SAP WCM Permit To Work Versus Prometheus ePAS

Permit to Work (PTW) systems are critical for ensuring safety in high-risk industrial environments, such as oil and gas, chemicals, and utilities.

These systems manage hazardous work activities by enforcing safety protocols and compliance. Both SAP and Prometheus Group offer robust PTW software solutions, but which provides the better option?

This article explores the functionality of SAP’s Work Clearance Management (WCM) module and Prometheus Group’s Electronic Permit Administration System (ePAS), comparing their features, integration capabilities, and effectiveness in replacing paper permits or supporting planning.

We’ll also define what a PTW is, its role in industrial plants, and its typical components.

What is a Permit to Work?

A Permit to Work is a formal document that authorizes specific work in hazardous environments, ensuring safety measures are in place before, during and after the task.

It acts as a control mechanism to mitigate risks, such as chemical exposure, fire, electrical hazards and any potentially harmful energies.

This is done by outlining safety protocols, responsibilities and approvals. PTW systems are essential for coordinating maintenance and operations teams, ensuring compliance with regulations like OSHA, and preventing incidents that could lead to injury, equipment damage, or downtime.

Why Are Permits Used in Heavy Industrial Plants?

In industrial plants, PTW systems are used to manage high-risk activities, such as maintenance on energized equipment or work in confined spaces.

They ensure that:

• Safety is Prioritized: Workers are protected from hazards through isolation (e.g., lockout/tagout) and risk assessments.
• Compliance is Maintained: Regulatory requirements are met, reducing the risk of fines or audits.
• Coordination is Streamlined: Maintenance and operations teams communicate effectively, avoiding conflicts or unsafe conditions.
• Visibility is Enhanced: Managers can track activities, ensuring no critical steps are bypassed.

For example, in an oil and gas refinery, a pump repair requires electrical isolation and a permit to ensure the workplace is safe before work begins.

Typical Components of a Permit to Work.

A typical PTW includes:

• Work Description: Details of the task, location, and equipment involved.
• Hazard Identification: Risks like fire, explosion, or toxic gas exposure, often assessed via Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (HIRA).
• Safety Controls: Isolation measures (e.g., lockout/tagout), personal protective equipment (PPE), or atmospheric testing.
• Certificates: Additional documents like confined space entry or excavation permits.
• Approvals: Signatures or digital approvals from authorized personnel.
• Validity Period: Timeframe during which the permit is active.
• Closure: Confirmation that the work is complete and the area is safe.

The Role of Software in Permit to Work Systems.

PTW software has transformed traditional paper-based systems by digitizing processes, improving efficiency, and enhancing safety.

Such Software can:

• Replace Paper Permits: Electronic PTW (ePTW) systems eliminate manual paperwork, reducing errors, delays, and lost documents. They provide real-time access, digital approvals, and audit trails.
• Support Planning: Software integrates with Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) or Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems to align permits with work orders, schedule tasks, and flag conflicts.
• Enhance Compliance and Visibility: Automated workflows enforce protocols, while dashboards provide real-time monitoring.

While paper permits are still used in some settings, digital solutions are increasingly adopted to meet modern demands for speed, scalability, and compliance.

SAP Work Clearance Management (WCM).

SAP’s WCM module, part of Asset Management – Environment Health and Safety in SAP S/4HANA, provides a comprehensive PTW solution tailored for asset-intensive industries.

Key Features.

• Permit Creation and Classification: Supports permits for cold work, hot work, and more, with or without work order integration.
• Safety Certificates: Manages certificates like isolation or confined space entry.
• Isolation Management: Handles electrical, mechanical, and instrumentation isolations, ensuring safe de-energization.
• Document Attachment: Allows PDFs for isolation diagrams or other safety documents.
• Approval and Validation: Configurable approval workflows with BAdI for custom checks (e.g., BADI_WCM_WCMOBJ; method STATUS_PREP_CHECK).
• Closure Automation: Permits can be closed automatically using BAdI WORKORDER_UPDATE and API WCHC_API_WCA_ACTION_EXECUTE.
• Integration: Natively integrates with SAP Plant Maintenance for seamless work order management.

