Abstract visualization of business and enterprise architecture

Master Enterprise Architecture: Clean Core with SAP

How to move from monolithic ERP to an agile, value-driven architecture with SAP BTP, LeanIX & Signavio – without losing control.

Enterprise Architecture Framework – Overview

This overview shows how to combine well-known frameworks effectively: TOGAF provides the method, ArchiMate the language, BPMN/DMN describe processes and decisions, and the SAP EAF sets guardrails for Clean Core and BTP. The following view helps you pick the right set depending on your goal (transformation, operations, security, modeling).

  • EA is no longer documentation but the control center of your transformation – focused on business value.
  • Clean Core separates stable standard processes (S/4HANA) from fast innovation (side‑by‑side on SAP BTP).
  • The SAP Enterprise Architecture Framework plus Metro Map provide cadence and method for planning and execution.
  • LeanIX makes your application landscape transparent; Signavio connects processes and value streams.
  • Governance via an Architecture Board enforces principles, guardrails, and clear decision paths.

Who should care?

CIOs, Enterprise Architects, Domain Leads, Program Managers (e.g., RISE with SAP), and Data & Security leaders – anyone who needs to control speed, quality, and cost simultaneously.

Why now? Strategic context

The shift to cloud, SaaS, and event-driven architectures demands new rules. With Clean Core, BTP extensions, and strong governance you reduce upgrade costs, accelerate change, and remain compliant.

Cost

Less customization in the core reduces upgrade and maintenance costs. Rationalization eliminates license and run duplicates.

Agility

Side‑by‑side extensions on BTP deliver fast innovation without touching the core – secure, versionable, scalable.

Compliance

Strong governance, ADRs, and guardrails protect Clean Core principles – auditable and repeatable.

AI Readiness

Clean data models, events, and APIs are the foundation for analytics, GenAI, and automation.

Cloud / RISE

From lift‑and‑shift to transformation: instance strategy, integration strategy, and phases from a single playbook.

M&A

Faster carve‑out and PMI: analyze capability overlap, capture synergies, control risks.

Frameworks Overview

TOGAF

Scope: Full EA lifecycle (ADM).
Strengths: Method, artifacts, governance.
Use for: Structured transformation, architecture process.

ArchiMate

Scope: Modeling business, application & technology layers.
Strengths: Common language, traceability.
Use for: Visualization & impact analysis.

Zachman

Scope: Classification schema.
Strengths: Completeness view.
Use for: Structured documentation, inventory.

BPMN

Scope: Process modeling.
Strengths: Standardized, tool support.
Use for: Signavio processes, automation.

SAP EAF

Scope: SAP‑specific EA guardrails.
Strengths: Clean Core, BTP, integration.
Use for: S/4HANA, RISE, BTP extensions.

ITIL / COBIT

Scope: Operations & controls.
Strengths: Service excellence, auditability.
Use for: Operating model, compliance.

Metro Map

Scope: Non‑linear execution methodology.
Strengths: Synchronizes streams (data, integration, security).
Use for: RISE with SAP programs, complex rollouts.

Quick comparison

TOGAF provides the method, ArchiMate the language, BPMN the process view. SAP EAF grounds all this for S/4HANA, BTP and integration – complemented by ITIL/COBIT in operations.

Frameworks compared (details)

TOGAF SAP fit: Medium

Goal/Scope
EA lifecycle, ADM, governance
Strengths
  • Method, reference artifacts
  • Governance depth
Weaknesses
  • Less prescriptive in delivery
  • Learning curve
Typical artifacts
  • ADM phases
  • Principles, roadmaps
  • Capability plans

ArchiMate SAP fit: Medium

Goal/Scope
Business/App/Tech modeling
Strengths
  • Common language
  • Traceability, tool support
Weaknesses
  • Model discipline needed
  • No process notation
Typical artifacts
  • Views/viewsheets
  • Motivation/realization views

