MaxiTRANS standardises business processes in move to SAP S/4HANA Public Cloud

17. July 2024

Key Takeaways 

  • SAP S/4HANA Public Cloud replaced custom-made legacy Oracle JD Edwards system
  • Adopted SAP best practices to standardise and simplify processes, while also being future-ready
  • Engaged cbs Corporate Business Solutions as implementation partner due to its experience in the transportation sector in Europe

 

Australian manufacturer of semi-trailer equipment and solutions, MaxiTRANS, has upgraded to SAP S/4HANA Public Cloud to standardise its business processes and implement best practices.

 

Speaking at Mastering SAP Collaborate Melbourne in May this year, MaxiTRANS general manager of IT, Andrew Rosicka, said SAP S/4HANA replaced an “outdated” Oracle JD Edwards system that was heavily customised to fit business needs.

 

“[The old system] is like a noose around our neck,” Rosicka said. “It was put in seven years ago but it’s also unsupported in every way – the vendor, the operating systems – so we had to get off it.”

 

The public cloud option specifically was chosen so MaxiTRANS could move away from a customised solution, focusing instead on adopting best practices.

 

Standardising processes was the priority – as manufacturing MaxiTRANS trailers requires around 800 raw materials to build – along with simplification of processes and future-readiness.

 

MaxiTRANS engaged with Germany-headquartered cbs Corporate Business Solutions (cbs) as its implementation partner despite being a recent arrival in Australia, citing its sizable presence in Asia and strong industry experience in Europe.

 

“There’s great synergies for us to have cbs on board, because their consultants in Europe have got years of dealing with the same industry, the same issues, the same problems,” Rosicka said.

 

Rosicka said the previous Oracle JD Edwards system did not have features like single sign-on, “proper” service support, reporting, middleware, warehousing and barcoding, so it had to use external solutions like SolidWorks to compensate for these shortcomings. The multiple add-ons and third-party tools meant the system became complex and inefficient.

 

Through SAP S/4HANA Public Cloud, MaxiTRANS has eliminated the need for these add-ons and third-party tools by consolidating all the functionality into a single, streamlined system.

 

“When we said we were going with SAP S/4HANA Public Cloud and I got the first estimate of what we’d be spending with SAP, I did nearly have a heart attack,” Rosicka said. “But then when I added up all the costs of everything that we do today, and that’s just the costs of the software, it was much more than we were going to spend with SAP, which really surprised me. And that doesn’t include the amount of money that we spend just to keep this going every year that we get absolutely zero return from.”

 

The implementation timeframe was eight months from the contract signing to go-live and Rosicka said it was achieved with the use of best practices.

 

MaxiTRANS’ payroll was integrated directly into the new SAP S/4HANA system. It also added SAP Analytics Cloud for reporting, SAP Extended Warehouse Management (SAP EWM), SAP Integrated Business Planning Software for Supply Chain (SAP IBP), SAP CPQ and more.

 

“[SAP S/4HANA] Public Cloud has warehouse management in it, and it’s quite good,” Rosicka said.

 

“I’m used to ERP systems where the warehousing functions are really limited. But it really is an advanced warehousing system, all within SAP S/4HANA.”

 

Rosicka added that the new system allows MaxiTRANS to not rely on as many skillsets and partners due to SAP S/4HANA’s clean architecture.

 

The implementation was split into two phases to manage complexity and risk, starting with MaxiTRANS’ dealership business, followed by manufacturing. The dealership network across Melbourne, Sydney, Adelaide and a central warehouse in Ballarat were transitioned, and then SAP IBP and CPQ were implemented.

 

SAP provided support via the SAP Preferred Success program, while cbs has provided experienced consultants.

 

The project started just over a month after signing the contract.

 

“I’ve never ever done that in my life before. Normally it’s six months to get your resources in place,” Rosicka said. “cbs have been amazing at getting us to where we are today and everything’s going really well.”

 

Rosicka said SAP has best practices embedded in templates, and governance was crucial in not allowing staff to revert to old practices.

 

“You must have good governance,” he added. “We’ve got a very strong steering committee – all of the executives are on it and brought in, they go to every meeting and the CEO signs off on everything.”