Strengths.

• Deep SAP Integration: As a native module, WCM aligns perfectly with SAP’s ecosystem, ideal for organizations already using SAP S/4HANA.
• Customizability: BAdI and APIs allow tailored configurations for specific industry needs.
• Robust Safety Focus: Comprehensive isolation and certificate management ensures high safety standards.

Limitations.

• Limited Real-Time Features: WCM focuses on process control rather than dynamic, real-time monitoring.
• Complex Implementation: Requires significant configuration, which may be challenging for smaller organizations.
• Less Mobile Flexibility: While SAP offers mobile solutions, WCM’s mobile capabilities are not as emphasized as ePAS’s.

Prometheus Group ePAS.

Prometheus Group’s ePAS is a web-based ePTW system designed as an Integrated Safe System of Work (ISSoW), focusing on digital permitting and safety management.

Key Features.

• Intelligent Templating: Reduces human error by standardizing permits with pre-configured templates.
• Real-Time Monitoring: Provides visibility into hazardous activities, replacing paper-based processes.
• Isolation and LOTO Management: Supports templating, cross-referencing, isolation point validation, and tag printing.
• Mobile and Offline Capabilities: Allows field data entry online or offline via a mobile app.
• HIRA Library: Dynamic library for hazard identification and risk assessment, growing with organizational needs.
• Integration: Connects with SAP, Oracle, and IBM Maximo, with flexible full or partial integration options.
• GIS Integration: Enhances hazard identification with geographic data, improving safety compliance.

Strengths.

• User-Friendly and Scalable: ePAS’s intuitive interface and scalability suit organizations of all sizes.
• Advanced Digital Features: Real-time monitoring, mobile access, and GIS integration provide modern capabilities.
• Flexible Integration: Works with multiple ERP/EAM systems, not limited to SAP, offering versatility.

Limitations.

• Integration Dependency: While flexible, integration with SAP may require additional configuration compared to WCM’s native setup.
• Less Focus on Complex Approvals: ePAS emphasizes standardization over highly customizable approval workflows.
• Potential Cost: As a third-party solution, licensing and implementation costs may add to expenses.

Comparison and Evaluation.

To determine which PTW software is better, we evaluate SAP WCM and Prometheus ePAS across what I consider to be the key criteria:

1. Functionality.

• SAP WCM: Offers comprehensive features, including permit classification, safety certificates, and automated closure, with a strong focus on safety and compliance. Its BAdI-driven custom checks are ideal for complex requirements.
• Prometheus ePAS: Excels in digital transformation with intelligent templating, real-time monitoring, and mobile access. Its HIRA library and GIS integration enhance proactive risk management.
• Verdict: ePAS has an edge for modern, user-friendly features, while WCM is better for intricate safety processes.

2. Integration with SAP.

• SAP WCM: Native to SAP S/4HANA, it integrates seamlessly with Plant Maintenance, requiring minimal setup.
• Prometheus ePAS: Likely integrates with SAP (e.g., Plant Maintenance, Master Data Governance), but may require APIs or partial integration, as seen in cases like EnergyAustralia.
• Verdict: WCM is superior for SAP-centric organizations; ePAS is more versatile for mixed ERP environments.

3. Replacing Paper Permits.

• SAP WCM: Digitizes permits but often involves printing for issuance, suggesting a hybrid approach.
• Prometheus ePAS: Fully replaces paper with electronic permits, digital approvals, and mobile access, reducing delays and errors.
• Verdict: ePAS is more effective at eliminating paper permits.

4. Planning Support.

• SAP WCM: Integrates permits with work orders, supporting maintenance planning but with less emphasis on real-time conflict detection.
• Prometheus ePAS: Enhances planning with work order integration, conflict detection, and GIS-based hazard mapping, improving scheduling efficiency.
• Verdict: ePAS offers stronger planning tools due to its digital and proactive features.

5. Ease of Use and Scalability.

• SAP WCM: Robust but complex, requiring expertise for configuration and scaling.
• Prometheus ePAS: User-friendly, scalable, and adaptable to growing needs, with mobile and offline capabilities.
• Verdict: ePAS is easier to use and more scalable.

