{"id":2023,"date":"2026-07-02T11:20:21","date_gmt":"2026-07-02T11:20:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scmchamps.com\/blog\/?p=2023"},"modified":"2026-09-14T13:01:35","modified_gmt":"2026-09-14T13:01:35","slug":"sap-post-go-live-advisory","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scmchamps.com\/blog\/sap-post-go-live-advisory\/","title":{"rendered":"SAP Post-Go-Live Advisory: What Senior Leaders Need to Know"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><b>Quick answer: SAP post-go-live advisory is a focused, short-term program (typically 6\u20139 months) that fixes the root causes of operational struggles after go-live \u2014 without reimplementation. It\u2019s for companies where untrusted data, workarounds, and slipping user adoption are eating into the business case. By systematically working on master data, planning parameters, user adoption, and governance, advisory turns a live but underperforming SAP system into a reliable business platform.<\/b><\/p>\n<h2><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">You know this situation<\/span><\/h2>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Your SAP system is live \u2014 but is it actually delivering results?<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The go-live party is over. The implementation partner has handed over the keys and moved on. Yet three months in, your planners are quietly rebuilding their old Excel sheets. Inventory numbers in the system look nothing like what\u2019s on the warehouse floor. Every month-end close is a scramble, and your leadership team keeps asking the same question: \u201cWe spent all this money\u2014where&#8217;s the improvement?\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Nobody has a good answer. IT says the project succeeded. Operations says the system still gets in the way. Finance sees the investment on the balance sheet but not in the business results.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The project was delivered on time and on budget, but the results everyone expected are missing. This isn\u2019t a failure of your team or the software \u2014 it\u2019s the gap between a technical go-live and the value the business was promised. At SCM Champs, closing that gap is the entire focus of our work.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Going live with SAP does not always mean the operation suddenly starts running better.<\/span><\/p>\n<h2><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">So, why is the business still struggling after SAP go live?<\/span><\/h2>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Because go-live is an IT milestone, not a business result. A live system doesn\u2019t guarantee accurate data, confident users, or stable processes. Those come only from deliberately tuning the levers that turn system functionality into daily operational reliability.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Here\u2019s the uncomfortable truth: most SAP failures don\u2019t happen during implementation; they happen silently after go-live.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The numbers back this up.<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.gartner.com\/en\/information-technology\/topics\/enterprise-resource-planning\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Gartner predicts that by 2027, more than 70% of recently implemented ERP initiatives will fall short of their original business case goals, with as many as 25% failing badly<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Walk the warehouse floor a few months after go live, and the gap between what the project was supposed to deliver and what the operation is actually experiencing can be hard to miss. Here\u2019s what these post-implementation issues usually look like:<\/span><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Inventory accuracy you can\u2019t trust \u2014 physical counts never match the system<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Warehouse teams running workarounds because the standard SAP flow feels too slow<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Planners maintaining parallel spreadsheets because MRP outputs don\u2019t reflect reality<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Exception queues growing week over week, drowning the few super-users who know what to do<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">A handful of key people becoming bottlenecks \u2014 if they leave, the whole operation grinds to a halt<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Dashboards and KPIs that look good in meetings but don\u2019t match what the business actually feels<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">These are not system bugs. They\u2019re symptoms of a value gap \u2014 the distance between a technically working SAP landscape and one that delivers the financial and operational returns you built the business case on. The gap tends to be widest in multi-plant organisations and after global rollouts, where one template had to fit very different sites.<\/span><\/p>\n<h2><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">What\u2019s the difference between SAP support and SAP post-go-live advisory?<\/span><\/h2>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Support fixes tickets; advisory fixes the reasons tickets keep happening. Support keeps the system running; advisory makes sure it pays off.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">This distinction matters because many organisations treat every post go-live problem as an AMS ticket. But getting the transaction working again does not necessarily fix the problem. If the process, the data or the way of working are the same, chances are the problem will return. The practical difference is summarised in the table below.<\/span><\/p>\n<table>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td><b>Support<\/b><\/td>\n<td><b>Advisory<\/b><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Fixes the error<\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Finds why it keeps happening<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Restores the transaction<\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Improves the process<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Reacts to tickets<\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Prevents tickets<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Measures response time<\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Measures business results<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Keeps the system running<\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Makes the system pay off<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Support stops the bleeding. Advisory builds the muscle so you bleed less next month.