiation – e.g., “We’ll adopt Digital Access now, but we want better terms on S/4HANA licenses”.

SAP, in turn, might view a DAAP deal as a goodwill gesture or a way to secure your commitment. Ensure you coordinate internally: if you have a major SAP contract renewal in the next year or two, you may get a chance to bundle the digital access issue into that discussion instead of tackling it standalone.

On the other hand, waiting for a future negotiation has its risks (the DAAP incentives might diminish, or SAP might crack down sooner). It’s a delicate balance between tying it into a bigger deal vs. addressing the risk while the special offer exists.

Also, budget timing matters – some companies set aside funds in anticipation of settling the indirect access question. In contrast, others try to roll it into project budgets (e.g., an S/4 upgrade project can include the cost of Digital Access as part of modernization).

In short, the financial case for DAAP requires a careful, case-by-case analysis. Don’t assume it’s automatically a money-saver, nor assume it’s a money-drain – run the numbers for your scenario.

The program’s generous terms tilt the math in favor of adoption for many. However, wise CIOs will quantify that advantage in real dollars and consider various what-if scenarios (growth, no-growth, audit happens, etc.).

Lastly, weigh the soft costs: operational uncertainty and audit risk have their own “cost,” which is hard to put a dollar figure on but is nonetheless important.

Risks and Pitfalls to Watch Out For

While DAAP presents an attractive solution, there are several risks and potential pitfalls to be aware of before jumping in:

• Measurement Missteps: Getting an accurate count of indirect documents is tricky. The SAP tools (Passport and Estimation reports) can over-count if not carefully configured. For example, the Estimation Tool might count a single business process multiple times across systems or include user-created documents​. If you rely blindly on SAP’s measurement, you might believe you need far more documents than you do, leading to over-purchasing. Conversely, under-counting is possible (e.g., overlooking certain interfaces), leaving you under-licensed post-DAAP. Pitfall: Treat the measured number as negotiable and verifiable, not an oracle. Many firms engage independent SAP license experts to validate the digital document count. Doing a dry run internally (with your tools or scripts) is advisable to sanity-check SAP’s figures. Remember, once you commit to a number in the DAAP agreement, that’s your license cap – so you want it to be as accurate as possible.
• Over-Focus on Discount, Not on Usage Details: Some organizations get so eager to secure the 90% discount that they rush the process. SAP’s DAAP paperwork might be pushed on you as a limited-time offer. If you haven’t fully analyzed which systems and processes drive the document count, you might be caught off guard later. For instance, you might adopt Digital Access and realize a legacy interface was creating far more documents than anyone knew, blowing through your licensed volume. You might discover that certain document types (like financial documents with 0.2 weight) weren’t significant, and you overestimated them. Don’t let the allure of the discount short-circuit due diligence. SAP’s messaging in DAAP somewhat encourages a “don’t worry about precision, just go for it” mindset​ (since they benefit from quicker adoption). Resist this; accuracy is important for your long-term satisfaction.
• SAP’s Audit Leverage: If you invite SAP to help measure as part of DAAP, be prepared for what they find. The program is voluntary, but an implicit clock starts once numbers are on the table. It’s unlikely SAP will forget about a major compliance gap if you decide to walk away after measurement. In some cases, SAP’s GLAC team might escalate the findings to your CIO/CFO to emphasize the risk​. You effectively open your kimono to SAP. This isn’t to say you shouldn’t involve SAP – their tools are necessary for precise counts – but do so when you are ready to act. One strategy is to do a controlled self-audit first, then involve SAP to confirm and promptly execute the DAAP deal to close the issue. The risk of a free SAP-led assessment is that it could lead to “drama” and pressure if the numbers are large. Always be mindful that SAP, while presenting DAAP as help, ultimately has a sales objective.
• Licensing Scope Creep: You agree to SAP’s indirect use definitions by adopting Digital Access. This may contradict any argument that you don’t owe licenses for certain integrations. Some customers have legal or contractual positions that certain types of access shouldn’t require extra licensing. If you sign on to DAAP, you’re largely conceding that debate and formalizing those requirements. This isn’t necessarily bad – it brings certainty – but it’s a one-way door.
  Additionally, you might be trading in some old entitlements (like “Sales Order Processing” licenses). If, for some reason, SAP were to change their model again or if you later feel Digital Access isn’t working for you, going back could be complex. Essentially, there’s a lock-in effect: you convert to the new model and can’t easily revert to the old licensing approach. Ensure you’re comfortable with SAP’s definitions and that you truly intend to embrace this model long-term.
• Post-Incentive Costs and “Shelfware 2.0”: We touched on this in terms of financial implications – after the initial purchase, any incremental needs are at full price. There’s a risk that a few years later, you’ll need more documents and face a hefty bill without the benefit of DAAP. Also, if your business changes and you have excess document capacity, you’ll still pay maintenance on it. Consider a company that overestimated and licensed 50% more documents than it ended up using – that unused portion is essentially shelfware, generating support costs for no benefit. SAP traditionally doesn’t allow scaling down licenses; you can’t reduce quantities once purchased. So, rightsizing the purchase is critical. A pitfall is being overly optimistic (or pessimistic) about usage. Build in some buffer, but not so much that you’re paying for lots of idle capacity. If you’re unsure, Option B (“just what you need now”) might be safer, accepting that you might pay a higher marginal cost later if needed. Or negotiate an arrangement with SAP for future growth – some customers have tried to get price locks or caps on future digital access purchases as part of the DAAP deal (success varies, as SAP’s standard stance is that DAAP discounts won’t repeat).
• Ignoring DAAP (and Hoping for the Best): On the flip side, not engaging with DAAP has its own risk. As one SAP licensing expert bluntly put it, sitting out this issue completely leaves a company exposed to an “unfriendly audit.” The negotiation will likely be painful if SAP audits your environment and you have significant indirect use that named users do not cover. Without DAAP, SAP could temporarily license all indirect activity retroactively, possibly counting every read/write via external systems under older rules​. They could impose back maintenance fees for those unlicensed uses, leading to a multimillion-dollar compliance bill. In an audit scenario, you also lose some negotiation leverage; you buy under duress rather than proactively. The horror stories of indirect access (like the initial $70 million claim in the Diageo case) are rare but illustrate the worst case. SAP has signaled some restraint (not forcing Digital Access until S/4HANA migration, etc.​), but that grace period won’t last forever. The risk of doing nothing is essentially gambling that either SAP won’t audit you or you can somehow cover indirect use in other ways. CIOs need to be fully aware: if you forego DAAP, have a plan to manage indirect usage risk (e.g., ensure all third-party access is accounted for via existing licenses or be prepared to negotiate quickly if audited). The DAAP incentives are the carrot; the unstated stick is that SAP can drop an audit notice, and you have little room to maneuver.
• Technical and Legal Uncertainties: Some pitfalls are more on SAP’s side, but still affect customers. SAP’s Passport technology (for tracking documents) is still evolving; reports of it misidentifying or overcounting documents require manual corrections. So even after adopting, you’ll need to monitor the counting accuracy to avoid disputes. Also, the broader question of the legality of SAP charging for indirect use has been debated. While few expect courts to flat-out invalidate SAP’s approach​, it has happened that customers push back legally. Taking the DAAP deal essentially waives any future argument – you acquiesce to SAP’s model. For most, this is an acceptable trade-off for peace of mind, but it’s a consideration (especially in industries where every software compliance issue can become a legal battle).