Comments – Which Do I Feel Is Better?

The choice between SAP WCM and Prometheus ePAS depends on organizational needs:

• Choose SAP WCM if your organization is deeply invested in SAP S/4HANA, requires highly customizable safety workflows, and prioritizes native integration for complex industrial processes. It’s ideal for large enterprises with dedicated SAP expertise.
• Choose Prometheus ePAS if you seek a modern, user-friendly ePTW system with real-time monitoring, mobile access, and flexible integration across ERP systems. It’s better suited for organizations aiming to fully digitize permits, enhance planning, or operate in diverse ERP environments.

For most modern industrial plants prioritizing digital transformation and ease of use, Prometheus ePAS appears to be the better solution due to its advanced digital features, scalability and ability to fully replace paper permits.

However, it’s very hard to rule out SAP WCM, it remains a strong contender for SAP-centric organizations with complex safety requirements and let’s face it, SAP is everywhere.

References.

• SAP Community: Implementing Permit to Work in SAP S/4HANA.
• SAP Help Portal: Work Clearance Management.
• Prometheus Group: The Guide to Strengthen Safety: Prometheus ePAS.
• Prometheus Group: Environmental Health and Safety Software.
• Prometheus Group: ePAS Day in the Life.
• Prometheus Group: Electronic Permitting & Safety (ISSOW).
• Prometheus Group: 3 Essential Features for Digital Permitting.
• Prometheus Group: Build a Business Case for an Electronic Permit to Work System.
• Prometheus Group: How Integrated GIS Enhances the Permitting Process.
• Prometheus Group: How Permit to Work Supports Asset Management Best Practices.

Is There Space To Complete In This Niche (Permit To Work Software).

Q.What would it take to develop a new competitive Permit to Work Software solution? 

So, we’ve established that Permit to Work (PTW) software is essential for managing high-risk activities in industries like oil and gas, chemicals and utilities to ensure worker safety and regulatory compliance.

We’ve also established that both SAP Work Clearance Management (WCM) and Prometheus Group’s Electronic Permit Administration Systems (ePAS) are both doing an excellent job with providing a software solution for PTW.

Now, would it be possible or worthwhile for a new PTW software to compete with SAP and Prometheus in this space?  One thing for sure an new player must seek to offer superior functionality, user experience and innovation.

This would not be easy but below are 30 key areas where I feel the new software company wishing to compete should target.

Naturally a detailed User Requirements Statement (URS) and a high-level project plan is provided to provide a guide for development.

The goal would be to create a product that addresses any limitations that existing solutions might have while introducing cutting-edge features to meet modern industrial needs.

Background on Permit to Work Software Solutions.

PTW systems are formal processes that authorize hazardous work, ensuring safety measures are in place. They are critical in industries where risks like fire, chemical exposure, or confined space hazards are prevalent.

A typical PTW includes:

• Work Description: Details of the task, location, and equipment.
• Hazard Identification: Risks and mitigation strategies, often via Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (HIRA).
• Safety Controls: Isolation measures (e.g., lockout/tagout), PPE, or testing.
• Approvals: Signatures or digital approvals from authorized personnel.
• Certificates: Additional documents like confined space or excavation permits.
• Validity and Closure: Timeframe and confirmation of safe completion.

PTW software digitizes these processes, replacing paper permits, streamlining planning, and enhancing compliance. SAP WCM integrates deeply with SAP S/4HANA but is complex and less mobile-focused.

Prometheus ePAS excels in digital features like real-time monitoring but may lack SAP’s customization depth. With that in mind, a new solution must combine the best of both while addressing gaps in usability, cost, and technology.

