I run a software company. You should’ve asked these questions before you bought.

When manufacturers evaluate B2B customer portals or SAP ecommerce platforms, the conversation usually starts the same way:

“Let’s look at the Leaders in the Magic Quadrant.”

It feels responsible. Analyst validation. Big logos. Enterprise credibility. Board-safe. It feels like you are de-risking the decision.

But safe is not the same as right.

If your goal is to give existing customers, dealers, distributors, and sales reps fast, accurate, real-time self-service tied directly to SAP, the biggest name in the quadrant may not be the best fit. It may be the most expensive way to solve the wrong problem. You end up buying software that looks great on paper but gets ignored in practice.

Magic Quadrant Leaders are built for a different objective

Most Leaders earned that position by excelling at omnichannel digital commerce. Marketing-driven storefronts, personalization, promotions, content, campaigns, anonymous traffic. They are optimized to attract and convert new buyers, to turn strangers into shoppers and shoppers into orders. This focus pulls your IT resources into managing marketing infrastructure (campaigns, A/B testing, CMS) instead of mission-critical operational data (pricing, availability, credit).

That is a different mission than servicing known customers inside SAP. Post-order self-service is operational. Digital commerce is promotional. Those are not the same problem, and they require different architecture.

If you mix those missions up, you end up buying a marketing machine to solve an operations problem. And then you are surprised when operations quietly pays the price.

Let’s cut to the chase

This is where you should have pushed before signing the SOW. Ask your vendors these questions. The answers will tell you exactly what you need to know about whether you are buying a clean solution or a tangle of dependencies.

• How many systems are involved every time a customer checks pricing, availability, or order status?

One system of truth is ideal. Every additional hop adds latency, integration risk, and one more place where something can be slightly wrong without anyone noticing until your customer calls. If a simple order status check needs to cross three platforms, you are not buying self-service. You are buying a Rube Goldberg machine.

• Is customer and product data replicated, or read live from SAP?

Replication introduces sync jobs, failure points, and timing gaps. You are living in the “almost current” past, hoping the batch jobs ran on time. Live reads reduce drift and eliminate that batch dependency. When SAP changes, your customers see it, and your team does not have to wonder which system is telling the truth.

• What happens if the middleware layer goes down?

Does the portal still function at all? Does anything fail gracefully, or does your entire customer experience hang on a layer your business depends on? If the answer is “the portal is down,” you have introduced a single point of failure between your customers and your revenue.

• How many technical teams are required to implement and maintain this?

Fewer teams means accountability and speed. One team that owns the outcome. Multiple vendors mean coordination overhead, delays, and a lot of “we’re waiting on their team” in your status meetings.

• What measurable business value should we expect in year one?

Look for numbers. CSR workload reduction. Cost-to-serve improvement. Call deflection. Faster order cycles. Fewer status checks. Fewer pricing disputes. If the answer you get is a list of capabilities instead of outcomes, you are being sold a toolbox, not a result.

• What is the ongoing cost to operate this beyond license fees?

Integration maintenance. Data sync management. Upgrade coordination. Vendor dependencies. Those do not show up in the pricing table, but they show up in your P&L and your people’s calendars. Total cost is driven by structural complexity, not subscription price.

These are not academic questions. They define how much complexity you are introducing and how much risk you are accepting. If you do not like the answers, you already know what that means. You are about to buy a problem your team will carry.

The hidden tax no one talks about

The architecture always looks clean in the sales deck. Three boxes. Clean arrows. “Integrated.” No friction. No latency. No edge cases.

In reality, every extra layer becomes something your team has to live with.

When pricing drifts, your CSR owns it. They explain why what the customer saw online is not what shows up on the invoice. When availability lags, your rep double-checks it and quietly reverts to email and spreadsheets because they trust their inbox more than the portal.

When the portal says one thing and SAP says another, your manager explains it. Over and over again. No one calls the middleware vendor. They call you. They call your CSRs. They call your sales team.

The people you pay to serve customers become human APIs, manually stitching together what your “integrated” architecture could not keep in sync. That is the hidden tax of layered architecture. Time your team spends reconciling systems is time they are not serving customers or closing deals.

