How Procurement Insights Called SAP Ariba’s October 2025 Announcement in August 2007
By Jon W. Hansen
November 22, 2025
THE ANNOUNCEMENT THAT SHOCKED (BUT DIDN’T SURPRISE)
On October 8, 2025, SAP Ariba announced they’re abandoning their 25-year-old codebase and rebuilding their entire Source-to-Pay suite from scratch on SAP’s Business Technology Platform (BTP).
Joël Collin-Demers, whose newsletter reaches 11,000+ procurement professionals, called it what it is:
“SAP Ariba just killed the legacy Source-to-Pay suite. That’s not my opinion… They announced it!”
The industry reacted with a mix of excitement and skepticism. Comments ranged from cautious optimism to outright doubt about whether SAP could deliver on yet another “transformation promise.”
But here at Procurement Insights, we had a different reaction:
“We called this 18 years ago.”
AUGUST 2007: “THE ARIBA INTERVIEWS” PREDICTED THIS MOMENT
In August 2007, I published a series called “The Ariba Interviews: Re-Engineering the Future of On-Demand” analyzing Ariba’s strategic positioning, acquisition strategy, and long-term viability.
The central thesis 18 years ago:
Ariba’s “on-demand” strategy—acquiring companies to bolt together a suite rather than building unified architecture—would create fundamental structural problems that would eventually force a complete rebuild or strategic repositioning.
From the August 2007 post:
“The question isn’t whether Ariba’s acquisition strategy can create a comprehensive suite. The question is whether that suite can deliver unified value, or whether the ‘bolted-together’ architecture will create integration, data, and usability challenges that undermine the value proposition.”
18 years later, SAP Ariba just announced they’re rebuilding from scratch because… the bolted-together architecture created integration, data, and usability challenges that undermined the value proposition.
THE 18-YEAR ARC: FOUR PROCUREMENT INSIGHTS POSTS THAT PREDICTED OCTOBER 2025
POST 1: AUGUST 2007 – “THE ARIBA INTERVIEWS: RE-ENGINEERING THE FUTURE OF ON-DEMAND”
What we identified:
- Ariba’s acquisition-driven growth strategy (Procuri, FreeMarkets, Quadrem, others)
- The architectural challenge of integrating disparate platforms
- The “on-demand” positioning vs. actual unified architecture reality
- The long-term sustainability question
Key prediction:
“Ariba’s challenge will be whether they can create a truly unified platform from acquired components, or whether they’ll face the same integration challenges their customers face with best-of-breed approaches.”
What happened: SAP acquired Ariba (2012), attempted to integrate it with SAP ecosystem, and 13 years later announced they’re starting over because the architecture can’t deliver on modern requirements.
POST 2: MARCH 2009 – “THERE’S A SLOW, SLOW TRAIN COMIN’ UP AROUND THE BEND” (EPILOG FOR THE ARIBA INTERVIEWS)
What we documented:
- The 2008 financial crisis impact on procurement technology adoption
- The divergence between vendor promises and customer realization
- The pattern of technology investment not translating to organizational transformation
- Early evidence that Ariba’s acquisition strategy was creating architectural debt
Key observation:
“The slow train coming isn’t about economic recovery—it’s about organizations realizing that technology capability doesn’t equal transformation success. The vendors who win long-term will be those who help customers become ready for transformation, not just those who sell them software.”
What this predicted: The exact dynamic playing out in 2025 where SAP Ariba (and Coupa, Ivalua, others) are realizing that platform sophistication without organizational readiness = failed implementations.
18 years later, The Hackett Group (October 2025) confirms: Only 2% of organizations exceed transformation expectations. 90%+ fail without readiness assessment.
POST 3: SEPTEMBER 2012 – “IS ARIBA STILL ON DEMAND FOR SHAREHOLDERS AND EXECS? THE ANSWER IS YES, BUT…”
What we analyzed:
- SAP’s acquisition of Ariba (announced May 2012, closed October 2012)
- The strategic rationale (SAP needed cloud/S2P capability)
- The integration challenges (SAP’s on-premise DNA vs. Ariba’s cloud architecture)
- The long-term sustainability of Ariba’s “bolted-together” suite within SAP’s ecosystem
Key question:
“Will SAP maintain Ariba’s independent architecture, or eventually fold it into SAP’s platform strategy? And if the latter, does Ariba’s acquisition-based architecture survive that integration, or require fundamental rebuilding?”