Bottom Line: DAAP is not a simple silver bullet—it resolves one issue but introduces new dynamics.

To avoid pitfalls, companies should approach it as a structured project: do their homework on usage, scrutinize SAP’s numbers, forecast future needs, and negotiate with their eyes open.

If executed correctly, the program can deliver huge benefits (cost certainty, avoiding audits, modernizing your license model). If done hastily or blindly, one could have an unnecessary expense or an incomplete solution.

Framework: Deciding if DAAP Is Right for You

Given the complexities, CIOs and procurement leaders should adopt a systematic framework when deciding on DAAP.

Here’s a step-by-step approach to evaluate the move:

1. Assess Current Indirect Usage: Inventory all third-party systems and interfaces that interact with your SAP ERP or S/4HANA system. Identify what documents those integrations create (sales orders, invoices, etc.) and gather at least an estimate of volumes. Leverage SAP’s Digital Access Estimation Tool in a controlled way (perhaps run it for a limited period or on a sandbox) to get a ballpark figure.

This internal assessment will tell you if your indirect document count is trivial or massive. If it’s very low (e.g., a few hundred documents/year), the urgency to switch models might be less – you might already be able to cover that with existing licenses.

If it’s high (tens of thousands or more), you have the exposure that DAAP could address. Getting this data is foundational; you can’t make an informed decision without knowing the scope of the “indirect use” in your organization.

2. Determine Current Compliance and Costs: Evaluate how you are covering (or not covering) those indirect uses. Do you have enough named-user licenses allocated to the external use cases? Were you sold special licenses (like “External Order” or third-party access licenses) in the past that apply?