Three o’clock on a Friday

Picture this. It is three o’clock on a Friday. A key customer logs in to check an order that has to ship today. The portal shows “Confirmed.”

In SAP, the order is on hold due to a credit issue updated earlier that day. The replication process stalled at noon. The portal never updated. To your customer, you gave them a green light.

The customer calls your CSR. They are not calling to chat. They are calling because your systems do not agree. Now your team is explaining why the system cannot be trusted, why “Confirmed” does not mean confirmed, and why they need to wait while someone checks the backend.

This is what happens when architecture choices show up in operations. The diagram becomes the mess in your day. And it happens at exactly the worst moments. End of day. End of month. End of quarter.

What this really means for your business

Step back from the diagrams and look at what happens on the floor.

If the portal is slow, your team answers the phone.
If pricing is wrong, your team fixes it.
If availability is unclear, your reps start emailing.
If data is out of sync, someone in operations explains it.

If the portal is confusing, your sales reps stop using it.
If your dealers cannot get accurate pricing, they call your inside team.
If distributors cannot see real availability, they hold orders or over-order.
If order status is unclear, they escalate.

Every extra system shows up as extra work. More calls. More manual fixes. More escalations. More “let me check on that.” The portal was supposed to reduce workload and accelerate orders. Instead, your team becomes the workaround.

The only question that matters

You can compare feature lists. You can stack up roadmaps, analyst badges, and logos.

But the only question that matters is simple:

Does this platform remove friction for your customers, dealers, distributors, and reps, or does it create new work for your team?

If it removes friction, your people will feel it. Calls go down. Errors drop. Orders move faster. If it creates work, they will feel that too. And they will spend their days compensating for a decision that looked safe on a slide.

I run a software company. I still buy software. I know what it feels like when you get this wrong, and who pays the price.

Next time you are in the market for a portal, start with these questions, not the quadrant.

Your customers and your CSRs will thank you.

I Run a Software Company. Your CSRs Are Paying the Price.

In my last two posts, I made two admissions.

First: I run a software company. And I still buy software. I don’t build everything. Sometimes the smartest move is to buy what already works.

Second: I run a software company. And I don’t always recommend us. Not every problem is a fit. Define the problem first. Then pick the tool.

Here’s the third.

I run a software company. And I don’t trust what my industry is doing to your customer service teams.

If you lead customer service for a manufacturer running SAP, this probably feels familiar. Reps are overwhelmed. The tech stack keeps growing. Turnover keeps rising.

The numbers are ugly. Over 60% of call center agents report burnout risk. Many B2B contact centers live in a world where annual turnover is normal, not alarming. The work is high volume. The systems are fragmented. The day is constant context switching.

At the same time, expectations keep climbing. AI. Omnichannel. Digital transformation.

SAP’s own guidance on AI in service includes a point that should not be controversial, but somehow is: AI should be anchored in real workflows, not deployed for its own sake. The fact that this warning needs to be said at all should give anyone in leadership a pause.

I’ve sat in the boardrooms where “platform expansion” is the growth lever and ARR is the headline. I’ve also noticed what is usually missing from the slide deck.

Nobody asks what a CSR’s screen looks like at 10:17 a.m. when a dealer calls and says, “Where’s my order?”

That is the question that matters.

The hidden tax on the front line

In a typical SAP centric service environment, answering one basic order status question can mean jumping across a handful of systems: SAP, CRM, Email, carrier sites, a portal that may or may not be current. 

So CSRs become human APIs. They translate and reconcile information all day, then get measured on speed.

Research is consistent on the pattern: fragmented tool stacks and cognitive overload show up as longer handle times, higher error rates, and lower satisfaction. Context switching is not just annoying. It is expensive. And the cost compounds into stress, rework, and operational debt.

Vendors celebrate omnichannel. Your team experiences omni-swivel-chair.

Now layer in AI.

Chatbots. AI agents. Auto summaries. Suggested replies.

A lot of companies talk about this as relief. But many teams experience it as supervision. Someone still has to verify the output, correct it, and clean up the edge cases. Nearly 80% of workers using generative AI say it has increased their workload because they spend time reviewing and correcting AI output.

If AI does not reduce the number of systems a rep touches to resolve a ticket, it is not innovation. It is noise.