30 Key Areas You Would Need To Concentrate On To Compete.

To create a competitive market-leading PTW software, the following 30 areas are critical for getting a new product into the same ball park as SAP WCM or Prometheus ePAS:

1. Seamless Integration with Multiple Systems
• Integrate with ERP/EAM systems (e.g., SAP, Oracle, IBM Maximo) using standard APIs, reducing setup time compared to SAP’s native but rigid integration.
2. Advanced Real-Time Monitoring
• Provide real-time dashboards and alerts for permit statuses, enabling immediate intervention, surpassing SAP’s limited real-time capabilities.
3. Mobile-First Design with Offline Capabilities
• Offer a fully functional mobile app with offline access, improving on SAP’s less mobile-focused design and matching ePAS’s strengths.
4. AI-Driven Risk Prediction
• Use AI to analyze historical data and predict safety risks, offering proactive suggestions, a feature not emphasized in either competitor.
5. No-Code Workflow Customization
• Allow users to configure approval workflows without coding, simplifying SAP’s BAdI-driven customization.
6. Advanced GIS Integration
• Include 3D GIS mapping for visualizing plant layouts, enhancing ePAS’s GIS features with more detailed hazard identification.
7. Automated HIRA Tools
• Automate HIRA with intelligent templates and risk scoring, streamlining risk assessments beyond basic templates in both systems.
8. Comprehensive Compliance Management
• Ensure compliance with standards like OSHA, Seveso III, and HSG 250, with automated reporting, matching or exceeding both competitors.
9. Integrated User Training
• Provide in-app training modules and guides, reducing the learning curve compared to SAP’s complex setup.
10. Scalability for Large Operations
• Handle thousands of permits and users efficiently, suitable for enterprises and smaller firms, unlike SAP’s enterprise focus.
11. Cost-Effective Pricing Models
• Offer subscription-based pricing to appeal to smaller businesses, addressing potential cost concerns with ePAS.
12. Advanced Data Analytics
• Deliver analytics for safety trends and performance, surpassing SAP’s basic reporting and matching ePAS’s dashboards.
13. Collaboration Features
• Integrate chat or video for safety briefings, enhancing team coordination beyond current offerings.
14. IoT Connectivity
• Link with IoT devices for real-time environmental monitoring (e.g., gas levels), a feature not prominent in either system.
15. Blockchain for Audit Trails
• Use blockchain for tamper-proof records, ensuring audit transparency, a unique selling point.
16. Natural Language Processing (NLP)
• Enable voice or text-based permit creation, improving usability over traditional interfaces.
17. Augmented Reality (AR) Integration
• Use AR for visual safety guidance (e.g., isolation points), a novel feature for both competitors.
18. Predictive Maintenance Integration
• Auto-generate permits for maintenance tasks, linking with predictive systems, extending beyond SAP’s maintenance integration.
19. Multi-Language Support
• Support global operations with multiple languages, matching industry needs.
20. Accessibility Features
• Comply with WCAG for accessibility, ensuring inclusivity.
21. Eco-Friendly Features
• Eliminate paper permits and optimize energy use, aligning with sustainability trends.
22. Vendor and Contractor Management
• Manage third-party permits, building on Velocity EHS’s contractor focus.
23. Incident Reporting and Analysis
• Integrate incident tracking to improve future permits, a gap in both systems.
24. Simulation Tools
• Allow scenario testing for permit procedures, enhancing training and preparedness.
25. Customizable Dashboards
• Enable user-defined KPI dashboards, matching ePAS’s flexibility.
26. API-First Architecture
• Provide open APIs for extensibility, improving on SAP’s closed system.
27. Cloud-Native Deployment
• Offer high availability and automatic updates, aligning with modern software trends.
28. Top-Tier Security
• Implement encryption and role-based access, meeting or exceeding industry standards.
29. 24/7 Customer Support
• Provide dedicated support, addressing potential gaps in competitor services.
30. Continuous Improvement
• Update regularly based on user feedback and standards, ensuring long-term relevance.

Comparison Table: New Software vs. WCM or ePAS.

User Requirements Statement For Developing A Rival Solution(URS).

The below URS defines the functional and non-functional requirements for the new PTW software, ensuring it would meet user needs and industry standards.

