The answer to the question of what comes after LE-TRA is clear: SAP Transportation Management (TM) takes over as the direct successor. LE-TRA will be completely replaced. Here, SAP is taking a tougher, more straightforward path than with the Warehouse Management (WM) module, where Extended Warehouse Management (EWM) is in the spotlight as the direct successor, but an interim solution is still offered in the form of Stock Room Management (StRM).
Straightforwardness is supposedly a positive thing and should meet with the approval of many companies, especially in the SAP logistics jungle, given the many architecture options. However, this straightforwardness causes headaches for those companies that use the LE-TRA module by and large to form a bracket for their deliveries. This bracket is used, for example, to print transport documents, send EDI messages to freight forwarders and generate freight cost accounting. Here and there there is also an interface to CEP service providers. None of this is rocket science, but these are essential functions without which the goods cannot leave the yard.
Anyone who has already familiarized themselves with TM and the Fiori apps knows that it offers a highly developed solution - with functions that far surpass LE-TRA.
The comprehensive range of functions and the completely new structure of TM can seem overwhelming at first glance. The experience of the first system presentation of TM is reminiscent of the moment when you sit in your newly purchased new car for the first time, after having driven the previous car to the bitter end for decades and now treating yourself to something new. Although buying a new car tends to generate feelings of happiness.
TM then looks more like a Formula 1 car, and phrases such as "it's too big for us" or "doesn't suit us as a company" are heard.
So what can these companies do to master the replacement of the LE-TRA module? Ultimately, there are two options, which I will present below.
Does TM fit my processes?
TM is often rejected because the basic process flow seems to be set in stone and the integration with other modules raises many questions:
![[Translate to English:] TM Process](/fileadmin/trendblog/Transport_Management/TM_Process.svg)
The classic TM-EWM process flow states that processing in TM always precedes processing in the warehouse, so-called "transportation-driven planning". Companies whose transportation processing is heavily dependent on activities in the warehouse quickly encounter challenges with this process. For these companies, the final transportation planning is only determined after the warehouse has finished picking and packing, rather than before. This approach, in which warehouse processing comes before transportation planning, is known as "execution-driven planning".
Other challenges may be that the company has switched to EWM but not yet to TM, and as a result carries out transportation planning at EWM level via transport units and apps such as the EWM shipping cockpit. One variant of this constellation is that an LE-TRA shipment is also created via EWM using Idoc. Do these companies now have to restructure everything in order to migrate from LE-TRA to TM?
Another common scenario is that the company works with LE-TRA and WM and initially aims to switch to TM without wanting to touch WM and the associated processes in the warehouse. This isolated approach carries the risk that the processes will have to be adapted again later.
As a result, a wide variety of process constellations have come about over the years, which is why an integrative strategy is more important than ever. My advice to companies facing this challenge is to address the issue as soon as possible: There is a lot of work ahead of them! With the following strategy tips, however, I would like to take away some of the fear.
Strategy tip no. 1: It doesn't necessarily have to be via TM!
Companies need to ask themselves whether the functions used in LE-TRA can be covered exclusively by SAP TM. If it is only a matter of forming a bracket around a delivery, this could also be realized via the EWM module.
EWM has its own functions for mapping transports, such as the creation of transport units, the allocation of appointments (Dock Appointment Scheduling) or the mapping of activities on the plant premises: a function package that is summarized under the name Yard Management (not to be confused with Yard Logistics!).
It is important to understand that SAP TM is clearly ahead in pure transportation planning. EWM concentrates more on the processing of transports than on their planning. Downstream tasks, such as freight cost accounting, can also be a knock-out criterion for an EWM standalone solution, as these functions are missing in the standard system.
Companies should also bear in mind that the use of the EWM function package "Shipping and Receiving", such as the use of transport units, always requires an Advanced license.
Strategy tip no. 2: TM can also be simple!
Companies should not be put off by TM or reject it prematurely. There are more design options for the end-to-end process than is often assumed. The Advanced Shipping and Receiving (ASR) process in particular opens up completely new design possibilities thanks to simplified communication between TM and EWM, Warehouse Management (WMS), Inventory Management and Physical Inventory (MM-IM) and Logistics Execution (LE).
The extended goods receipt and dispatch process is characterized by a harmonized data model between TM and EWM, which eliminates the EWM transport unit. Instead, the TM freight order is the leading object, which warehouse employees access via Fiori apps specially provided by SAP. The new Fiori app Freight orders loading or unloading enables warehouse activities such as loading and unloading, gate assignments, status updates or even goods movements. The freight order is accessed directly instead of having to rely on data replication via the EWM transport unit, as was previously the case.
![[Translate to English:] EWM TM Integration](/fileadmin/trendblog/Transport_Management/EWM_TM_Integration.svg)
A closer look at the process flow reveals that transportation planning takes place after warehouse processing (execution-driven), although it was previously explained that transportation planning normally precedes it. This is not a mistake; the ASR integration model enables both transportation-driven and execution-driven planning, which means considerable flexibility for process design and implementation. The integration model with EWM transport units, on the other hand, remains with transportation-driven planning.
ASR simplifies the overall process, but does not yet solve the problem of user-friendliness. SAP offers a remedy for this with newer S/4 releases and provides ready-made layouts for the Transportation Cockpit that are very similar to the look and feel of the LE-TRA module. These layouts can also be customized as required. The Transportation Cockpit is also available for the Basic TM, provided that no Advanced Features are used within this app. With the Basic layouts supplied, companies are not taking any risks here.
If you have any further questions about transportation management, please do not hesitate to contact us!
Summary
Companies currently using the LE-TRA module will need to develop a replacement strategy by 2030 at the latest. SAP Transportation Management (TM) is presented as a seamless successor, but offers far more comprehensive and complex functionality that can seem overwhelming at first. However, there are alternatives and design options that can make the transition easier. Companies should carefully consider the options offered by TM and EWM and decide which system best suits their specific processes. An early examination of the topic and a well-considered strategy are crucial to successfully mastering the changeover. As specialists in warehouse management, CONSILIO has set itself the goal of not losing sight of transportation planning and offering companies a holistic solution.