What happened: SAP attempted hybrid approach (maintain Ariba independence while integrating with SAP ecosystem), discovered architectural limitations, and 13 years later announced complete rebuild on SAP BTP.
The “answer is yes” referred to shareholder/exec value. The question we raised was: “Is it still on-demand for CUSTOMERS?”
October 2025 answer: No. It requires complete replatforming.
POST 4: NOVEMBER 2019 – “WHERE ARE THEY NOW? THE ARIBA INTERVIEWS, AUGUST 2007”
What we revisited:
- 12 years after original analysis, where did the predictions land?
- How did Ariba’s acquisition strategy play out under SAP ownership?
- What happened to the unified architecture question?
- Where are the executives who drove the strategy?
Key finding:
“The fundamental architectural challenges identified in 2007 weren’t solved—they were papered over with integration layers, middleware, and workarounds. The question isn’t whether Ariba can continue operating with this architecture. The question is how long SAP tolerates the architectural debt before forcing a fundamental rebuild.”
October 2025 answer: 6 years. SAP announced the rebuild.
WHAT MAKES THIS PATTERN RECOGNITION REMARKABLE
This isn’t about predicting that SAP Ariba would struggle. Lots of analysts critique vendors.
This is about predicting the exact failure mode 18 years in advance:
August 2007 prediction:
- Acquisition-driven suite = architectural debt
- “Bolted-together” platforms = integration/data/usability challenges
- Long-term outcome = forced rebuild or strategic repositioning
October 2025 reality:
- SAP Ariba abandoning 25-year-old codebase
- Reason cited: Integration challenges, data fragmentation, inability to deliver unified UX
- Solution: Complete rebuild on new platform (BTP)
The pattern was predictable because the organizational dynamics were predictable.
THE DEEPER PATTERN: TECHNOLOGY EVOLUTION DOESN’T ELIMINATE ORGANIZATIONAL DYNAMICS
Here’s what 18 years of Ariba analysis teaches us:
1. TECHNOLOGY CAPABILITY ≠ TRANSFORMATION SUCCESS
Ariba’s challenge was never technology capability.
They acquired best-in-class point solutions:
- FreeMarkets (auctions/sourcing)
- Procuri (P2P)
- Quadrem (supplier collaboration)
- Others
Ariba’s challenge was organizational readiness:
- Could they integrate disparate architectures into unified platform?
- Could they align acquired cultures and roadmaps?
- Could they deliver unified data model across products?
- Could they maintain innovation velocity while managing architectural debt?
Answer: No. Hence the October 2025 announcement.
But here’s the critical insight:
This same pattern plays out in customer organizations.
Organizations buy “best-in-class” S2P suites (Ariba, Coupa, Ivalua, GEP) and fail to achieve transformation not because the technology lacks capability, but because the organization lacks readiness.
Peripheral executive engagement, competing priorities, inadequate resources, poor data quality, weak governance—these organizational dynamics determine outcomes, not platform sophistication.
Technology changes. Organizational dynamics don’t.
2. THE “BOLTED-TOGETHER” ARCHITECTURE MIRRORS CUSTOMER IMPLEMENTATIONS
Ariba’s approach (pre-2025):
- Acquire best-in-class point solutions
- Integrate them into “unified” suite
- Paper over architectural differences with middleware
- Promise “single platform” experience
- Reality: Multiple data tables, integration challenges, UX inconsistencies
Customer approach (typical S2P implementation):
- Select best-in-class S2P suite
- Integrate it with existing ERP/systems
- Paper over organizational gaps with workarounds
- Promise “transformation” outcomes
- Reality: <60% adoption, unrealized benefits, expensive partial success
The pattern is identical.
Ariba couldn’t integrate acquired companies successfully.
Customers can’t integrate acquired technology successfully.
Why? Because integration isn’t a technology problem—it’s an organizational readiness problem.
