Senior Application Consultant, an expert in integrating data, logic, and the physical world for management, argues that the shift from “process accounting” to “context understanding” is revolutionizing global supply chain management.
The main problem of supply chains today is a lack of understanding of their own vulnerabilities, especially outside of first-tier suppliers, McKinsey has documented. In other words, businesses still lack visibility and manageability in complex supply chains. This is particularly sensitive for the pharmaceutical industry: according to a Tive survey, 68% of executives in pharmaceutical supply chains are seriously concerned about the increase in theft, fraud, and cyber risks, and a lack of real-time visibility is described as a critical vulnerability. At the same time, more than 83% of companies already use real-time tracking and condition monitoring to reduce risks and maintain cold-chain integrity.
But the problem goes deeper than just the lack of data. In many cases, corporate systems are initially unable to reflect the real complexity of a business, from regulatory requirements to physical logistics.
Sudeepta Rana, Senior Application Consultant, SAP S/4HANA Transformation Advisor, Council Member of AITEX (Association of Information Technology Experts), and enterprise systems researcher with more than 17 years of experience in pharmaceutical and life sciences projects, works to solve such problems. He designs architectures for areas where standard systems usually fail: global logistics, compliance, cold chain supplies, and contract manufacturing. Among his solutions are real-time API integration with multiple carriers, his own jurisdiction-control architecture for global distribution, and a single model that synchronizes physical and financial flows.
In this interview with Sudeepta, we talk about a fundamental problem: why enterprise systems often don’t match reality – and what needs to be changed to make them really work.
– Sudeepta, you were appointed as a Council Member of AITEX following an Expert Committee review of your work in enterprise systems and pharmaceutical supply chains. What aspects of your work were recognized by the Council?
– My appointment to the AITEX Council was closely connected to my work in enterprise-scale ERP architectures and pharmaceutical supply-chain transformation projects. The Committee recognized my contributions to ERP architectures and pharmaceutical supply chain transformations. Key areas included original OTC systems, regulatory-compliant frameworks, and multi-country enterprise system implementations. They highlighted my work on global distribution logic, jurisdiction-control architecture, and real-time visibility. My research on ATP models for clinical trials and measurable improvements in enterprise programs were also central. They acknowledged my leadership in large-scale ERP rollouts, my certifications, and my upcoming SAP Press book. Ultimately, the role recognizes a blend of implementation, research, and architectural design in complex pharma environments.
– As you said, you have extensive experience and achievements, so you can assess the situation today, where companies are investing millions in digital transformation, but the results are often below expectations. In your experience, where does the gap between system design and real-world supply chain execution actually begin?
– In my work, I approach this not just as system implementation, but as applied research. The gap exists because most systems are designed as simplified representations of business processes. In pharmaceutical supply chains, I have repeatedly observed that these simplified models fail when exposed to real-world variables such as regulatory constraints, cold-chain dependencies, and multi-country distribution requirements.
Using AS-IS analysis and gap identification methods, I found that the failure points are rarely technical, they are architectural. Systems do not fail because they lack capability, but because they are not designed to interpret real-world complexity. That experience ultimately shaped my view that enterprise systems should function as adaptive decision environments rather than static process maps.
– To solve the problem, you replaced the traditional IDoc-based shipping process with a real-time API-driven integration. What changed in practice?
– Traditional systems process information with delay, which means they always reflect the past. In one pharmaceutical distribution environment, I designed and implemented an API-based integration layer that connects directly with carriers and enables real-time event processing. This allowed the system to detect deviations, such as delays or temperature issues, at the moment they occur, rather than after the fact. As a result, this approach contributed to measurable improvements in operational efficiency, including up to 30% optimization in Order-to-Cash processes in related implementations.
– So the key transition is from a reactive to a proactive system?
