Choosing the right user interface

This is aimed only to inform, because in the end there is no definitive framework for choosing between these technologies. Sometimes it can be as much a personal choice as a logical one. 

In the dark ages of SAP there was only one choice of user environment – the Graphical User Interface (GUI). However, this changed with the arrival of SAP Portal as another avenue for application delivery. 

Add to this the release of the Netweaver Business Client (NWBC) and the waters have become somewhat muddied. For a detailed explanation of what the NWBC is please see this excellent summary put together previously by my colleague Julie.

So which user interface is the best? 

There is no easy answer to this question as it depends on the business landscape in which each technology is being used.

I will start with the SAP GUI. If you do not know what the SAP GUI is and what it is for then you may be reading the wrong blog. However, by way of explanation the SAP GUI is the original SAP user interface and is a thick client application that is installed on the PC of system users. 

To use the SAP GUI it requires some knowledge of the system, its menu structure and special commands or transaction codes, and it is best used by what I would term power users. Power users are ones that are in SAP most days and rely on it for data entry, reporting and transacting. 

A good example would be employees performing an accounts receivable/payable role who need to report on invoices and overdue accounts, and GL entries etc. These heavy users require a broad range of transactions as well as some of the SAP GUI features such as being able to run a long running report as a background job or uploading a file for processing, all of which the SAP GUI is well suited to and provides good performance whilst completing.
 
I believe most SAP customers would be aware and comfortable with the SAP GUI and its capabilities so I will focus on the SAP Portal and NWBC for the rest of this blog.
The SAP Portal was the next UI in the SAP ecosystem, however, it cannot be discussed in isolation as there is significant duplication of tasks with the NWBC. In fact, to the casual observer looking at screenshots of both the new SAP Portal UI and the NWBC UI they would appear to be the same product (See figures 1 and 2 below).

In the large part this similarity is intentional, but there are differences in these products around the services they supply, how they are administered and how they are delivered to the customer.

Figure 1: SAP Portal

Figure 2: Netweaver Business Client

SAP Portal suits casual users – people who use the system on an occasional basis and as such need access to only a limited number of applications within SAP. A common example would be the use of the employee self service applications which provide for time entry, payslips, leave etc. These are functions that all employees need to perform, however it is not an everyday requirement and there are a discreet number of applications they require access to.

The user type for the NWBC covers most of the functions of both the GUI and the SAP Portal cases and can cover either scenario depending upon the requirements of the organisation. 

The first major difference between the SAP Portal and the NWBC is the way these UIs are delivered. SAP Portal is a purely web technology with a zero install footprint on the client PC, whereas the NWBC can be delivered via a rich client requiring a desktop install or a zero install client based on web technologies.
 
It is worth noting at this point that even though the NWBC provides a zero install client it does lose some of its capabilities when this client is used and for power users this may not be a viable solution. The install of the thick client can be a major consideration depending on the network landscape and employee distribution within the organisation if it is being used for the casual user. 

For example, in an organisation with a centralised and well controlled IT department the deployment and maintenance of the NWBC software to PCs may be a simple matter, however for an organisation with decentralised control of IT this could be more problematic. 

The second key difference between the SAP Portal and the NWBC is in the services provided. SAP Portal provides a number of additional services around content management and collaboration which an organisation may wish to take advantage of. For those that wish to read up on them they are: 

• Knowledge Management
• Forums 
• Wikis
• Collaboration
• Workspaces
• Web Page Composer

The NWBC also has some services that the SAP Portal does not provide which are targeted more toward power users such as: 

• Enterprise Search 
• Page Builder for Webdynpro ABAP

Thirdly, the two application delivery platforms differ in how the user administration is performed. The NWBC can utilise the standard SAP PFCG application for the administration of the user’s roles and authorisations or use the SAP Portal PCD via web services. SAP Portal uses its own user management engine and the roles for users must be built in the portal itself. 

There are numerous UME setup scenarios that can be used to simplify the administration, however none will be as simple as that provided by the centralised approach available to the NWBC.

Lastly, the current iteration of the NWBC allows login to one client at a time whereas the SAP Portal allows a central view of several systems at once. If an organisation is running a simple landscape this is not a concern. However, at a site that uses ECC, BI, SRM and possibly CRM the need to access these applications across the landscape will be met more efficiently if the applications are delivered via a single interface. 

The decision on the mix of user tools to deploy is a complex one that must take into account the landscape complexity, user skill level and tool familiarity, IT support infrastructure, and business scenarios. It may be the case that just the SAP GUI or NWBC is deployed if it is for a single client system with a limited user group.
 
For a system landscape containing multiple clients and requiring branding, collaboration and external access with a mix of power users, casual users and consultants then all three options may be required. 

Taking external and preference factors out of the decision I would usually recommend looking at how the users interact with the system on a daily level and separate the functions performed into power user and casual user categories. A power user is always going to require the flexibility provided by the SAP GUI or NWBC to perform their daily tasks, whilst a casual user will require a structured interface that is user friendly and easy to access which the SAP Portal supplies.