Renewal pricing benchmarks for RISE.

The RISE with SAP renewal cycle is now mature enough that the firm engagement base produces a usable benchmark distribution for renewal pricing outcomes. The first wave of RISE deals signed in 2021 and 2022 have reached renewal, the second wave signed in 2023 are approaching, and the buyer side experience across the renewal cohort has surfaced a consistent distribution of outcomes. The benchmark distribution is not a single number. It is a range of outcomes shaped by the buyer organisation preparation, the SAP commercial position at the renewal moment, the consumption pattern across the first term, and the structural choices made inside the original contract. This piece walks the benchmark distribution, the variables that shift the outcome up or down inside the distribution, and the positioning that the buyer organisation can apply during the renewal conversation to land at the favourable end of the range.

The benchmark distribution sits across a wide range

The renewal outcomes observed across the firm engagement base sit across a wide commercial range. At the unfavourable end of the range, RISE renewals have closed at increases of fifteen to twenty five percent above the prior term annualised commercial level, with the increase reflecting the SAP standard uplift mechanism applied without effective challenge and the consumption baseline accepted at the SAP position. At the favourable end of the range, RISE renewals have closed at decreases of five to fifteen percent below the prior term level, with the decrease reflecting the buyer side preparation, the consumption recalibration, and the structural negotiation against the renewal proposal.

The median outcome across the cohort sits at approximately four percent above the prior term annualised commercial level. The median reflects an average of buyer side preparation, an average level of SAP commercial pressure, and a renewal scope that broadly mirrors the original contract. The distribution is wider than the median suggests, and the position of an individual renewal within the distribution is largely determined by the work the buyer organisation does in the ninety days before the renewal date.

The variables that shift the outcome up or down

Six variables explain the majority of the variation in the renewal outcomes across the cohort. The first variable is the buyer side preparation. Buyer organisations that ran a structured renewal preparation cycle, with the consumption baseline assembled and the alternative path scoped, closed renewals at materially better outcomes than buyer organisations that improvised. The preparation discipline alone accounts for approximately ten percentage points of variation in the renewal outcome.

The second variable is the alternative path credibility. Buyer organisations that surfaced a credible alternative to RISE renewal, whether through brownfield S/4HANA migration, GROW with SAP for a portion of the estate, or partial migration to a non SAP platform for selected workloads, closed renewals at better outcomes than buyer organisations that did not. The alternative path does not need to be the chosen path, but it has to be credible enough for the SAP team to model a probability of execution.

The third variable is the consumption pattern. Buyer organisations whose consumption sits comfortably inside the contracted entitlement, with documented evidence of the consumption pattern, hold stronger renewal leverage than buyer organisations whose consumption has exceeded the entitlement and surfaced true up exposure across the term. The consumption pattern is a function of the original sizing work, the post signature optimisation programme, and the operational discipline across the term.

The fourth variable is the SAP commercial position at the renewal moment. SAP quarter end pressure, regional commercial targets, and product portfolio campaigns each shift the SAP commercial position at any given renewal date. Buyer organisations that align the renewal cycle with the SAP commercial pressure points close at better outcomes than buyer organisations that allow the renewal date to drive the timing regardless of the SAP cycle. The fifth variable is the executive sponsorship inside the buyer organisation. Renewals with active CIO or CFO sponsorship close at better outcomes than renewals delegated to procurement teams operating without executive cover. The sixth variable is the original contract structure. Buyer organisations that negotiated strong renewal protections inside the original contract, including the renewal uplift cap, the FUE reclassification mechanism, and the BTP credit treatment, hold stronger positions at renewal than buyer organisations that signed on the SAP standard template.

The positioning against the benchmark

The benchmark distribution is useful only when the buyer organisation can position its renewal accurately within the distribution. The positioning work requires an honest assessment of the buyer side preparation, the alternative path credibility, the consumption pattern, the SAP commercial position, the executive sponsorship, and the original contract structure. The assessment produces a positioning indication that the renewal negotiation can target, with the buyer side knowing whether the realistic outcome sits at the favourable end of the distribution, the unfavourable end, or somewhere in the middle.

The positioning indication shapes the negotiation strategy. A buyer organisation positioned at the favourable end of the distribution can push for an outcome below the prior term level, with the renewal conversation framed around the consumption recalibration and the alternative path credibility. A buyer organisation positioned at the unfavourable end has to focus on holding the SAP standard uplift at the lower end of the proposed range, with the renewal conversation framed around the operational continuity and the migration cost that an alternative path would carry. The positioning indication is honest internal work, not a negotiating posture, and the work produces a realistic target that the negotiation team can hold the SAP commercial position against.

The role of the renewal RFP

A subset of buyer organisations have used a renewal RFP to surface market pricing against the SAP proposal. The renewal RFP is not always commercially attractive, because the migration cost from a hosted RISE environment to an alternative platform may exceed the saving that the RFP could deliver. The RFP is operationally attractive in a different way. It produces market pricing data that the buyer organisation can use to test the SAP renewal proposal, and it surfaces the alternative platforms that could carry portions of the SAP estate if the renewal does not land at an acceptable commercial level.

The renewal RFP has to be scoped honestly. A buyer organisation that runs a renewal RFP without serious intent to consider the alternatives will be detected by the SAP commercial team and the leverage value of the RFP will collapse. A buyer organisation that runs a renewal RFP with documented executive sponsorship, scoped alternatives, and a defined timeline for the alternative evaluation will produce real market pricing data that shifts the SAP commercial position. The honest construction is the leverage.

The benchmark evolves across the cohort

The benchmark distribution will continue to evolve as the renewal cohort matures. The first wave renewals through 2024 and 2025 set the early benchmark. The second wave renewals through 2026 and 2027 are calibrating the distribution against a different SAP commercial position, with the SAP team now under stronger commercial pressure to retain RISE customers and the buyer organisations now operating with stronger preparation discipline. The third wave renewals beyond 2028 will shift the distribution further, with both sides operating on a more sophisticated commercial footing than the first wave.

The benchmark is a moving reference, and the buyer organisations preparing for renewal have to position against the current benchmark rather than against the historical distribution. The current benchmark is reasonably accessible through the firm engagement base, and the positioning work has to draw on the current data rather than on the assumptions carried forward from the original RISE signature. The discipline produces the outcome, and the outcome sits at the position within the benchmark distribution that the buyer side preparation has earned. The work is the value, and the value is realised inside the renewal window that the final ninety days produces.