Custom Code and Legacy Complexity: What Happens to Your SAP Extensions in S/4HANA?

The predictable failure mode is treating custom-code assessment as a technical checklist completed quickly early in the project, rather than as a genuine cross-functional exercise. When that happens, one of two things tends to occur. Either too much custom code gets carried forward by default, because nobody made the case for retiring it, and the new system inherits the same complexity the migration was partly meant to reduce — reflected in SAPinsider’s finding that only 43% of organizations are actively modernizing or eliminating custom processes, meaning a majority are not. Or, in the opposite failure mode, custom code gets stripped out aggressively to hit a timeline, and the organization discovers post-go-live that a “redundant” object was actually load-bearing for a process finance or operations depended on.

Both outcomes are avoidable with the same fix: treat the custom-code decision as a documented, business- reviewed exercise conducted early enough in the program that its findings can actually influence the choice between a brownfield, greenfield, or selective migration strategy — not as a cleanup task squeezed in after that strategic decision has already been made.

Assessing which custom objects to retain, redesign, replace, or retire requires both an accurate technical inventory and informed business judgment — exactly the kind of evidence-based review Orpington Technologies’ Full ERP Diagnostic Report is built to provide. From there, Orpington Technologies can either lead the custom-code remediation program directly through its Full ERP Implementation Partnership, or place certified specialists into an existing effort through ERP Staff Augmentation. Organizations facing a custom-code backlog are welcome to discuss which model fits their situation.