If it doesn’t eliminate a step, don’t take it

Here’s the rule I give service leaders when someone proposes a new tool.

For every system you add, tell me what step disappears.

A properly integrated SAP self-service portal should allow customers to:

Check order status directly against SAP.
Retrieve invoices without emailing a CSR.
Confirm pricing from the system of record.

Studies on well designed self service consistently show routine inquiry volume can drop dramatically, often 50 to 70 percent, when customers can reliably get answers on their own.

If the stack only grows, the burden grows.

If a project does not move first contact resolution, handle time, CSAT, or deflection, it is decoration.

And since I’m the CEO of a software company, I’ll say it plainly:

If we cannot show a believable path to improving those numbers, you should not buy from us.

When I walk away

There are times I tell a prospect no. Not because the software is bad. Because I’ve seen the same failure pattern too many times.

I walk away when there is no service leader insisting on fewer system touchpoints, and the initiative is being driven as a technology project.

I walk away when SAP master data is a mess and nobody is willing to own the cleanup. A portal can only expose what the ERP can support. Bad data does not become trustworthy just because it has a nicer UI.

I walk away when the organization is not willing to retire legacy tools and enforce a new workflow. If everything stays, nothing changes.

There are times when portals “go live” and call volume go up because customers didn’t trust the information. That outcome is worse than doing nothing. It adds cost and disappointment at the same time.

Good software is subtractive. It removes steps, reduces screens, and makes work simpler.

CSRs live with the consequences of every system decision.

Make sure the software does too.

I run a software company. Not every problem needs my software.

Let’s start with the obvious: I run a software company. We design and sell enterprise software. I have a perspective on how companies choose platforms. Some of that comes from building. A lot of it comes from watching customers live with the consequences of those decisions.

There is a natural assumption that every vendor believes their product fits every situation. In practice, some of our best sales conversations end with us recommending a different product, because not every problem is a Corevist problem.

If the goal is running complex, marketing-driven storefronts, a top digital commerce platform – the kind frequently found in analyst quadrant reports – is often the right choice. These systems support brand storytelling, content, product discovery, promotions, campaigns, and anonymous browsing. They are built to attract and convert new buyers. I even keep a short list of the ones I tend to recommend.

However, with these platforms, everyday post-order interactions run on a much heavier system than the task requires.

Commerce platforms acquire customers. Operational systems service customers.
Those are different problems.

The Influence of the Implementation Partner

Many of these projects begin as digital transformation initiatives led by an implementation partner. Those teams specialize in customer experience platforms, storefront design, and marketing workflows, so the problem is naturally framed in those terms.

That is not wrong. It is a different lens.

When you solve a service problem with a commerce platform, complexity follows. Organizations implement a digital experience platform to answer order and account questions that already live inside the ERP. The result becomes expensive to maintain and slow to adapt.

Good partners solve the problems they are best equipped to solve. The important step is confirming the problem before choosing the platform.

When a Portal Clearly Beats a Storefront

Most companies buy commerce platforms to solve a service problem. If your customers already exist, you are not trying to persuade them, you are trying to operate efficiently. The fastest way to reduce service cost is to stop mediating information the ERP already knows.

Orders arrive through phone calls, emails, spreadsheets, and EDI. Status lives in the ERP. Pricing is complicated. When customer service teams spend their day answering questions like these, the challenge is operational rather than commercial:

Where is my order?
Can I get a copy of the invoice?
Did pricing change?
What shipped?
What is backordered?
Can I place or repeat this order without starting from scratch?

These are not merchandising problems. They are operational ones.

You do not need campaigns or personalization engines to answer order and account questions reliably. You need secure, accurate exposure of ERP data with minimal latency and minimal maintenance. This shifts routine questions away from customer service and back to the customer.

That is where we operate.

The Hybris Replacement Conversation

In mature SAP environments, another pattern appears. A company implemented a commerce platform years ago for digital commerce. Over time, usage shifted. The platform now serves mostly logged-in users checking orders, invoices, shipments, and pricing rather than anonymous shopping. The system still functions but feels oversized for the job and expensive to evolve.

In those cases, the problem is no longer digital commerce. It is customer self service.

Replacing one commerce engine with another rarely fixes that. Simplifying the architecture usually does.