– Yes, but it’s important to understand that real-time is only half the solution. When we switch to a proactive model, the system starts receiving events at the moment they occur. It sees what’s going on – delays, deviations, route changes. But then a more complicated question arises: what should I do about it? And here it becomes obvious that speed alone is not enough. The system should not just record events, but make decisions in context. For example, if a cargo crosses a border or changes route, it affects not only logistics, but also tax jurisdiction, trade rules, compliance requirements, storage, and handling conditions of the product. Standard systems cannot handle this level of complexity. They can process an event, but they cannot interpret it in a multidimensional context.
– You designed a custom jurisdiction-control system to address this. What problem were you solving, and how does it work in practice?
– The goal was to make the system understand context. Instead of just tracking what happens, the system evaluates what it means for the business. For example, when a product moves across regions, the system considers: where it is going, what type of product it is, and what rules apply there. Based on that, it determines the correct action. This is especially important in pharmaceuticals, where errors often occur at the intersection of logistics, finance, and compliance. Most systems fail exactly at those intersections.
– If a system starts taking so many factors into account at the same time, does it not make it harder to maintain and scale?
– This is indeed one of the main risks, and that is why the architecture was originally designed to avoid the accumulation of complexity. In traditional systems, each new logic is often sewn into the existing one, which makes it difficult to maintain over time and requires constant developer involvement, even for small changes. In this case, the principle was different: to separate the rules and the core of the system. This allows us to change the logic without having to rebuild the entire architecture, adapt faster to new markets or regulations, and at the same time maintain manageability even with increasing complexity. Additionally, a global template has been created that can be used in different regions, which greatly simplifies scaling and makes the solution reproducible.
– You have already mentioned that systems often do not match reality. Where is this gap most pronounced?
– A major flaw is the separation of the physical and financial worlds in systems. In reality, product movement, costs, obligations, and regulations are simultaneous and interrelated. However, most ERPs handle these separately, causing discrepancies, calculation errors, and lost transparency. This effect worsens in complex pharmaceutical supply chains as the system struggles to synchronize across different domains.
– You integrated a custom tolling engine with the core physical and financial flow framework to get a unified contract manufacturing process – something existing ERP systems don’t support natively. What does that integration look like in operation?
– This is especially important in contract manufacturing, where the product goes through external partners and complex processing schemes. As a result, I was able to create a system that provides a holistic picture of what is happening: it simultaneously reflects the physical state of the supply chain, correctly calculates the cost, and takes into account the requirements of compliance and audit. This significantly reduces the risk of discrepancies between the actual transactions and how they are presented in the system.
– When you combine real-time carrier integration, jurisdiction decision systems, and synchronized physical-financial flows, what actually changes for the business at scale?
– This all changes the very principle of management. The business stops working in reaction mode to events that have already occurred and moves to a model in which it sees, understands, and can act in the moment. This means that decisions are based on the current context rather than on assumptions or outdated data. As a result, supply chain resilience increases, operational risks are reduced, and complexity can be managed rather than simply responded to.
– Due to your achievements like that, you participated in Cases&Faces, an international professional competition that brings together experts from technology, business, and innovation fields. What was that experience like for you?
– Cases&Faces is an international expert platform focused on professional case evaluation and interdisciplinary problem-solving. What makes it particularly valuable is that participation in judging is selective and regulated through a formal expert review and appointment process. The competition brings together specialists from different industries and evaluates both practical impact and strategic thinking behind projects and solutions. For me, it was interesting because the discussions there go beyond purely technical implementation. Many cases focus on how systems behave in real operational environments, which is very close to the challenges I work on in pharmaceutical and enterprise transformation projects.
– Your perspective is shaped by hands-on implementation, applied research in enterprise systems, and formal certifications in SAP S/4HANA and enterprise transformation methodologies. You also participated in industry competitions like Cases&Faces. In that context, what matters more today – the technologies themselves or how they are applied?
Technology has already reached a level where it is rarely a limitation in itself. The key factor is how we model our business within these technologies. If the model is initially simplified and does not reflect the real complexity of the processes, the system will inevitably fail. But if the architecture is built correctly and takes into account the context, technology begins to work as an amplifier, allowing business systems in pharmaceutical and other complex industries to become faster, more accurate, and more sustainable.
