Impact of SAP GTS on International Supply Chain Efficiency
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63345/Keywords:
SAP GTS, international supply chain, trade compliance, customs management, operational efficiency, enterprise systemsAbstract
International supply chains depend on timely trade documentation, regulatory checks, customs processing, and coordination between organizations. SAP Global Trade Services provides functions intended to support these activities, but documented functionality should be distinguished from independently measured business benefits. This assessment examines operational changes associated with SAP GTS implementation using a simulated before-and-after dataset representing 24 matched trade lanes and 2,400 shipments. Each lane contributes 50 shipments before implementation and 50 during a subsequent stable operating period. Documentation preparation time is the primary outcome; customs release time, trade-administration cost, and international delivery lead time are secondary outcomes. Paired comparisons use lane-level means to avoid treating shipments within a lane as independent implementation units. Mean preparation time decreases from 48.0 to 31.0 minutes, a reduction of 35.4% and a paired difference of 17.0 minutes (95% confidence interval: 14.49–19.51; p<0.001). Customs release time decreases by 23.3%, administration cost by 25.0%, and delivery lead time by 9.5%. Shipments requiring documentation corrections decline from 8.0% to 3.5%, while on-time delivery increases from 84.0% to 92.0%. These generated results demonstrate a coherent evaluation framework rather than verified SAP GTS effectiveness. Actual implementation research should account for shipment composition, external border conditions, complementary process changes, and total ownership costs.References
1. SAP. SAP Global Trade Services, edition for SAP HANA. SAP Help Portal. Official documentation.
2. SAP. Customs Management. SAP Help Portal. Official documentation.
3. Hummels DL, Schaur G. Time as a trade barrier. American Economic Review. 2013;103(7):2935–2959. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.103.7.2935.
4. Djankov S, Freund C, Pham CS. Trading on time. Review of Economics and Statistics. 2010;92(1):166–173. https://doi.org/10.1162/rest.2009.11498.
5. Hitt LM, Wu DJ, Zhou X. Investment in enterprise resource planning: business impact and productivity measures. Journal of Management Information Systems. 2002;19(1):71–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2002.11045716.
6. Hendricks KB, Singhal VR, Stratman JK. The impact of enterprise systems on corporate performance: a study of ERP, SCM, and CRM system implementations. Journal of Operations Management. 2007;25(1):65–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2006.02.002.
7. Dehning B, Richardson VJ, Zmud RW. The financial performance effects of IT-based supply chain management systems in manufacturing firms. Journal of Operations Management. 2007;25(4):806–824. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2006.09.001.
8. Rai A, Patnayakuni R, Seth N. Firm performance impacts of digitally enabled supply chain integration capabilities. MIS Quarterly. 2006;30(2):225–246. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148729.
9. Flynn BB, Huo B, Zhao X. The impact of supply chain integration on performance: a contingency and configuration approach. Journal of Operations Management. 2010;28(1):58–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2009.06.001.
10. World Trade Organization. World Trade Report 2015: Speeding up trade—benefits and challenges of implementing the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement. Geneva: WTO; 2015. Official publication.
11. World Customs Organization. Time Release Study Guide. Version 4. Brussels: WCO; 2025. Official guide.
12. SAP. Summarizing Key Capabilities of International Trade Management. SAP Learning. Official learning resource.