3. MAJOR CONSULTING FIRMS ARE ARRIVING AT THE SAME CONCLUSION
The Hackett Group (October 2025):
- Only 2% of organizations exceed transformation expectations
- 90%+ fail without quantified readiness assessment
- Success requires readiness across six dimensions (strategy alignment, organizational structure, process maturity, data quality, technology architecture, change management)
These six dimensions map directly to Hansen Fit Score’s five dimensions (established 2015):
The industry is catching up to what Procurement Insights documented for 27 years:
Readiness determines outcomes. Technology is necessary but not sufficient.
WHAT SAP ARIBA’S ANNOUNCEMENT MEANS FOR THE MARKET
Joël Collin-Demers nailed it:
“When your biggest competitor publicly admits their suite is obsolete and announces a complete rebuild, suddenly YOUR legacy code is in the spotlight too.”
The implications:
1. ALL MAJOR S2P SUITES FACE ARCHITECTURAL DEBT
- SAP Ariba: 25 years old, rebuilding from scratch
- Coupa: 19 years old, facing same legacy code challenges
- Ivalua: Similar vintage, similar challenges
- GEP: Recognized early (2023) and replatformed to GEP Quantum
The “legacy S2P suite” model is dead.
Not because these platforms lack capability, but because the architectural foundation can’t support modern requirements (AI-first design, composable architecture, unified data models, embedded analytics).
2. CUSTOMERS SELECTING “BEST-IN-CLASS” TODAY ARE BUYING OBSOLETE TECHNOLOGY
The hard truth:
Whatever ERP/S2P platform organizations select in 2025-2026 will require replatforming or complete replacement within 10-15 years.
Why?
- SAP Ariba lasted 25 years before requiring rebuild
- Coupa is 19 years old and facing similar pressure
- Technology evolution cycles are accelerating (cloud, AI, composable platforms)
The question isn’t “which technology should we buy?”
The question is “are we ready to implement THIS platform successfully AND migrate to the NEXT platform when needed?”
3. ORGANIZATIONAL READINESS MATTERS MORE THAN VENDOR SELECTION
As Joël observed:
“What will be the determining factor of your success is your implementation team’s ABILITY TO DELIVER, in your company, in your context.”
Translation: Readiness > Technology
Organizations with strong readiness can:
- Implement current platform successfully (70-85% success probability)
- Migrate to next-generation platform when needed
- Reduce dependency on any specific vendor
Organizations without readiness:
- Fail on current platform (80-90% failure probability)
- Cannot successfully migrate to new platform (repeat failure pattern)
- Remain locked into vendor despite dissatisfaction (lack capability to change)
Technology changes. Organizational readiness transcends vendors.
THE PATTERN PROCUREMENT INSIGHTS HAS DOCUMENTED FOR 27 YEARS
1998: RAM (Relational Acquisition Model)
- Government-funded research for Canada’s Department of National Defence
- Key finding: 51% → 97.3% delivery accuracy through readiness-first approach
- Organizational dynamics > Technology capability
2007: Virginia eVA
- Commonwealth of Virginia e-procurement transformation
- Key finding: “Effectiveness has little to do with technology and more to do with process understanding and refinement”
- Results: 1% of spend (2001) → 80% of spend (2007)
2007: “The Ariba Interviews”
- Predicted that acquisition-driven architecture would create long-term challenges
- Forecast: Either Ariba would rebuild platform or face strategic repositioning
2009: “Slow Train Coming”
- Documented that vendor promises ≠ customer realization
- Predicted: Organizations would realize technology ≠ transformation
2012: “Is Ariba Still On-Demand?”
- Analyzed SAP acquisition and integration challenges
- Predicted: SAP would eventually need to rebuild or fundamentally reposition
2015: Hansen Fit Score Formalized
- Codified RAM principles into quantitative assessment (5 dimensions, 23 characteristics)
- Established Phase 0 readiness methodology
2019: “Where Are They Now?”