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Put simply: support restores transactions. Advisory restores business confidence.<\/span><\/p>\n<h2><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">What is poor post-go-live management actually costing you?<\/span><\/h2>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Often more per year than fixing the root causes would cost, because the hidden costs of workarounds, excess inventory, and bad data compound quietly \u2014 month after month.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Executives rarely see a single line item called \u201cpost-go-live value erosion&#8221;. Instead, the cost hides inside operational headaches that show up on the P&amp;L in familiar, depressing ways.<\/span><\/p>\n<table>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td><b>Symptom<\/b><\/td>\n<td><b>Hidden Cost<\/b><\/td>\n<td><b>Advisory Lever That Fixes It<\/b><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Excess inventory buffers<\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Trapped working capital; higher warehousing costs<\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Planning Parameters, Master Data<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Manual workarounds (Excel, paper picks)<\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Lost productivity; overtime during peaks<\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">User Adoption, Governance<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Unreliable master data (lead times, BOMs, batch info)<\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Slow, wrong planning decisions; scrap and rework<\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Master Data, Governance<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Declining user adoption<\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">SAP investment quietly depreciating; rising shadow processes<\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">User Adoption, Governance<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The scale is bigger than most leaders assume:<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.mckinsey.com\/capabilities\/tech-and-ai\/our-insights\/delivering-large-scale-it-projects-on-time-on-budget-and-on-value\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">McKinsey and Oxford studied thousands of large IT projects<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> and found they deliver, on average, 56% less value than predicted.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">And here\u2019s the dangerous part: the costs keep growing while leadership stares at green dashboards \u2014 dashboards built from the same bad data.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">If you want to see the value gap in boardroom language, look at four numbers. Working capital: excess safety stock is cash sitting on shelves. OTIF: every workaround and mis-shipment chips away at it. Inventory turns: they stall when nobody trusts the system\u2019s numbers enough to run lean. And EBITDA: overtime, rework, and expedited freight all land there. The value gap never shows up as its own line item \u2014 it hides inside the metrics the board already reviews every quarter.<\/span><\/p>\n<h2><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">What does good SAP post-go-live advisory look like?<\/span><\/h2>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Good advisory works the four levers of the SAP Value Gap Framework \u2014 Master Data, Planning Parameters, User Adoption, and Governance \u2014 with a special focus on the top two: keeping User Adoption real and Governance alive so improvements never slip back.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Think of the framework as four stacked levers. The bottom levers \u2014 Master Data and Planning Parameters \u2014 create the technical conditions for a stable system. Get them right and MRP starts suggesting sensible quantities, inventory snapshots become usable, and basic transactional friction drops. But stability alone doesn\u2019t deliver business results. The top two levers \u2014 User Adoption and Governance \u2014 are where the business case lives or dies.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Worth pausing on: the first spreadsheet people rebuild after go-live is rarely because they dislike SAP. It\u2019s because they no longer trust one number inside it. Adoption doesn\u2019t collapse all at once \u2014 it erodes one untrusted number at a time. That\u2019s why advisory fixes the data and parameters first: trust can only be rebuilt on a foundation that deserves it.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Advisory\u2019s real job is to climb the levers in order. Find where you\u2019re stuck. Fix the weak lever. Then put governance in place so you don\u2019t slide back. Without real user adoption, every process improvement starts degrading the moment a super-user goes on holiday. Without active governance, master-data standards decay within weeks, and you\u2019re back to spreadsheets.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">And governance is not an abstract word. In practice it looks like:<\/span><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Weekly parameter reviews<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> \u2014 safety stocks and lead times checked against reality, not set-and-forgotten<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Site adoption scorecards<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> \u2014 visible, comparable, discussed in leadership meetings<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Monthly inventory accuracy reviews<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> \u2014 one number, one owner, one trend line<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Named cross-functional owners<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> \u2014<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.supplychainbrain.com\/blogs\/1-think-tank\/post\/44055-why-ai-in-supply-chain-cant-succeed-without-foundational-systems\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">supply chain<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, finance, and IT accountable for the same KPIs at the same table<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Which warning signs should leadership never ignore?