BPMN SAP fit: High

Goal/Scope
Process modeling
Strengths
  • Standardized, automation‑ready
  • Understandable for business
Weaknesses
  • No EA scope
  • Needs governance/versioning
Typical artifacts
  • Process diagrams
  • Roles, interfaces

Zachman SAP fit: Low

Goal/Scope
Classification framework
Strengths
  • Completeness, order
  • Inventory view
Weaknesses
  • No method
  • No flow logic
Typical artifacts
  • Matrix Who/What/Where/…

SAP EAF SAP fit: Very high

Goal/Scope
EA guardrails for SAP
Strengths
  • Clean Core, BTP
  • Integration guidance
Weaknesses
  • Strong SAP focus
Typical artifacts
  • Guardrails
  • Blueprints
  • Integration patterns

ITIL / COBIT SAP fit: High

Goal/Scope
IT operations, controls, governance
Strengths
  • Service excellence
  • Audit/controls
Weaknesses
  • No architecture target picture
Typical artifacts
  • Processes, policies
  • KPIs, controls

Metro Map SAP fit: High

Goal/Scope
Non‑linear program execution
Strengths
  • Synchronize streams
  • Expose dependencies
Weaknesses
  • Discipline required
  • No formal standard
Typical artifacts
  • Stations/streams
  • Milestone networks

SAFe SAP fit: Medium

Goal/Scope
Scaled agility/portfolio
Strengths
  • Value streams
  • Lean budgets
Weaknesses
  • Complex, rollout effort
Typical artifacts
  • Program Kanban
  • PI plans, ART artifacts

IT4IT SAP fit: Medium

Goal/Scope
IT value chain/reference model
Strengths
  • End‑to‑end delivery model
  • Interfaces/contracts
Weaknesses
  • Focus on IT operations
Typical artifacts
  • Value streams
  • Functional components

C4 Model SAP fit: Medium

Goal/Scope
Architecture visualization
Strengths
  • Context to code level
  • Clarity
Weaknesses
  • No process/EA scope
Typical artifacts
  • Context/container
  • Component/code

DMN SAP fit: Medium

Goal/Scope
Decision modeling
Strengths
  • Clear business rules
  • Automatable
Weaknesses
  • Limited coverage
  • Needs governance
Typical artifacts
  • DRD
  • Decision tables

DDD SAP fit: Medium

Goal/Scope
Domain cut & model
Strengths
  • Bounded contexts
  • Clear responsibility model
Weaknesses
  • Requires strong domain knowledge
Typical artifacts
  • Context maps
  • Ubiquitous language

NIST CSF SAP fit: High

Goal/Scope
Security framework
Strengths
  • Controls, risk management
  • Maturity
Weaknesses
  • No EA/process focus
Typical artifacts
  • Identify‑Protect‑Detect‑Respond‑Recover

ISO/IEC 42010 SAP fit: Medium

Goal/Scope
Architecture description
Strengths
  • Foundational principles
  • Stakeholders/views
Weaknesses
  • Abstract
  • No implementation method
Typical artifacts
  • Viewpoints
  • Views, concerns

Key differences

  • TOGAF vs ArchiMate: Method/process vs. language/model. Together they give governance + visualization.
  • BPMN vs DMN: Flows vs. decisions. Combine for automated processes.
  • SAP EAF vs generic EA frameworks: SAP‑specific guardrails vs. general principles.
  • ITIL/COBIT vs SAFe: Operations/controls vs. value‑stream‑based delivery.
  • DDD/C4 vs BPMN/ArchiMate: Domain/architecture cut vs. process/EA documentation.
  • IT4IT vs NIST CSF: IT delivery model vs. security control framework.

Frameworks comparison (radar)

Clean Core – A complete approach for a stable, maintainable, and future‑proof SAP landscape

The Clean Core approach is a key success factor for any SAP S/4HANA transformation. It ensures that processes, technology, data, and integrations are designed to keep the system stable, leverage cloud innovation, and enable upgrades without costly rework. The following four building blocks together form a complete Clean Core framework.