A Practical Rule of Thumb

If your initiative starts in marketing, you probably want a commerce platform in the lead.
If it starts in customer service or operations, you probably do not.

Sometimes the right answer is a pure commerce platform.
Sometimes it is Corevist.
Sometimes it is something else entirely.

As the old saying goes, “Never use a cannon to kill a mosquito.” The mistake is not choosing the wrong product. It is solving the wrong problem.

I run a software company. And I still buy software.

Let’s start with the obvious: I run a software company. We design and sell enterprise software. So yes, I have a perspective on the “build vs. buy” debate—one informed as much by buying as by building.

There is a well-known line that says, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.” Some will argue that this perspective is shaped by that reality.

That is fair.

It is also why I try to be precise about what I am and am not arguing. Over time, I’ve learned that the line between a great internal prototype and a durable production system can look deceptively thin. That is where even capable organizations find themselves tested.

A Demo Is Not a System

Modern tools—AI, low-code platforms, integration frameworks—have made experimentation faster and cheaper than ever. That is progress. Teams can learn quickly, visualize ideas, and test assumptions at record speed. Used well, prototypes sharpen thinking and reduce waste.

The challenge is what happens after the early excitement. A proof of concept that performs beautifully in a controlled setting can mask the work still ahead. Real systems must endure bad data, evolving security standards, staff turnover, regulatory surprises, and growth that never fits the plan. Logging, access controls, auditability, backups, and governance are not glamorous—but they are what make software sustainable. The best innovators know that building is only half the journey. Support, compliance, and stewardship define the other half.

The Hidden Cost of Permanent Ownership

Consider a mid-sized manufacturer that built its own order-entry and reporting portal five years ago to avoid paying a software vendor. At the time, it worked well. Sales reps could place orders, customers could check status, and management had visibility into backlog and pricing.

Today, the original architect is gone. The system struggles with S/4HANA upgrades. New compliance and export-control requirements are difficult to support. Pricing rules live in undocumented scripts. Integrations break during every ERP change. The remaining IT team avoids touching the code unless absolutely necessary.

The company did not eliminate cost. It converted a license fee into a permanent, underfunded operational risk.

When you replace commercial platforms with internal systems, you are not making a short-term decision. You are committing to years of maintenance, security updates, compliance reviews, integrations, and user support. You are committing to fund that work long after the original excitement has faded.

In the first year, ownership feels empowering. You control the roadmap. You avoid license fees. You move quickly. In year three or five, it feels different. Key developers have moved on. Documentation is incomplete. Security standards have changed. Regulators ask new questions. Customers expect higher reliability. At that point, “we built this ourselves” stops being a point of pride and becomes a permanent obligation.

Owning software is not wrong. In fact, when a system is part of your intellectual property—the unique element that delivers your core value—building is often mandatory.

Owning it forever, without a clear strategic reason, usually is.

What Business Are We Really In?

Every company faces this question eventually. Are we a manufacturer, distributor, logistics provider—or a technology company at heart? Most successful firms thrive by excelling in a narrow band of capabilities, not by mastering every layer of technology beneath them.

Building internal platforms is a form of vertical integration. Sometimes it deepens advantage. Sometimes it diffuses it. Owning software means owning security, compliance, uptime, support, governance, and succession. Those responsibilities create durable capability only when they reinforce the company’s strategic core. The right question is not whether you can build more internally. It is whether this system gives you a market advantage or proprietary capability you could not buy—and whether it makes you stronger three to five years from now.

Closing

I run a software company, and I still buy software.

Because focus beats pride.

We invest deeply in what we do best: delivering reliable, SAP-integrated self-service portals that make manufacturers easier to do business with. The rest, we trust to partners who bring their own excellence to the table.

The real competitive advantage is not found in avoiding a license fee. It is found in the sustained ability to execute your core strategy. Building for the sake of ownership is a slow diversion. Partnering for excellence is a permanent accelerator.

Great companies are not defined by how much they build.
They are defined by what they choose to master.