- Revisited 12-year-old predictions
- Finding: Architectural debt unresolved, rebuild inevitable
2023: McKinsey, Gartner, KPMG Begin Publishing Readiness Frameworks
- Major consulting firms start catching up to Hansen thesis
October 2024: Gartner Predicts
- 60% of Gen-AI projects will fail due to readiness gaps
October 2025: The Hackett Group Confirms
- Only 2% exceed transformation expectations
- 90%+ fail without readiness assessment
- Six-dimension framework (maps to Hansen Fit Score’s five)
October 2025: SAP Ariba Announces Rebuild
- Exactly what Procurement Insights predicted 18 years earlier
November 2025: Industry Convergence Complete
- Hansen led for 27 years
- Industry followed
- Evidence converged
WHAT THIS MEANS FOR ORGANIZATIONS IMPLEMENTING ERP/S2P IN 2025-2026
The conventional approach:
- Hire consultant (Panorama, Gartner, others)
- Define requirements (250-300 functional requirements)
- Evaluate vendors (Ariba, Coupa, Ivalua, GEP, others)
- Select “best-in-class” platform
- Begin implementation
- Encounter “unexpected” challenges (resources, alignment, data, priorities)
- Experience delays, overruns, scope reductions
- Achieve <60% adoption, unrealized benefits
- Classify as “expensive partial success” (functional failure)
Probability: 80-90% (Hansen archive: 180 implementations, 1998-2025; confirmed by Hackett October 2025)
The readiness-first approach:
- Phase 0 Organizational Readiness Assessment (parallel to requirements definition)
- Quantified baseline measurement (current readiness score: typically 45-55/100)
- Gap identification (five dimensions: behavioral alignment, execution capacity, process maturity, data intelligence, technology architecture)
- Remediation roadmap (target: 72-80/100 for 75% success probability)
- Go/no-go decision criteria (do NOT proceed below 72/100)
- Gap remediation (4-6 months: hire resources, deploy governance, cleanse data, standardize processes, extract lessons from prior failures)
- Then proceed with vendor selection and implementation from position of readiness
- Continuous readiness monitoring during implementation (pause if readiness drops below threshold)
Probability: 70-85% success (Hansen archive: 180 implementations, 1998-2025; confirmed by Hackett October 2025)
THE ROI CALCULATION REMAINS UNCHANGED
Investment:
- Consultant-driven vendor selection: Already committed
- Phase 0 Readiness Assessment: $50-75K (10-15% of transformation budget)
Avoided cost (if Phase 0 prevents failure):
- Schedule delays: $180K-360K
- Budget overruns: $100K-200K
- Scope reductions: $500K-1M in unrealized benefits
- Poor adoption: $300K-600K annually in lost productivity
- Total failure cost: $2-5M+
ROI: 27-67x
Organizations that decline Phase 0 to “save” $50-75K regularly lose $2-5M+ in failure costs.
This pattern has held constant across 180 implementations (1998-2025).
WHY THE OCTOBER 2025 CONVERGENCE MATTERS
Before October 2025, organizations could dismiss Hansen’s readiness-first thesis as:
- One consultant’s opinion
- Overly pessimistic
- Not applicable to their situation
- Not validated by major firms
After October 2025, that’s no longer possible:
Three independent sources converged on identical conclusion:
- Hansen Fit Score (27 years, 180 implementations): Readiness determines outcomes
- Major consulting firms (McKinsey 2023, Gartner 2024, Hackett October 2025): All independently confirm readiness-first thesis
- SAP Ariba (October 2025): Market leader admits 25-year-old architecture obsolete, announces complete rebuild
The pattern is validated:
- Procurement Insights called it 18 years ago (Ariba Interviews, 2007)
- Major consulting firms confirmed it 2 years ago (McKinsey, Gartner, KPMG)
- The Hackett Group quantified it 1 month ago (October 2025: 90%+ failure without readiness)
- SAP Ariba demonstrated it 1 month ago (October 2025: complete rebuild announced)
Organizations can no longer dismiss readiness-first methodology as speculative or unproven.
It’s now industry consensus backed by 27 years of evidence.
THE QUESTION FOR LEADERSHIP
Given:
- 18-year prediction arc (Procurement Insights, 2007-2025)
- 27-year evidence base (RAM 1998 → 180 implementations → 2025)
- Industry convergence (McKinsey, Gartner, Hackett all confirm)
- Technology lifecycle reality (platforms become obsolete within 10-15 years)
- Success probability differential (70-85% with Phase 0 vs. 15-25% without)
Which approach serves your organization’s transformation objectives?