<\/span><\/h2>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">If three or more of these are true, you have a value gap that\u2019s quietly eroding your SAP investment.<\/span><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Repeated large inventory adjustments every cycle count<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Growing dependence on offline spreadsheets for planning or reporting<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Rising warehouse exceptions that operators routinely override<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Declining transaction volumes in core SAP screens as users drift away<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Support tickets rising \u2014 or falling suspiciously (see below)<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">KPIs that vary significantly across sites despite the same system and processes<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Teams proudly \u201cworking around SAP\u201d instead of working inside it<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">One counterintuitive signal fools many leadership teams: a falling ticket count after go-live is not automatically good news. Tickets fall for two very different reasons. One is that problems are genuinely being resolved. The other is that users have stopped reporting problems and started working around them \u2014 the system is not healthier, it is simply being abandoned quietly. If ticket counts are dropping while spreadsheet use is rising, you are looking at the second case.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Count your ticks. Three or more means it\u2019s time for an independent look.<\/span><\/p>\n<h2><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Where does this show up in real operations?<\/span><\/h2>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The symptoms are universal, but the pattern shifts by industry. Here\u2019s how the value gap typically surfaces.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><b>Manufacturing: production plans that don\u2019t match shop-floor reality.<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> The BOMs and routings set up during implementation slowly drift away from how the shop floor actually runs \u2014 the real run times, yields, and changeover sequences. SAP generates production orders that the shop floor cannot execute as planned, so supervisors override the system. Planners compensate by inflating lead times and safety stock. Working capital balloons while fill rates stay mediocre. The fix sits squarely in Master Data and Planning Parameters \u2014 rebaselining BOMs and routings against real shop-floor data so MRP outputs become usable again, without planners second-guessing every recommendation.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><b>Distribution \/ 3PL: the warehouse runs on paper, not<\/b><a href=\"https:\/\/www.scmchamps.com\/sap-modules\/extended-warehouse-management\"> <b>SAP EWM<\/b><\/a><b>.<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Under daily shipping pressure, floor teams skip system-directed steps \u2014 picking is confirmed on paper first, system updates follow hours later. It usually becomes visible once daily order volumes grow past what manual workarounds can quietly absorb. Physical stock and SAP EWM stock diverge, and every cycle count turns into a firefight. The result: nobody trusts the warehouse KPIs anymore, labor costs creep up from rework, and mis-shipments start reaching customers. The levers here are User Adoption and Governance \u2014 first redesign the warehouse process so that following SAP is the faster path, then build daily routines that catch shortcuts early, before they spiral. (We\u2019ve broken down this exact failure mode in detail in<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.scmchamps.com\/blog\/warehouse-productivity-sap-ewm-go-live\/\"> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">why warehouse productivity falls after SAP EWM go-live<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><b>Pharma \/ Consumer Goods: compliance data that needs manual rework every reporting period.<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Batch, expiry, and serialisation data are maintained inconsistently across plants because local teams interpret standards differently. At quarter-end, a small army manually reconciles records before regulatory reports can be filed. Audit risk grows quietly, and the cost of quality escalates. The fix requires master data standards harmonised and enforced through governance \u2014 simple, auditable rules for batch-status updates and expiry-date maintenance, backed by exception reports that catch deviations within 24 hours, not at month-end.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><b>A recent engagement: stabilising without reimplementation.<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> One of our recent engagements with a mid-sized manufacturing company in Europe illustrates this clearly. Three months after SAP go-live, their leadership team was facing a familiar situation \u2014 inventory accuracy was fluctuating between system and physical counts, planners had reverted to spreadsheets for critical decisions, and warehouse teams were increasingly relying on manual overrides to meet dispatch timelines.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Instead of recommending a reimplementation, the focus was on stabilising what already existed. The diagnosis was unglamorous: safety stocks and lead times were still sitting at their go-live defaults, and planners were overriding most MRP proposals rather than trusting them. Within the first 8 weeks, by recalibrating those planning parameters and correcting key master data elements, MRP outputs became reliable enough that planners began accepting system proposals again instead of reworking them in spreadsheets. In parallel, by redesigning a few high-friction warehouse execution steps, user adoption improved without additional system changes.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">By the end of the advisory cycle, the company had not only reduced manual workarounds but also regained confidence in system-driven planning and execution \u2014 allowing leadership to finally rely on SAP numbers for operational decisions, something that was missing even after a successful go-live. The sequence mattered: bottom levers first, adoption on top.<\/span><\/p>\n<h2><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Why SCM Champs for post-go-live advisory?