Many companies still run critical integrations on Neo. Some work well, but were built at different times, by different teams and with uneven documentation. The risk is not always visible in the iFlow itself: it may live in a dependency, adapter, destination, externalized parameter or environment difference that nobody has formally compared.
A serious readiness assessment does not promise automatic migration. Its value is turning the CPI landscape into evidence: inventory, differences, dependencies and tasks that make planning less fragile.
1. Inventory before effort estimation
Before estimating migration work, teams need to know how many packages and iFlows exist, which ones are active, which interfaces are critical and which environments must be compared. Without inventory, every migration plan starts with hidden debt.
2. Compare environments, not only iFlow counts
DEV, QA, UAT and PROD may contain an iFlow with the same name and still behave differently. Versions, endpoints, parameters, certificates, mappings or deployment status can change the risk profile.
3. Review BTP dependencies with evidence
In a Neo to Cloud Foundry scenario, signals such as connectivity, destinations, Cloud Connector, Partner Directory, Integration Advisor, adapters and internal resources matter. The goal is not to list technology; it is to identify what may affect compatibility, governance or transition effort.
4. Offline assessment can still create value
When clients cannot provide direct tenant access, ZIP exports can support artifact, structure, resource and configuration review. The limitation must be explicit: offline analysis depends on exported evidence and does not replace full runtime observability.
5. The output should be a roadmap
Good readiness separates findings by severity, impact and recommended action. That helps architecture, PMO and SAP teams decide what to fix first, what to monitor, what to document and what to leave outside the first scope.
| Question | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| Which iFlows exist per environment? | Defines real scope and avoids weak estimates. |
| Do DEV, QA and PROD differ? | Reduces surprises during go-live or transition. |
| What depends on Neo or BTP? | Helps prioritize compatibility and technical tasks. |
Need to review CPI readiness?
Picasso CPI Governance Assessment can start with controlled access, ZIP exports or a mixed model to document risks, differences and next steps before migration.
View SAP CPI assessment