Path A: Invest $50-75K in Phase 0 readiness assessment, achieve 70-85% success probability, build organizational capability that transcends vendors
Path B: Proceed without quantified readiness assessment, accept 80-90% failure probability, risk $2-5M+ in failure costs
The evidence converged. The decision is yours.
EPILOGUE: PROCUREMENT INSIGHTS TURNS 18
The original “Ariba Interviews” series published in August 2007.
SAP Ariba announced their rebuild in October 2025.
18 years from prediction to validation.
Some might say that’s a long time to wait for vindication.
But pattern recognition isn’t about being right quickly—it’s about being right accurately.
Technology evolves. Organizational dynamics don’t.
We’ve been documenting this pattern for 27 years (RAM 1998 → Present).
The industry took 27 years to catch up.
But now that they have, the evidence is irrefutable:
Readiness determines outcomes. Technology is necessary but not sufficient.
Organizations proceeding with transformation initiatives in 2025-2026 now have a choice:
Learn from 27 years of documented evidence and pursue readiness-first approach (70-85% success probability).
Or ignore the evidence and repeat the pattern that fails 80-90% of the time.
The slow train came around the bend.
Just like we predicted in 2009.
Just like we predicted in 2007.
Just like we documented in 1998.
The convergence is complete.
Jon W. Hansen
CEO, Hansen Fit Score | Creator, Hansen Method
Ottawa, Canada
jon@pimedia1.com
Related Reading:
30
Procurement Insights
FROM “RE-ENGINEERING THE FUTURE” TO REPLATFORMING FROM SCRATCH: THE 18-YEAR ARC OF PREDICTION VALIDATED
Posted on November 21, 2025
0
How Procurement Insights Called SAP Ariba’s October 2025 Announcement in August 2007
By Jon W. Hansen
November 22, 2025
THE ANNOUNCEMENT THAT SHOCKED (BUT DIDN’T SURPRISE)
On October 8, 2025, SAP Ariba announced they’re abandoning their 25-year-old codebase and rebuilding their entire Source-to-Pay suite from scratch on SAP’s Business Technology Platform (BTP).
Joël Collin-Demers, whose newsletter reaches 11,000+ procurement professionals, called it what it is:
The industry reacted with a mix of excitement and skepticism. Comments ranged from cautious optimism to outright doubt about whether SAP could deliver on yet another “transformation promise.”
But here at Procurement Insights, we had a different reaction:
“We called this 18 years ago.”
AUGUST 2007: “THE ARIBA INTERVIEWS” PREDICTED THIS MOMENT
In August 2007, I published a series called “The Ariba Interviews: Re-Engineering the Future of On-Demand” analyzing Ariba’s strategic positioning, acquisition strategy, and long-term viability.
The central thesis 18 years ago:
Ariba’s “on-demand” strategy—acquiring companies to bolt together a suite rather than building unified architecture—would create fundamental structural problems that would eventually force a complete rebuild or strategic repositioning.
From the August 2007 post:
“The question isn’t whether Ariba’s acquisition strategy can create a comprehensive suite. The question is whether that suite can deliver unified value, or whether the ‘bolted-together’ architecture will create integration, data, and usability challenges that undermine the value proposition.”
18 years later, SAP Ariba just announced they’re rebuilding from scratch because… the bolted-together architecture created integration, data, and usability challenges that undermined the value proposition.
THE 18-YEAR ARC: FOUR PROCUREMENT INSIGHTS POSTS THAT PREDICTED OCTOBER 2025
POST 1: AUGUST 2007 – “THE ARIBA INTERVIEWS: RE-ENGINEERING THE FUTURE OF ON-DEMAND”
What we identified:
Key prediction:
“Ariba’s challenge will be whether they can create a truly unified platform from acquired components, or whether they’ll face the same integration challenges their customers face with best-of-breed approaches.”
What happened: SAP acquired Ariba (2012), attempted to integrate it with SAP ecosystem, and 13 years later announced they’re starting over because the architecture can’t deliver on modern requirements.