They experiment.
They partner.
They buy wisely.
And they deliver results.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT: Chelsea Raegen

chelsea[dot]raegen[at]corevist.com

DURHAM, NC – May 3, 2024 – Corevist, the B2B ecommerce platform that powers customer-central digital channels, today announced the winners of the inaugural Golden Bull Awards, which recognizes outstanding achievements in B2B digital commerce, spotlighting clients who have excelled in utilizing the Corevist platform to enhance their online sales channel.

Eight manufacturers have been awarded for their exceptional use of the Corevist B2B ecommerce platform, which has enhanced their revenue and improved customer experiences. As B2B purchasing expectations shift, these companies lead the way by adopting scalable, modern tools to align with customer demands. Corevist supports these efforts by providing user-friendly customer portals and an intuitive online ordering platform. Its solutions are seamlessly integrated in real-time with SAP ECC and S/4HANA to ensure 100% ecommerce accuracy 100% of the time.

“The number of companies opting for digital transactions in the B2B sector is at an all-time high and continues to rise,” stated Andy Martin, CEO of Corevist. “These awards showcase the exceptional commitment and creativity our clients bring to enhancing this channel. The Golden Bull Awards signify the profound transformation and strategic achievements our clients realize through our platform. Congratulations to all the winners for establishing new standards in digital commerce.”

The categories for the Golden Bull Awards include:

• Overall Excellence Award for best use of the entire Corevist platform
• President’s Club Award for top sales achievements in the ecommerce channel
• Innovation Trailblazer Award for best suggestions for ongoing platform innovations
• SAP Technical Champion Award for best SAP-driven workflows for operational excellence
• UX Mastery Award for most user-friendly and engaging user experience

Among a group of outstanding clients, the 2024 Golden Bull Awards winners include Chicago Faucets, awarded for Overall Excellence; Bioventus and Oregon Tool, both recognized in the President’s Club; Emmerson Packaging, celebrated as the Innovation Trailblazer; and Kids2, acknowledged for UX Mastery. Additionally, four other manufacturers, both private and publicly traded, received awards across the different categories.

Winners were selected using unique data insights from the Corevist Performance Dashboard, which tracks ecommerce metrics critical to B2B manufacturers. This tool enabled an objective review of each nominee’s use of the platform, emphasizing quantifiable achievements in digital commerce.

Todd Clark, VP of Client Success at Corevist, said, “This year’s winners come from different manufacturing industries and show how creatively and effectively our platform can be used. These awards are not just about what they’ve achieved but also the solid partnerships we’ve built with each winner, which have propelled them to excel in their respective categories.”

The 2024 Golden Bull Awards mark a new chapter in celebrating excellence in B2B digital commerce, highlighting Corevist’s essential contribution to the industry. To discover how the Corevist platform assists manufacturers in creating high-performing B2B ecommerce sites, please visit corevist.com.

For more details on the Golden Bull Awards and to explore the achievements of the winners, visit corevist.com/golden-bull-awards.

About Corevist

Corevist enables SAP-based enterprises to provide exceptional service to their clients through B2B portals and ecommerce solutions that integrate into SAP ERP systems in real-time. Corevist blends the strength of existing technology infrastructures with its deep understanding of customer needs to deliver a solution that’s as intuitive as it is effective.

Corevist solutions process over $2 billion in transaction value every year, interacting directly with clients’ SAP systems. SAP has certified Corevist’s ERP integration for S/4HANA and NetWeaver, and Corevist is SAP’s only strategic partner in commerce. 

Corevist is a global company with clients in North America, LATAM, EMEA and Asia. For more information, call (919) 424-2120 or visit corevist.com.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT: Chelsea Raegen

chelsea[dot]raegen[at]corevist.com

DURHAM, NC. – April 2, 2024 – Corevist, the B2B ecommerce platform that leverages real-time SAP integration to power customer-central digital channels, is thrilled to announce the appointment of its new Chief Customer & Enterprise Solutions Officer, Terry Stahler, former CIO of Crayola. Prior to Crayola, Stahler held technology roles within manufacturing organizations for over 20 years. In his new role, Stahler will be instrumental in working closely with Corevist’s clients, ensuring they harness the full potential of the platform to drive their businesses forward.

As Corevist client in his previous position, Stahler brings a wealth of experience and a deep understanding of the platform’s capabilities. His firsthand experience with Corevist’s transformative impact on business operations and strategic achievements positions him uniquely to lead the company’s client-centric initiatives.