<\/span><\/h2>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Because we focus exclusively on the after-go-live phase, with deep supply chain and<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.scmchamps.com\/sap-modules\/extended-warehouse-management\"> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">SAP EWM<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\/<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.scmchamps.com\/sap-modules\/sap-transportation-management\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">TM<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> expertise, and we measure success in business results, not resolved tickets.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Our people come from the warehouse floor and the planning desk, not just IT. So we judge your SAP system the way your teams do \u2014 by the daily work: can a picker finish a task without a workaround? Can a planner trust the suggested order? We work cross-functionally, across regions, and always with the SAP Value Gap Framework as our method \u2014 no black-box consultancy, just a structured approach that leaves your team stronger.<\/span><\/p>\n<h2><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Frequently asked questions<\/span><\/h2>\n<h3><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">What is SAP post-go-live advisory?<\/span><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">It\u2019s a short, focused programme \u2014 usually 6\u20139 months \u2014 that fixes what\u2019s stopping a live SAP system from paying off: bad data, wrong planning parameters, users working around the system, and no governance to hold standards in place. Nothing gets reimplemented; the goal is to make what you already own work reliably. A typical engagement is a small team of 2\u20133 consultants, mostly remote, with on-site diagnostic visits.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">How is it different from SAP AMS \/ support?<\/span><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">AMS \u2014 traditional SAP post-go-live support \u2014 reacts to incidents and keeps the lights on. Advisory looks at why the same incidents keep coming back. Instead of fixing each ticket, look at the process, the data and the governance behind the problem and address what\u2019s actually causing it.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">How soon can you expect to see real results?<\/span><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">A good advisory programme can produce measurable improvements in 6 to 9 months. It is contingent upon what needs to be fixed and how quickly the fixes can be put in place.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">You may see some early improvements in the first three months, particularly in areas such as inventory accuracy and reducing manual work, once the biggest issues have been addressed.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Do we need to reimplement SAP to fix post-go-live problems?<\/span><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Almost never. The core design is usually fine \u2014 the problems sit in configuration settings, master data, and how people actually use the system. Advisory finds those issues and fixes them inside the system you already have, so you skip the cost and disruption of doing it all again.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">What does an SAP post-go-live assessment involve?<\/span><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">A focused, independent review of your four value levers \u2014 master data health, planning parameter alignment, user adoption levels, and governance maturity. It pinpoints exactly where value is leaking and produces a prioritised, practical remediation roadmap.<\/span><\/p>\n<h2><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The real measure of your SAP programme<\/span><\/h2>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">SAP programmes are ultimately judged by the business performance you see after go-live \u2014 not by the fact that you went live on schedule. If the daily numbers don\u2019t tell a story of improvement, the investment hasn\u2019t yet paid off.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Start with the seven warning signs above. How many did you tick?<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">If you counted three or more, book a free 30-minute SAP Value Gap Assessment with<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.scmchamps.com\/\"> <b>SCM Champs<\/b><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. No pitch and no obligation \u2014 an honest outside look at where your gap is and what it will take to close it.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Because SAP doesn\u2019t create business value when it goes live. It creates business value when people trust it enough to stop working around it<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Quick answer: SAP post-go-live advisory is a focused, short-term program (typically 6\u20139 months) that fixes&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":2024,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[311,321],"class_list":["post-2023","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-sap","tag-sap-advisory","tag-sap-post-go-live-advisory"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scmchamps.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2023","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scmchamps.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scmchamps.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scmchamps.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scmchamps.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2023"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.scmchamps.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2023\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2040,"href":"https:\/\/www.scmchamps.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2023\/revisions\/2040"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scmchamps.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2024"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scmchamps.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2023"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scmchamps.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2023"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scmchamps.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2023"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}