You may have unknowingly been out of compliance for some interfaces – note those as a risk. Also, calculate what those existing licenses cost you annually (maintenance on them) and whether they’re utilized.

This is where you identify potential conversion credits. For example, mark their license value and support fees if you have 200 extra named users meant for a supplier portal that could be replaced by digital access. Outline the status quo: “We cover X% of indirect usage with Y legacy licenses costing $Z, and we have A% that might be uncovered.”

3. Project Future Needs: Engage with your business and IT architects about upcoming changes that could affect indirect usage. Are you planning new digital channels, mobile apps, IoT integrations, or partner connections to SAP?

Are you migrating more users to SAP (which might reduce some interfaces) or, conversely, integrating SAP with more non-SAP tools? Try to forecast the document growth (or reduction). If, for example, you foresee doubling your e-commerce orders through SAP in 3 years, your document count will grow accordingly.

This projection will inform whether Option A (with growth headroom) makes sense and how many documents you might need. Also, consider the timeline: if a huge increase is 4-5 years out, you might adopt now for current usage and handle growth later; if it’s next year, maybe size up now. On the other hand, if some processes might be decommissioned (say you’re moving a certain module off SAP), factor that in as well.

4. Evaluate Alternatives to DAAP: Remember, DAAP is optional. You could stick with named-user licensing for indirect use, especially if you have enough licenses to cover everything (some companies over-licensed users in the past, providing a cushion). Check if your SAP contract has specific clauses or license types for indirect scenarios. Sometimes, customers have negotiated bespoke terms (e.g., a blanket license for a certain interface).

Weigh the cost of buying a few more named-user licenses (or appropriate engine licenses) to cover indirect use versus the cost under Digital Access. The old model might be cheaper for certain usage patterns, particularly if indirect users are limited and you can reuse existing licenses.

SAP’s direction is clearly towards Digital Access, and named-user licensing for third-party use may become increasingly cumbersome. However, as part of due diligence, compare the status quo vs. DAAP side by side – not just in cost, but also in risk. If you choose not to do DAAP, can you ensure audit compliance? If yes, maybe you don’t need DAAP yet. If not, then doing nothing is not a safe alternative.

5. Calculate the Business Case: Bring it all together, build a business case document or matrix. Include current indirect usage and coverage gaps; cost to remediate via the old model (e.g., buy 100 more user licenses) versus the cost to remediate via DAAP (e.g., buy 1 million documents at 90% off); use scenarios (growth vs. no growth); and intangible factors (audit risk, the administrative effort of managing thousands of user licenses vs. one document license).

Quantify as much as possible. For example, “Under the current model, we’d need ~300 additional user licenses over 5 years to cover projected growth, costing $X. Under DAAP, we’d spend $Y (including future true-ups) for the same period. Audit risk in the current model is valued (qualitatively or quantitatively) at $Z potential exposure.” This exercise often reveals the tipping point.

Many organizations find that while DAAP introduces a new cost line, it replaces or avoids other costs (purchases or penalties) and often comes out favorably when viewed holistically​. If the business case is not favorable, that’s a red flag that perhaps your situation doesn’t align with the typical use case for DAAP – double-check if you over-counted something or if, indeed, you are one of the few who genuinely might pay more with Digital Access.

6. Consider Timing and Alignment: If your analysis leans toward adopting DAAP, decide when to pull the trigger. Is a contract renewal with SAP coming up, and where could this be bundled? Are you in the middle of an S/4HANA migration project? Notably, some customers choose to address Digital Access as part of the S/4HANA conversion since SAP sales often bring it up anyway.

There’s also the factor of RISE with SAP (SAP’s subscription offering). Suppose you plan to move to RISE (cloud subscription) soon. In that case, Digital Access might become moot because RISE uses a different licensing metric (often Full User Equivalents, including indirect usage in the subscription).

In such a case, buying perpetual Digital Access licenses now might be unnecessary if, in 2 years, you’ll be on a cloud model. Always align the DAAP decision with your IT roadmap. Addressing digital access is more pressing if you have 5+ years of experience in ECC and plan to maximize on-prem investment.

If you’re 1 year from potentially signing a RISE deal, you might manage the risk in the short term by other means and avoid buying something you won’t use in the cloud. Of course, this is complex and involves some guesswork on future strategy, but it’s better to discuss it internally beforehand.