Functional Requirements

1. Permit Management:
• Create, edit, approve, and close permits (e.g., hot work, cold work, confined space) with fields for work details, hazards, controls, and attachments.
• Support customizable templates for different permit types.
• Track permit status in real-time.
2. Workflow and Approvals:
• Define flexible approval workflows with multiple levels.
• Notify users of required actions via email or in-app alerts.
• Allow digital signatures or approvals.
3. Integration:
• Integrate with ERP/EAM systems (e.g., SAP, Oracle) to link permits with work orders.
• Connect with contractor management systems for third-party permits.
4. Mobile Access:
• Provide a responsive mobile app for iOS and Android.
• Support offline permit creation and syncing when online.
5. Safety and Compliance:
• Include HIRA tools with automated risk scoring and templates.
• Attach safety certificates (e.g., isolation, excavation).
• Ensure compliance with OSHA, Seveso III, and HSG 250, with reporting capabilities.
6. Reporting and Analytics:
• Generate customizable reports on permit activities and safety performance.
• Provide real-time dashboards with KPIs.
7. User Training and Support:
• Offer in-app training modules and user guides.
• Provide 24/7 customer support with helpdesk and training sessions.

Non-Functional Requirements.

8. Security:
• Implement role-based access control and data encryption.
• Conduct regular security audits.
9. Scalability and Performance:
• Handle large-scale operations with minimal latency.
• Use cloud infrastructure for scalability.
10. Internationalization:
• Support multiple languages and regulatory frameworks.
• Adapt to regional safety standards.
11. Usability:
• Ensure intuitive interfaces with a low learning curve.
• Comply with WCAG for accessibility.
12. Reliability:
• Maintain 99.9% uptime with fast response times.
• Ensure robust error handling and data recovery.

Project Plan.

The project plan uses an Agile methodology (Scrum) to deliver the software iteratively, incorporating user feedback and ensuring quality. The plan is divided into five phases.

1. Initiation Phase (1-6 Weeks)

• Objectives: Define scope, goals, and success criteria.
• Activities:
• Conduct stakeholder interviews (e.g., safety managers, IT teams).
• Develop a project charter outlining vision and timeline.
• Secure stakeholder approval.
• Deliverables: Project charter, stakeholder list.

2. Planning Phase (6-12 Weeks)

• Objectives: Create a detailed roadmap and setup.
• Activities:
• Define Agile methodology with 2-week sprints.
• Plan sprints for core features (e.g., permit creation, mobile access).
• Identify risks (e.g., integration challenges) and mitigation strategies.
• Set up tools (Jira for tracking, Git for version control, AWS for hosting).
• Deliverables: Project plan, risk register, development environment.

3. Execution Phase (3-9 Months)

• Objectives: Develop and test the software iteratively.
• Activities:
• Conduct sprint planning, daily stand-ups, reviews, and retrospectives.
• Sample sprint breakdown:
• Sprint 1: Permit creation, classification, and basic approvals.
• Sprint 2: Mobile app with offline functionality.
• Sprint 3: ERP/EAM integration and HIRA tools.
• Sprint 4: AI risk prediction and GIS integration.
• Sprint 5: AR, IoT, and blockchain features.
• Perform unit, integration, and user acceptance testing per sprint.
• Gather user feedback via demos and adjust features.
• Deliverables: Working software increments, test reports.

4. Monitoring and Controlling Phase (Ongoing)

• Objectives: Ensure project stays on track.
• Activities:
• Track progress using Jira and burndown charts.
• Manage scope changes via change control processes.
• Address risks (e.g., delays in testing) promptly.
• Conduct regular stakeholder reviews.
• Deliverables: Progress reports, updated risk log.

5. Closure Phase (8-12 Weeks)

• Objectives: Finalize and launch the software.
• Activities:
• Complete final testing and bug fixes.
• Conduct beta testing with select organizations.
• Obtain stakeholder acceptance via UAT.
• Document lessons learned and archive project files.
• Plan for post-launch support and updates.
• Deliverables: motd: Final software, user manuals, support plan.

Conclusion

By focusing on the 30 key areas, the new PTW software could potentially offer an alternative to SAP WCM and Prometheus ePAS, assuming the rival solution could offer a more user-friendly, innovative, and scalable solution.

It would take a lot of work, R&D, testing and fine tuning to develop something that would rival the SAP and/or Prometheus Solution. A far easier approach would be to just pick of the two solutions on offer and then customize and personalize that product to be exactly what you are after.