POST 2: MARCH 2009 – “THERE’S A SLOW, SLOW TRAIN COMIN’ UP AROUND THE BEND” (EPILOG FOR THE ARIBA INTERVIEWS)
What we documented:
Key observation:
“The slow train coming isn’t about economic recovery—it’s about organizations realizing that technology capability doesn’t equal transformation success. The vendors who win long-term will be those who help customers become ready for transformation, not just those who sell them software.”
What this predicted: The exact dynamic playing out in 2025 where SAP Ariba (and Coupa, Ivalua, others) are realizing that platform sophistication without organizational readiness = failed implementations.
18 years later, The Hackett Group (October 2025) confirms: Only 2% of organizations exceed transformation expectations. 90%+ fail without readiness assessment.
POST 3: SEPTEMBER 2012 – “IS ARIBA STILL ON DEMAND FOR SHAREHOLDERS AND EXECS? THE ANSWER IS YES, BUT…”
What we analyzed:
Key question:
“Will SAP maintain Ariba’s independent architecture, or eventually fold it into SAP’s platform strategy? And if the latter, does Ariba’s acquisition-based architecture survive that integration, or require fundamental rebuilding?”
What happened: SAP attempted hybrid approach (maintain Ariba independence while integrating with SAP ecosystem), discovered architectural limitations, and 13 years later announced complete rebuild on SAP BTP.
The “answer is yes” referred to shareholder/exec value. The question we raised was: “Is it still on-demand for CUSTOMERS?”
October 2025 answer: No. It requires complete replatforming.
POST 4: NOVEMBER 2019 – “WHERE ARE THEY NOW? THE ARIBA INTERVIEWS, AUGUST 2007”
What we revisited:
Key finding:
“The fundamental architectural challenges identified in 2007 weren’t solved—they were papered over with integration layers, middleware, and workarounds. The question isn’t whether Ariba can continue operating with this architecture. The question is how long SAP tolerates the architectural debt before forcing a fundamental rebuild.”
October 2025 answer: 6 years. SAP announced the rebuild.
WHAT MAKES THIS PATTERN RECOGNITION REMARKABLE
This isn’t about predicting that SAP Ariba would struggle. Lots of analysts critique vendors.
This is about predicting the exact failure mode 18 years in advance:
August 2007 prediction:
October 2025 reality:
The pattern was predictable because the organizational dynamics were predictable.
THE DEEPER PATTERN: TECHNOLOGY EVOLUTION DOESN’T ELIMINATE ORGANIZATIONAL DYNAMICS
Here’s what 18 years of Ariba analysis teaches us:
1. TECHNOLOGY CAPABILITY ≠ TRANSFORMATION SUCCESS
Ariba’s challenge was never technology capability.
They acquired best-in-class point solutions:
Ariba’s challenge was organizational readiness:
Answer: No. Hence the October 2025 announcement.
But here’s the critical insight:
This same pattern plays out in customer organizations.
Organizations buy “best-in-class” S2P suites (Ariba, Coupa, Ivalua, GEP) and fail to achieve transformation not because the technology lacks capability, but because the organization lacks readiness.
Peripheral executive engagement, competing priorities, inadequate resources, poor data quality, weak governance—these organizational dynamics determine outcomes, not platform sophistication.
Technology changes. Organizational dynamics don’t.
2. THE “BOLTED-TOGETHER” ARCHITECTURE MIRRORS CUSTOMER IMPLEMENTATIONS
Ariba’s approach (pre-2025):
Customer approach (typical S2P implementation):
The pattern is identical.
Ariba couldn’t integrate acquired companies successfully.
Customers can’t integrate acquired technology successfully.
Why? Because integration isn’t a technology problem—it’s an organizational readiness problem.
3. MAJOR CONSULTING FIRMS ARE ARRIVING AT THE SAME CONCLUSION
The Hackett Group (October 2025):
These six dimensions map directly to Hansen Fit Score’s five dimensions (established 2015):
The industry is catching up to what Procurement Insights documented for 27 years:
Readiness determines outcomes. Technology is necessary but not sufficient.
WHAT SAP ARIBA’S ANNOUNCEMENT MEANS FOR THE MARKET
Joël Collin-Demers nailed it:
The implications:
1. ALL MAJOR S2P SUITES FACE ARCHITECTURAL DEBT
The “legacy S2P suite” model is dead.
