Evidence and Provenance

In an S/4HANA transformation, a plausible answer is not enough. The team must know where it came from, whether the source was valid for this client and release, and who accepted the conclusion.

What provenance should capture

For material outputs, retain:

• source identifiers, owners and versions.
• retrieval time and applicable project context.
• model, instruction, skill and tool versions.
• transformations or calculations applied.
• assumptions, exclusions and confidence.
• human review, corrections and approval.
• links to resulting decisions and actions.

The detail presented to a user can remain concise, while the underlying record supports assurance and investigation.

Distinguish authority from relevance

A source may be official SAP content but irrelevant to the client’s deployment option or release. A client document may be current but not approved. A workshop transcript may be useful evidence of discussion but not of a decision.

The knowledge model should classify both source authority and contextual applicability.

Make claims inspectable

Important claims should link to the evidence that supports them. Where sources conflict, the output should expose the disagreement rather than blending it into a smooth answer.

This is especially important for design rationale, control effectiveness, testing, data reconciliation and readiness.

Retain decisions as first-class records

A decision is more than a sentence in meeting minutes. It has alternatives, rationale, assumptions, owner, date, scope and consequences. Connecting decisions to downstream artifacts allows the mesh to detect what must change when a decision is revised.

Control retention

Not every intermediate reasoning trace should be stored indefinitely. Retention should balance reproducibility, privacy, security, legal obligations and cost. What matters is a defensible record of the evidence and actions behind material outcomes.