“Having previously worked with Corevist, I’ve seen firsthand how its real-time ecommerce and ERP integration can revolutionize more than just day-to-day operations,” said Stahler. “It’s the linchpin of an entire digital commerce strategy that enhances efficiency and fosters new revenue streams. With my 20 years of IT experience, my goal is to partner one-on-one with client executives. Together, we’ll develop a holistic enterprise landscape, driving substantial growth in their digital commerce channel.”

Corevist’s CEO, Andy Martin, also expressed enthusiasm about the new appointment. “Bringing Terry into our team is a strategic move that reflects our commitment to customer success. His insight as a former client will be invaluable in guiding our team to not just meet but exceed the expectations of our clients. We are confident that his leadership will significantly contribute to our ongoing growth and client satisfaction.”

This appointment marks a significant milestone for Corevist as it continues to expand its reach and enhance its offerings in the B2B ecommerce sector. With Stahler at the helm of client relations, Corevist is poised to deliver even greater value to its clients, helping them achieve unprecedented levels of success.

About Corevist

Corevist enables SAP-based enterprises to provide exceptional service to their clients through B2B portals and ecommerce solutions that integrate into SAP ERP systems in real-time. Corevist blends the strength of existing technology infrastructures with its deep understanding of customer needs to deliver a solution that’s as intuitive as it is effective. Corevist oversees the complete infrastructure, allowing businesses such as H.B. Fuller, Nordson, LORD Corporation, and Emmerson Packaging to thrive in the digital space while concentrating on their primary operations.

Corevist solutions process over $2 billion in transaction value every year, interacting directly with clients’ SAP systems. SAP has certified Corevist’s ERP integration for S/4HANA and NetWeaver, and Corevist is SAP’s only strategic partner in commerce. 

Corevist is a global company with clients in the US, UK, EU, Canada, Africa, and Asia. For more information, call (919) 424-2120 or visit Corevist.com.

Both Forrester and DigitalCommerce360 have made an astounding prediction: US B2B ecommerce sales will surpass $2 trillion in 2023. According to Forrester, we’re on track to hit $3 trillion in 2027 with a compound annual growth rate of 10.7%.

The kicker? By 2027, Forrester says B2B ecommerce will account for 24% of total B2B sales in the US. That’s up from 16% in 2021.

Clearly, big things are happening in B2B ecommerce. A digital channel is a serious growth engine—and our clients validate that with stats like 325% digital revenue growth.

But not every organization is realizing their digital value. In fact, some companies just see obstacles when they look at B2B ecommerce.

Here are the most common roadblocks—and how to overcome them.

1. B2B ecommerce is too big, complex, and risky

Let’s be honest, some B2B ecommerce platforms aren’t built for midmarket companies that run on SAP ERP.

Your business data and logic live in SAP, but how is your B2B ecommerce solution going to interact with that data safely, securely, and without errors?

It’s a huge challenge. Most platforms will require you to implement a third-party integration solution between SAP and B2B ecommerce. Typically, this integration platform will replicate and synchronize data—meaning your customers never get the real-time information they need.

As time goes on, this architecture can get more complex as all 3 systems (SAP, middleware, and B2B ecommerce) go through various update cycles. You’ll need dedicated resources in place supporting all 3 systems, and ultimately, your risk of technical debt will increase.

How to overcome this obstacle

Here at Corevist, we think the solution is pretty simple.

Why construct a complex architecture with 3 separate systems when you can get a B2B ecommerce solution that includes integration for ECC or S/4HANA?

Make that a managed solution, i.e. one that doesn’t require additional IT resources, and you’ve got a huge win. That’s the thinking behind Corevist.

2. We’d rather build B2B ecommerce ourselves, and we don’t have the resources

Back in the day, it made sense to build your own B2B ecommerce solution in-house. The technology on the market couldn’t handle the complexities of B2B companies with complex business rules in SAP. If you were going to do B2B ecommerce, you’d better have the resources on staff to scope the project, build it, integrate it to SAP, and maintain it yourself.

My, how times have changed.

B2B ecommerce technology is so mature now, it doesn’t make sense to reinvent the wheel. A platform like Corevist comes with prebuilt, configurable integration for ECC or S/4HANA. We can get you up and running in as little as 30 days, and you can roll out new features and functionality on Corevist without additional infrastructure investment.