7. Risk Appetite and Governance: Assess your organization’s risk appetite. Some CIOs (and CFOs especially) loathe the idea of an open compliance risk hanging out there – they prefer to resolve it and budget for it.

Others might be more willing to take a wait-and-see approach, especially if they suspect SAP will be lenient or the company has negotiation clout. Present the findings to an internal governance committee: “Here’s the risk if we do nothing, here’s the cost if we do DAAP now.”

Ensure the decision is made consciously at the right level – given the potential financial impact, this often reaches the CFO or CEO if the exposure is large. Also, it involves procurement and legal reviewing SAP’s DAAP terms; procurement will want to ensure the conversion credits and discounts are correctly captured in writing, and legal might want to ensure the amnesty on past use is explicitly stated.

The outcome of these discussions should be a clear directive: either proceed with DAAP (and under which option, roughly by when) or defer/decline but with a plan to mitigate risk.

8. Engage SAP (or Not) Based on Decision: If you decide to proceed, engaging SAP is the next step, typically via your account executive. You’d share your interest in DAAP, possibly share your measured figures (or ask SAP to help validate), and begin negotiating terms. If you decide not to proceed, consider proactively communicating something to SAP if appropriate (some companies let SAP know they’ve assessed and, for now, will continue under existing licenses – without admitting non-compliance, of course).

If you stay silent, that’s fine too, but be prepared if SAP raises the topic (they frequently do in annual meetings or audits). Having a documented internal rationale will help if circumstances change or if, down the line, you revisit DAAP.

By following a framework like this, you ensure that the decision around DAAP is grounded in data and strategic context rather than a knee-jerk reaction to SAP’s sales pitch.

Every organization’s conclusion may differ – some will find DAAP a no-brainer to execute immediately, while others will take a cautious wait-and-see stance. The key is to be deliberate and informed, either way.

What CIOs and Procurement Leaders Should Do

If you’re a CIO or procurement leader facing the SAP Digital Access question, consider the following concrete next steps to navigate this challenge:

1. Baseline Your Indirect Usage: Immediately initiate an internal project to measure and document your indirect SAP usage. Inventory all external interfaces in SAP. Run SAP’s Indirect Usage Estimation reports (SAP Note 2644139 and related tools) in a controlled manner to get a preliminary document count. This baseline will quantify your exposure and is the foundation for any decision. Treat this data gathering as urgent homework – even if you don’t act on DAAP now, you need to know where you stand.
2. Review Your SAP License Landscape: Work with your software asset management (SAM) team to identify all SAP licenses you own that relate to indirect scenarios. Look for SKUs like “Sales Order Execution” or any bundles for supplier use, and any buffer of named-user licenses assigned to technical integration users. Determine which of these are utilized and which are shelfware. This will highlight potential licenses you could convert to Digital Access (and ensure you’re utilizing what you have in the meantime). It’s also a good opportunity to tidy up user license assignments – ensure you’re not under- or over-assigned on named users relative to your workforce.
3. Quantify the Risk/Cost of Status Quo: If you do nothing, assess the worst-case financial risk. Engage your audit/compliance folks to estimate what an SAP audit could uncover and what it might cost. While speculative, put some parameters around it: e.g., “If SAP enforced indirect usage as we understand it, we’d need to license ~50k documents per year; at the list price that’s $Xm, plus back maintenance of $Ym for the past 3 years.” This exercise can be eye-opening and will help justify any proactive spending. Essentially, translate the abstract risk into a dollar figure or range. At the same time, calculate the cost to legitimately cover your indirect usage under the existing model (how many more named users or engine licenses would you need to buy to be compliant?). This gives a baseline for comparison.
4. Model the DAAP Scenario: Using the data from steps 1 and 2, simulate the DAAP offer. For Option A and Option B, how many document licenses would you need, and what would it cost under each (both upfront and 5-year maintenance)? How much of that could be offset by converting existing licenses (apply any credits you identified)? Work with your SAP account manager (informally) or a licensing consultant to get indicative pricing. SAP can usually quote or confirm the list price per 1000 documents and volume tiers. This modeling is straightforward once you trust your document count because DAAP discounts are fixed (90% or equivalent). The goal is to produce a clear side-by-side of “Cost to adopt under DAAP” vs “Cost to remain as-is (and potential audit).”
5. Consider External Expertise: If there is any uncertainty in your analysis, consider bringing in an independent SAP licensing advisor. Firms specializing in SAP license management can validate your indirect usage measurements and provide an impartial opinion on the best course​. They can also help craft negotiation strategies to maximize credits and avoid pitfalls. While SAP will offer its own “Digital Access Evaluation Service,” remember that SAP’s goal is to sell licenses – an independent view can ensure you’re not over-counting or overlooking alternatives. The cost of a consultant engagement can be small relative to the millions at stake, and it can provide cover to the CIO/CFO that experts have vetted the plan.
6. Engage SAP – Deliberately: When you’re ready, initiate a discussion with SAP about DAAP. Come to the table with your understanding of your document count and desired option. This way, the conversation is driven by your data, not just SAP’s. Ask SAP to confirm your numbers with their tools (if not already), but avoid formally triggering an audit – frame it as a voluntary effort towards a commercial deal. Be upfront that you expect to utilize the DAAP incentives (SAP will be happy to hear this) and have identified $X in conversion credits (provide the list of licenses you’d trade). Ensure SAP’s proposal explicitly includes the 90% discount or 115%-for-15% deal and the credit for legacy licenses. It’s wise to get this in writing in a proposal or email. Also, clarify the support fee implications (e.g., will your existing maintenance transfer?). Don’t be afraid to ask for written confirmation of the amnesty on past usage as part of the DAAP deal – it’s usually inherent, but having it stated that SAP will not pursue past indirect use fees once.
7. Engage SAP – Deliberately (continued): …the deal is signed.* While SAP’s standard DAAP terms imply no back-charging for past indirect use, prudent procurement may want that assurance noted. If you have any unique asks (e.g., locking in a price for additional documents for 1-2 years or getting the right to reverse the conversion of certain licenses if not used), now is the time to negotiate them. However, SAP may be reluctant to modify the standard program. Maintain a tone that you are eager to resolve this collaboratively and are an informed customer.
8. Plan the License Transition: Work out the logistics of the switch. How will you reclassify users or decommission those old entitlements if you’re converting licenses? If you’re implementing the Passport tool for ongoing measurement (which you should, post-DAAP, to monitor usage), ensure your BASIS team is prepared and up-to-date on patches for Digital Access counting. Update your internal SAM records: reflect the new document license entitlement and adjust any compliance dashboards. Essentially, operationalize the new model – you might set up alerts if document consumption nears your purchased limit, for instance.
9. Monitor and Govern Post-Adoption: Don’t just “set and forget ” after moving to Digital Access.” Assign responsibility (perhaps in the SAM or BASIS team) to track document usage regularly. SAP’s tools can be run periodically – do this quarterly or at least biannually. This will alert you if usage is trending higher than expected, so you can plan your budget if an expansion purchase might be needed. Also, ensure new projects/integrations go through a design review for license impact: any new interface to SAP should be evaluated for how it will generate documents and consume your digital access licenses. By integrating this check, you avoid surprises and keep the licensing under control. From a governance perspective, brief your IT and procurement leadership annually on the status: “We used 70% of our document capacity this year, up from 60% last year, primarily due to X project. We have 30% headroom remaining.” This makes everyone aware that Digital Access is now a managed asset, similar to how you’d previously track named-user assignments.
10. Stay Educated and Agile: SAP’s licensing policies continue to evolve. Keep an eye on any SAP announcements regarding Digital Access or indirect use. For example, in the future, SAP might introduce an updated model or modify the document definitions (so far, they haven’t changed the document types, but one never knows). Also, watch the market: if your peers face issues or if any legal rulings emerge related to indirect access, understand how they might affect you. Even after DAAP, compliance isn’t entirely trivial – you must maintain it. Engage in SAP user groups or forums (ASUG, SUGEN, etc.) to hear experiences and best practices from other customers. This collective knowledge can help you fine-tune your approach.
11. Communicate the Outcome: Once you’ve made a decision (whether to adopt or not), inform relevant stakeholders. If you did adopt DAAP, highlight the proactive risk mitigation and likely cost avoidance achieved. For instance, report to the CFO and CIO Board, “We secured SAP’s Digital Access licenses covering all indirect use at a 90% discount, avoiding an estimated $X in potential audit exposure.” This demonstrates good governance and can be a big win to showcase. If you choose not to adopt (yet), document why (e.g., “current usage is low and covered by existing licenses; will re-evaluate in 12 months; low risk at present”) and ensure those reasons hold as time goes on.

These steps allow CIOs and procurement leaders to turn the complex DAAP decision into a structured action plan. The key is proactive management: don’t wait for an audit to force the issue; likewise, don’t leap in without analysis.

With due diligence, you can either confidently embrace SAP’s Digital Access model with minimal cost impact or decide to delay adoption with eyes wide open to the risks.