Are the audit results always accurate?
Depending on the individual situation of each customer, it might be that they are faced with audit results that are not aligned with their expectations. The main reason why that can happen is because the customers submitted USMM results independent of a key ‘consolidating tool’ known as LAW. The latter is essential in terms of audit accuracy but use of LAW is presented to customers being audited as ‘optional’ rather than mandatory. When that happens, the results might show over usage (e.g.: duplicated users), in which case the customer will have to pay for what is most likely a misrepresentation of true and accurate data.
The other key area that can confuse (and by extension, cost) the customers is that of SAP ‘engines’. Engine measurement is a complex process that can provide false consumption results. As such, the customer has to be alert to and knowledgeable about how engine measurement functionality works. In particular, customers need to be wary about USMM commonly delivering measurements for engines that are not used at all. Again, this can result in costly SAP surcharges, largely because the customer has no awareness of the engine types that actually support their business.
In order to submit correct results to SAP, the customer needs to understand why data is being incorrectly displayed in USMM, as well as which and how measurements can be corrected. Generally, this requires extra resources, knowledge, and effort; however, given the alternative prospect of post-audit ‘commercial discussions’ with SAP, it’s on balance an effort very much worth making.
Customers should always bear in mind that SAP will only analyze the reports submitted by themselves. As such, it is critical that they make every effort to ensure complete accuracy. But even when the measurement has been performed correctly in a strictly technical context (e.g.: correct client selection, system type, job completion instructions), the background settings might not have been maintained by the customer. In these scenarios, both the customer and the SAP audit review team might reasonably believe that the results are true and accurate: however, had the customer properly maintained the background settings, the audit results might have been vastly different (and less costly).