 

SAP Signavio Process Navigator was also helpful in providing best practice workflows, security roles and task tutorials – according to Rosicka – while SAP Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) was used for automating testing and project management processes. The SAP for Me digital companion also provided user management and provisioning capabilities.

Related articles
oneascent-m&a-image-4
Insight
A Safer Way to Manage ERP Change During M&A
Read More
14. March 2026
oneascent-m&a-image-3
Insight
Why ERP Systems Make Divestitures and Carve-Outs So Difficult
Read More
14. March 2026
When a merger, acquisition, or divestiture is announced, the spotlight is usually on the strategic story. Market expansion. Portfolio optimisation. Synergies. Shareholder value. Behind closed doors, deal teams are working intensely on valuation models, legal structures, and regulatory approvals. Leadership teams focus on how the new organisation will operate once the transaction is complete. Technology rarely sits at the centre of these discussions. And yet, once the deal is signed, it often becomes the hardest problem to solve. Where the real complexity begins In large enterprises, ERP systems sit at the centre of how the organisation actually runs. Finance reporting, procurement, supply chain operations, manufacturing processes, and compliance controls are all deeply connected through the same digital core. Over time, these systems evolve into highly integrated environments. Multiple legal entities may share the same ERP instance. Business units that look independent on an organisational chart may rely on shared data structures, reporting frameworks, and operational processes inside the same system landscape. This works well when the organisation remains intact. It becomes far more complicated when the structure of the business changes. When a company sells a division, spins off a business unit, or acquires another organisation, those shared systems suddenly need to be separated, replicated, or reorganised. Data structures that support several entities may need to be redesigned. Reporting environments must remain stable even as the underlying systems change. And this often needs to happen under strict deal timelines. Why ERP challenges appear late One reason ERP complexity catches organisations by surprise is timing. In many transactions, technology teams are brought into the conversation only after the deal structure is already defined. By that point, legal agreements are signed, Day-One deadlines are set, and the operational expectations of the new organisation are already clear. What becomes visible at that stage is the gap between the business structure of the deal and the technical reality of the systems that support it. Separating a business entity on paper may take weeks. Separating it inside an ERP system can take months if the dependencies are not fully understood. When technology risk becomes business risk This is where technology stops being a purely IT concern. If ERP systems cannot be separated cleanly, finance reporting may be affected. Regulatory obligations may become harder to fulfil. Supply chains and operational processes may experience disruption. Integration timelines can extend far beyond what deal teams originally expected. In other words, ERP complexity can quickly become a business continuity risk. This does not mean that mergers, acquisitions, and divestitures are inherently problematic from a systems perspective. Organisations execute these changes successfully every year. But the most successful programmes share a common mindset. They recognise early that enterprise systems are not just operational tools. They are structural components of the business itself. Treating ERP as part of the deal strategy When ERP landscapes and enterprise data structures are considered earlier in the transaction process, organisations gain much greater control over execution. Dependencies between business entities become visible sooner. Separation or integration scenarios can be evaluated earlier. Technology teams can design approaches that protect operational continuity while still supporting the strategic intent of the deal. This shift in thinking is becoming increasingly important. Modern ERP environments support far more than financial accounting. They underpin operational processes, regulatory reporting, supply chain coordination, and increasingly the data foundations that support analytics and AI. Changing the structure of the business inevitably means changing the structure of the systems that run it. For organisations navigating mergers, acquisitions, or divestitures, the real question is no longer just how to close the deal. It is how to execute the change without destabilising the systems that keep the business running. Over the coming weeks, the ONE.Ascent campaign will explore how enterprises approach ERP change during structural events such as mergers, acquisitions, and divestitures, and what separates high-risk programmes from those executed with confidence. Continue the Conversation If your organisation is navigating a merger, acquisition, carve-out, or divestiture, join our upcoming ONE.Ascent executive webinar where we explore the practical realities of managing ERP change during structural transformation. Register for the session or explore the ONE.Ascent campaign hub to see how enterprises across the Asia Pacific are approaching modernisation with greater clarity and control.
Insight
The Hidden ERP Risk in M&A: Why Technology Becomes the Hardest Part After the Deal
Read More
14. March 2026