For SAP SBA exams

Scenario Roleplay: practise being questioned, not just answering

SAP® Scenario-Based Assessments reward holding and defending a position. In Scenario Roleplay an AI character plays your client stakeholder, presses on your reasoning in writing, and afterwards scores every objective with your own words quoted back as the evidence.

Find your SBA exam Read an example session

Why SBA exams need more than multiple-choice practice

A Scenario-Based Assessment gives you a realistic business situation and asks you to reason towards the right decisions. Some SBA exams go further with SAP's AI-guided option — a simulated interview in which an AI persona questions you about your scenario, which candidates often call "Roleplay with AI" (what to expect from it). Either way, knowing the right answer is only half the job: you also have to explain it, and hold it when someone pushes back. That is a skill you can rehearse — and Scenario Roleplay is built to rehearse it.

How it works

  1. 1. Pick an SBA exam and a scenario

    Choose one of your exam's original ERPPrep scenarios. You get a short brief: the business situation and the role you are playing.

  2. 2. Get questioned by an AI stakeholder

    An AI character playing a client stakeholder, such as a programme sponsor, asks for your recommendation and then presses on it with follow-up questions, in writing, the way a real client would.

  3. 3. Read your scored debrief

    Every objective is scored afterwards, with your own sentences quoted back as the evidence and a note on what was missing, so you know exactly which part of your reasoning to tighten.

An example session

Three exchanges from a programme-governance scenario, and how one objective was scored.

An example conversation. Shortened, and written in-house to show the format — not a real learner’s session, and not the SAP exam.

The brief: A group rollout is running to a fixed go-live. Two regional business units have asked for local process variants, and the steering board wants to know whether to grant them.

Programme Sponsor

Role-play
Thanks for making time. The two regions have both put in for local variants and they are not going to stop asking. I need a recommendation I can take to the board on Thursday — what are you telling us to do?
I would hold the standard for this wave and handle the two requests as exceptions with a defined route, rather than granting them now. The reason is sequencing: we are against a fixed go-live, and every variant granted before the core is stable multiplies what has to be regression-tested in the window we have least slack in. What I would not do is refuse outright, because a flat no is what drives regions to build workarounds you find out about after go-live. So: standard now, a documented exception route with a decision date after the first stable release, and I would tell the regions that date on Thursday.
The regions will say you have simply deferred them. What do they actually get on Thursday that they do not have today?
They get a date and a named decision-maker, which is more than they have now. Concretely: their requirement is logged against the release it will be assessed in, they know who assesses it, and they know what evidence they need to bring — volume, the regulatory driver if there is one, and what breaks if they run standard. That last one matters because roughly half of local variant requests do not survive being asked what specifically fails under standard.
And if one of them comes back with a genuine regulatory requirement that standard cannot meet?
Then it stops being a variant request and becomes a scope item, and it should be escalated the same day rather than waiting for the exception cycle. A regulatory gap is not a preference and treating it as one is how you end up non-compliant at go-live. I would accept the trade-off there openly with the board: if that happens, the fixed date is at risk, and it is better to surface that in week two than in the week before cutover.

How it was scored

On track
4.5/5 mean

CHALLENGE 1 — Governance of local variation

Strong

Took a clear position and justified it from the case's own constraint — the fixed go-live — rather than in general terms. Named the trade-off being accepted and gave the regions something concrete rather than a deferral.

Evidence: I would hold the standard for this wave and handle the two requests as exceptions with a defined route

What was missing: Did not say who owns the exception decision or how a disagreement between the board and a region would be resolved.

CHALLENGE 2 — Handling a regulatory exception

Excellent

Reclassified the request rather than processing it, identified the second-order consequence for the date, and chose to surface the risk early instead of protecting the plan. Deepened under questioning rather than restating.

Evidence: Then it stops being a variant request and becomes a scope item, and it should be escalated the same day

Scores are a practice signal against ERPPrep’s own criteria — not an SAP result, and never a prediction of one.

SAP exams with Scenario Roleplay

Scenario Roleplay is offered on exams in the Scenario-Based Assessment format that have practice scenarios ready. Open an exam to see the options. See every SBA exam.

What Scenario Roleplay is not

It is independent practice modelled on the Scenario-Based Assessment format. You are talking to an AI character in an original ERPPrep scenario — not SAP, not an SAP employee, and not the SAP exam. There are no real or recalled exam questions here, and the scores are a practice signal against ERPPrep’s own criteria, never a prediction of a certification result.

Scenario Roleplay: common questions

What is Scenario Roleplay?
Scenario Roleplay is ERPPrep's AI stakeholder practice for exams that use SAP's Scenario-Based Assessment (SBA) format. An AI character plays a client stakeholder in an original ERPPrep scenario and questions your reasoning in a written conversation; afterwards every objective is scored with your own words quoted back as the evidence.
Is this the same as SAP's AI-guided option ("Roleplay with AI")?
No. Some SBA exams include an AI-guided option from SAP — a simulated interview in which an AI persona questions the candidate about their scenario, which candidates often call "Roleplay with AI". Scenario Roleplay is independent practice for the same underlying skill, defending a position under follow-up questions. It is not SAP's tool, it uses ERPPrep's own scenarios, and it produces no SAP score.
Which exams is Scenario Roleplay available for?
Only exams that use the Scenario-Based Assessment format. System-Based Assessment (SyBA) exams are graded on tasks performed inside a live SAP system, so there is no conversation to rehearse and Scenario Roleplay is not offered for them.
How is a session scored?
Each scenario has a set of objectives. After the conversation every objective is rated on a band from Insufficient to Excellent, with a short justification, what was missing, and a quote from your own answers as the evidence. The scores are a practice signal against ERPPrep's own criteria, never a prediction of a certification result.
Does the AI give me hints or the answers?
No. The stakeholder never hints, never confirms that an answer was right, and never reveals the scoring criteria during the conversation — it behaves like a client who needs a decision, not a tutor. The feedback comes afterwards, in the debrief.
How do I get Scenario Roleplay?
It is available on SBA exams either bundled with the exam's practice pass or as an add-on for a pass you already hold. Open your exam's page to see the options.
What happens to what I write?
Your transcript is used to run and score your own session. Conversation text is deleted after a fixed retention window; your scores are kept so you can track progress.

Further reading