January tends to bring the same narrative every year: fresh budgets, new plans, “reset” hiring. In ERP, the reality is usually more continuous. Most organisations enter Q1 carrying the same delivery pressures from the prior year—timelines are tight, governance is under scrutiny, and key roles are difficult to fill because the people who consistently deliver are already in motion.
What has changed going into 2026 is how organisations are buying certainty. Not certainty in the sense of risk-free delivery, but certainty that the person hired will reduce ambiguity rather than add to it.
One clear pattern is the continued split of “transformation” into two distinct profiles. For several years, job descriptions have tried to capture a single person who can lead process design, manage stakeholders, configure the system, drive testing discipline and still act as a steady hand when delivery becomes tense. That combination exists, but it is scarce—and it rarely appears in response to a generic advert.
Instead, we are seeing stronger hiring outcomes when organisations are explicit about which of the following they are hiring for:
- Delivery specialists: deep module capability (FI/CO, SD, MM, EWM, TM, PP, etc.), strong documentation habits, reliable execution under pressure.
- Business-facing translators: process-first profiles who can convert requirements into implementable decisions and protect scope without escalating politics.
Problems often start when these are blended into one hire. The result is either an overloaded lead (burnout risk) or a technically strong hire who cannot correct stakeholder drift. In 2026, role clarity is not a “nice to have”; it directly impacts speed-to-productivity.
Compensation pressure remains a reality, especially in Europe, but it is showing up in a more selective way. The mid-market will flex. Top performers will not meaningfully “discount” if the role lacks clarity or the programme lacks leadership. Where we see the best candidates engage, it is usually because the hiring manager can answer practical questions quickly:
- Who signs off decisions, and how often?
- What is stable versus still being debated?
- What are the known risks?
- What does success look like in the first 8–12 weeks?
- How is the programme governed when priorities collide?
This is also why some employers report “candidate shortages” while peers hire within days. It is less about overall market supply and more about whether the role looks deliverable.
S/4HANA itself is now largely treated as baseline experience for mid-to-senior ERP hiring. The market has matured past “S/4 exposure” as a differentiator. The practical differentiators in 2026 are about context:
- Greenfield vs conversion vs rollout, and what that meant day-to-day
- Where complexity sat (integration, data, testing, change)
- How issues were handled under pressure (defect triage, cutover risk, business pushback)
- What the candidate truly owned (decisions and outcomes, not attendance)
Candidates who can articulate trade-offs—why a design choice was made, what was sacrificed, what was protected—are consistently stronger than those who can only list tasks.
In BeNeLux and wider Europe, language and local stakeholder credibility remains a significant lever, particularly in finance and supply chain environments. Even where systems operate in English, decision-making often does not. Employers tend to over-correct in one of two directions: either language requirements are so strict that the candidate pool collapses, or language is treated as optional and delivery friction appears later.
A practical approach we see working is team design: identifying which stakeholder groups truly require local language capability, then anchoring the programme with one or two bilingual leads so specialist roles can be filled from a broader pool. The key is making this decision early, not mid-process.
Finally, interview processes continue to influence hiring outcomes more than most teams expect. Good ERP candidates interpret slow, unclear processes as a proxy for decision-making quality. If a hiring process takes weeks, changes direction mid-way, or provides vague feedback, the best candidates usually opt out quietly. Streamlined processes with clear timelines and consistent assessment criteria convert better—without increasing compensation.
What this means for Q1 is straightforward: role clarity, decision-making speed and credible programme storytelling will outperform broad job adverts every time. In 2026, “good people” are not just choosing the highest offer; they are choosing the programmes they believe will run properly.