We may be biased, but it sure looks like the best way for SAP companies to do B2B ecommerce.

How to overcome this obstacle

Educate your stakeholders on just how far B2B ecommerce technology has come. Let them know what’s available on the market. Show them how easy it is to provide every customer with personalized data straight from your SAP system. You’d be amazed at what this information does for an organization that’s stuck without B2B ecommerce.

Learn more here: Get Buy-In For B2B Ecommerce.

3. We’re migrating to S/4HANA, and we have to figure that out first

For many organizations, an S/4HANA migration is the most significant technology project that they’ll undertake in the next few years. The new ERP will impact every part of the organization, and for IT, it’s all hands on deck.

It’s easy to let that S/4HANA migration push other projects to the wayside. But in the case of B2B ecommerce, it actually makes more sense to pursue both projects in parallel.

How to overcome this obstacle

You should see B2B ecommerce as a line item in your larger S/4HANA project.

Why?

Because the needs of your customers in B2B ecommerce should dictate certain configurations in S/4HANA. When you pursue B2B ecommerce alongside S/4, you ensure that your new ERP is “B2B ecommerce friendly”—ready for the deeply-integrated solution that your customers will love.

Read more here: Launching B2B Ecommerce And S/4HANA In Parallel.

4. Our customers will never place orders online

Let’s be honest, some products aren’t a great fit for B2B ecommerce. That $1M industrial machine may never be a one-click purchase—though plenty of Corevist clients routinely log B2B ecommerce orders valued in the mid-six figures. Some clients even get orders that approach $1M in value. 

However, even if your products are no-brainers for selling through B2B ecommerce, some customers may object. They may be more comfortable with slower workflows that they’re used to—things like building an order in a procurement system, exporting it to a CSV, and emailing it to your customer service department.

How to overcome this obstacle

In this specific case, customers can actually upload that CSV directly to the B2B ecommerce cart in Corevist—which is more efficient for you and, ultimately, more seamless for them.

Whether or not every sale moves to B2B ecommerce, you can create a better customer experience through self-service tracking capabilities. In the case of Corevist, you can choose our Launch package, which empowers customers with self-service tracking for orders, shipments, invoices, payments, and more. You can add digital payment capabilities too, making the portal a one-stop shop for customers to manage their accounts.

And you can do all of this without investing in a product catalog or online ordering. The choice is yours!

Either way, the efficiency gains from self-service are significant. Our client Emmerson Packaging reduced their customer service workload by 97% with their Corevist portal.

5. Our ERP and our internal processes are too messy for integrated B2B ecommerce

If this is your organization, we’ve got news for you: You’re not alone! Over the years, we’ve helped numerous companies work through this type of challenge. Here’s what it looks like. 

Everything lives in your SAP system. And chances are, you’ve got layers of configuration changes in there from different IT directors, initiatives, and evolving policies over the years.

On top of a messy SAP system, you might have an organizational culture that doesn’t care to use SAP as the system of record.

Maybe each customer service rep has their own processes for interacting with customers. Maybe you’ve got essential information that lives in tribal knowledge or sticky notes on people’s monitors. The details may differ, but the result is usually the same: SAP needs some TLC to get it ready for customer interaction through integrated B2B ecommerce. 

How to overcome this obstacle

In all these cases, SAP-integrated B2B ecommerce can act as a powerful catalyst for healthy change. It might just be the push your organization needs to standardize everything in SAP, throw out the sticky notes, and build internal processes that are scalable.

We call this the Kimono Effect—the fact that customers interacting with your SAP data will push you to clean things up. It’s one of the great benefits of integrated B2B ecommerce, and there are few other projects that can initiate this kind of change.

The takeaway: Don’t let these obstacles stop you from selling more stuff

At the end of the day, B2B ecommerce is the future. It’s also an incredible growth engine for your organization. The obstacles can be intimidating, but they don’t have to stay that way. With the right partner guiding you through the process—and providing a managed, integrated solution—you can start tapping into the $2T B2B ecommerce market.

And you can do it in as little as 30 days. That’s the thinking behind Corevist.