1. Functional Clean Core

Goal

Keep processes close to SAP standard and harmonize across domains.

What’s included?

  • Adopt standard processes instead of building from scratch
  • Harmonize variants across all areas
  • Define end‑to‑end responsibility per process
  • Use SAP Best Practices and Model Company
  • Clear fit‑to‑standard decision rules

How do we implement?

  • Fit‑to‑standard workshops across business areas
  • Leverage preconfigured best‑practice scenarios
  • Governance board for deviations from standard
  • Process documentation via Signavio or SolMan

Benefits

  • Lower complexity
  • Faster release cycles
  • Reduced defect rate
  • Higher end‑to‑end transparency

2. Technical Clean Core

Goal

No changes in the SAP core. Extensions remain upgrade‑safe and cleanly decoupled.

What’s included?

  • No modifications in the S/4HANA core
  • Use stable APIs instead of direct changes
  • Side‑by‑side extensions on SAP BTP
  • Modern extension tech (CDS Views, RAP, Key User Extensibility)
  • Clear separation between standard and custom

How do we implement?

  • Architecture mandates for developers and partners
  • Build new functions on BTP or in‑app extensibility
  • Governance process for extensions ("Extension Board")
  • Document all extensions in an Extension Repository

Benefits

  • Upgrade safety over many years
  • More stability and fewer incidents
  • Leverage SAP innovation immediately
  • Reduced technical debt

3. Data Clean Core

Goal

Data quality, model and governance clearly defined and clean.

What’s included?

  • Harmonized master data model across business areas
  • Clear data owners and data stewards
  • Cleanup of legacy, duplicates and inconsistencies
  • Use SAP MDG or data governance frameworks
  • Rules for data maintenance, permissions and monitoring

How do we implement?

  • Establish a data governance board
  • Data cleansing campaigns before and during the transformation
  • Introduce clear data standards and validation rules
  • Proactive data quality metrics (KPIs, dashboards)

Benefits

  • Higher automation and fewer manual interventions
  • Better decision quality
  • Foundation for AI, analytics and process automation
  • Fewer errors and questions in daily operations

4. Integration Clean Core

Goal

API‑based, transparent and robust integration architecture.

What’s included?

  • Use standardized APIs from SAP API Business Hub
  • Avoid point‑to‑point connections
  • Event‑driven integration (e.g., SAP Event Mesh)
  • Use SAP Integration Suite
  • Clear documentation, monitoring and ownership

How do we implement?

  • Architecture blueprints and integration guidelines
  • Set up an API catalog (versioning, transparency)
  • Define Integration Owner roles
  • Operate/monitor via SAP Integration Suite

Benefits

  • Fewer outages due to robust integration
  • Faster onboarding of new systems
  • Transparency across interfaces
  • Easier maintenance and lower run costs

Why the combination of all four building blocks matters

A Clean Core only works when Functional, Technical, Data, and Integration come together. Isolated actions are not enough. The combination enables:

  • a stable S/4HANA landscape
  • lower lifecycle costs
  • clear ownership
  • higher delivery speed
  • immediate use of new SAP innovations
  • true cloud readiness

Recommendation: Governance & roles

  • Process Owner (end‑to‑end responsibility)
  • Technical Owner / Lead Architect
  • Data Owner / Data Steward
  • Integration Owner
  • Clean Core Board – central decision body

Guiding principle

Clean Core means: Standard first. API first. Data first. Cloud first. This keeps S/4HANA stable, maintainable, and future‑proof.

Capability Map

Business Processes, value streams, capability ownership Application Applications, services, integration Data Data model, quality, analytics Technology Cloud/Edge, infrastructure, platforms Security IAM, protection, compliance AI MLOps, model governance, GenAI Notes The Capability Map connects business goals with applications, data, and technology and reveals gaps and redundancies.

