SAP S/4 HANA Output Management vs NAST: A Guide for Customization and Centralized Management

SAP's S/4 HANA Output Management is a centralized approach to output management, based on BRF+ (business rule framework), which replaces the traditional NAST output method. Output Management offers a less-coding approach for customizations, making it preferable for consultants over end-users. While NAST is more flexible, Output Management provides a streamlined oversight and future-proofing capabilities. The configuration of Output Management is easier to set up than NAST, with a user-friendly interface and fewer technical requirements.

SAP's S/4 HANA Output Management represents a significant shift from the traditional NAST (New Application Server Technology) output method, offering a centralized and streamlined approach to output management. Built on the BRF+ (Business Rule Framework), this new system aims to simplify output customization, making it more user-friendly and less coding-intensive.

Key Features and Comparisons

- Customization Flexibility: While NAST offers extensive customization capabilities, S/4 HANA Output Management is designed to be more user-friendly, particularly for consultants who need to manage complex output scenarios. NAST, with its traditional condition technique setup, requires a deeper understanding of technical configurations, making it more suitable for end-users who need straightforward output management.

- Form Types and Outputs: Both systems support various form types and outputs, including Adobe Forms, SAPscript, Smart Forms, and EDI/IDOC. However, S/4 HANA Output Management offers a more centralized and streamlined management approach, making it easier to handle multiple outputs per document and manage different channels (e.g., Print, Email, XML, EDI).

- Learning Curve and Setup: The setup for S/4 HANA Output Management is generally considered simpler and more intuitive, with a user-friendly interface. In contrast, NAST's setup involves a more technical approach, requiring a deeper understanding of condition techniques and t-code setups.

- Future-Proofing: S/4 HANA Output Management leverages the latest technology, ensuring future-proofing and adaptability to evolving business needs. NAST, being a legacy system, may face challenges in keeping up with technological advancements, potentially leading to obsolescence.

Use Cases and Recommendations

- Standard Scenarios and New Systems: S/4 HANA Output Management is particularly well-suited for standard scenarios and new systems where a centralized, less-complicated approach is preferred. Its user-friendly interface and streamlined oversight make it an excellent choice for organizations looking to simplify their output management processes.

- Custom-Heavy Projects and Legacy Systems: For projects that require heavy customization or are part of legacy systems, NAST remains a reliable and flexible option. Its extensive customization capabilities and familiarity make it a trusted choice for complex output scenarios.

Conclusion

SAP's S/4 HANA Output Management and NAST each have their unique strengths and are best suited for different scenarios. While S/4 HANA Output Management offers a centralized, user-friendly approach with future-proofing capabilities, NAST remains a reliable choice for complex, custom-heavy projects. Organizations should consider their specific needs and choose the system that best aligns with their requirements.

References
[1] https://community.sap.com/t5/enterprise-resource-planning-blog-posts-by-sap/a-little-glance-at-s-4-hana-output-management-and-compare-its-to-our-old/ba-p/14176742