Not because these platforms lack capability, but because the architectural foundation can’t support modern requirements (AI-first design, composable architecture, unified data models, embedded analytics).
2. CUSTOMERS SELECTING “BEST-IN-CLASS” TODAY ARE BUYING OBSOLETE TECHNOLOGY
The hard truth:
Whatever ERP/S2P platform organizations select in 2025-2026 will require replatforming or complete replacement within 10-15 years.
Why?
The question isn’t “which technology should we buy?”
The question is “are we ready to implement THIS platform successfully AND migrate to the NEXT platform when needed?”
3. ORGANIZATIONAL READINESS MATTERS MORE THAN VENDOR SELECTION
As Joël observed:
Translation: Readiness > Technology
Organizations with strong readiness can:
Organizations without readiness:
Technology changes. Organizational readiness transcends vendors.
THE PATTERN PROCUREMENT INSIGHTS HAS DOCUMENTED FOR 27 YEARS
1998: RAM (Relational Acquisition Model)
2007: Virginia eVA
2007: “The Ariba Interviews”
2009: “Slow Train Coming”
2012: “Is Ariba Still On-Demand?”
2015: Hansen Fit Score Formalized
2019: “Where Are They Now?”
2023: McKinsey, Gartner, KPMG Begin Publishing Readiness Frameworks
October 2024: Gartner Predicts
October 2025: The Hackett Group Confirms
October 2025: SAP Ariba Announces Rebuild
November 2025: Industry Convergence Complete
WHAT THIS MEANS FOR ORGANIZATIONS IMPLEMENTING ERP/S2P IN 2025-2026
The conventional approach:
Probability: 80-90% (Hansen archive: 180 implementations, 1998-2025; confirmed by Hackett October 2025)
The readiness-first approach:
Probability: 70-85% success (Hansen archive: 180 implementations, 1998-2025; confirmed by Hackett October 2025)
THE ROI CALCULATION REMAINS UNCHANGED
Investment:
Avoided cost (if Phase 0 prevents failure):
ROI: 27-67x
Organizations that decline Phase 0 to “save” $50-75K regularly lose $2-5M+ in failure costs.
This pattern has held constant across 180 implementations (1998-2025).
WHY THE OCTOBER 2025 CONVERGENCE MATTERS
Before October 2025, organizations could dismiss Hansen’s readiness-first thesis as:
After October 2025, that’s no longer possible:
Three independent sources converged on identical conclusion:
The pattern is validated:
Organizations can no longer dismiss readiness-first methodology as speculative or unproven.
It’s now industry consensus backed by 27 years of evidence.
THE QUESTION FOR LEADERSHIP
Given:
Which approach serves your organization’s transformation objectives?
Path A: Invest $50-75K in Phase 0 readiness assessment, achieve 70-85% success probability, build organizational capability that transcends vendors
Path B: Proceed without quantified readiness assessment, accept 80-90% failure probability, risk $2-5M+ in failure costs
The evidence converged. The decision is yours.
EPILOGUE: PROCUREMENT INSIGHTS TURNS 18
The original “Ariba Interviews” series published in August 2007.
SAP Ariba announced their rebuild in October 2025.
18 years from prediction to validation.
Some might say that’s a long time to wait for vindication.
But pattern recognition isn’t about being right quickly—it’s about being right accurately.
Technology evolves. Organizational dynamics don’t.
We’ve been documenting this pattern for 27 years (RAM 1998 → Present).
The industry took 27 years to catch up.
But now that they have, the evidence is irrefutable:
Readiness determines outcomes. Technology is necessary but not sufficient.
Organizations proceeding with transformation initiatives in 2025-2026 now have a choice:
Learn from 27 years of documented evidence and pursue readiness-first approach (70-85% success probability).
Or ignore the evidence and repeat the pattern that fails 80-90% of the time.
The slow train came around the bend.
Just like we predicted in 2009.
Just like we predicted in 2007.
Just like we documented in 1998.
The convergence is complete.
Jon W. Hansen
CEO, Hansen Fit Score | Creator, Hansen Method
Ottawa, Canada
jon@pimedia1.com
Related Reading:
30
Share this:
Related