Start with “Priority‑1” data objects (e.g., Business Partner, Sales Order) and clear ownership. Add business roles and Fiori apps to ensure real usability.

Reference architecture: layers

Business / Process

  • Value streams & capability map guide investments.
  • Align Signavio processes to KPIs and roles.
  • ADR‑backed decisions remain transparent.

Application / Integration

  • S/4HANA as stable core, extensions side‑by‑side on BTP.
  • Integration via SAP Integration Suite, events, and APIs.
  • LeanIX‑driven rationalization and TCO control.

Data / Analytics

  • Shared metadata catalog for core and extension objects.
  • Data quality, lineage, self‑service analytics.
  • Model ESG metrics through to auditability.

Technology / Cloud / Edge

  • Cloud‑first principles, automation, observability.
  • Scalable platform services (BTP, storage, runtime).
  • Guardrails for cost, security, availability.

Security / Compliance

  • IAM, secrets, encryption, least privilege.
  • Policies, controls, evidence (e.g., ADR/reviews).
  • Regulatory alignment (e.g., AI regulation, NIS2).

AI / MLOps / Governance

  • Feature stores, model lifecycle, drift monitoring.
  • GenAI with security and IP checks.
  • Responsible AI policies & approval flows.

Use cases: Sustainability & M&A

Sustainability management

  • Data architecture: model ESG data lineage (capture, calculation, reporting).
  • Solution: S/4HANA operational + SAP Sustainability Control Tower for auditable reporting.
  • Governance: anchor responsibilities, data quality and evidence.

Mergers & Acquisitions

  • Carve‑out: LeanIX inventory to analyze “blast radius” (apps, servers, data) and separation cuts.
  • PMI: capability overlap analysis → consolidate duplicates (e.g., HR), prioritize roadmap.
  • Risk & pace: guardrails, integration strategy (SAP Integration Suite) and phased plan.

Governance & operating model

Roles & responsibilities (RACI‑light)

  • CIO – strategic direction, budget, prioritization.
  • Enterprise Architect – principles, target picture, guardrails.
  • Data – metadata, data quality, access models.
  • Security – policies, controls, risk sign‑off.
  • Domain leads – business value, process accountability.
  • Works council – co‑determination for roles & work design.

RACI overview

The Architecture Board decides on deviations (ADRs), issues approvals, and enforces principles like “Cloud First”, “Buy before Build”, and “Keep the Core Clean”. Project teams are Responsible, domain leads Accountable, EA/Security Consulted, stakeholders Informed.

Policies & standards

Mandatory guardrails: naming conventions, API standards, event design, data classification, secrets handling, test and release processes, minimum telemetry and documentation (ADRs).

Roadmap: Implementation

Phase 1: Assessment

Inventory with LeanIX, process capture with Signavio, define capability map & instance strategy, Clean Core baseline, identify quick wins & risks.

Phase 2: Pilot

Value‑driver pilot (e.g., pricing logic on BTP), validate reference architecture, automate integration & security, establish the Architecture Board.

Phase 3: Scale

Application portfolio rationalization, rollout per Metro Map, KPI‑driven steering, continuous architecture (automated checks, ADR routine).

Roadmap phases (time/effort profile)

KPIs & value contribution

Time‑to‑change
Release lead time
Cost‑to‑serve
Run & license costs
Incident rate
Incidents/month
Reuse
Service/API reuse
Tech debt
Reduction per quarter
Stakeholder NPS
Business satisfaction
  • Quarterly portfolio reviews and architecture health checks.
  • Monthly measurement of lead time, defect density, change failure rate.
  • Annual TCO assessment and investment planning by value streams.
  • Application rationalization savings (licenses, operations) evidenced.
  • Upgrade cost reduction through Clean Core (less customization).

Cadence: Monthly (operational), quarterly (strategic), annually (budget/TCO).

KPI overview

Tools & repositories

Further reading

FAQ