4 Smart Rules for ERP Data Migration: What to Bring Forward (and What to Leave Behind)
- Tarana Rana
- Mar 12
- 7 min read
ERP migration scope should be a finance decision. Learn how CFOs can decide what data to migrate, reduce costs, protect audits, and speed up ERP implementations.
Whether you're planning a GP to Business Central migration or moving from another ERP system, most migration conversations start in the same place: the IT department. Teams talk about integrations, data pipelines, migration tools, and technical frameworks. While those are important factors to consider, they’re not where the most important migration decision actually sits.
While these are important factors to consider, one of the most important migration decisions is more strategic than technical: What data should you bring forward to the new system and what should you leave behind?
Many companies tend to default to the simplest answer: migrate everything. On the surface, it feels safe because if all the historical data is moved into the new system, nothing can be lost.
However, that instinct often creates the exact problems companies are trying to avoid. Migration scope can double project timelines, inflate costs, introduce operational complexity, and even slow down the new system before it fully launches.
To avoid these pitfalls, organizations should approach the migration scope as a finance-led decision rather than solely a technical one.
In this article, Sebastian Alexander, Director of Professional Services at Kwixand Solutions, shares key insights into why the migration scope should be finance led, along with data migration best practices finance leaders should follow during an ERP data migration to define the scope and avoid data migration common mistakes.
The Hidden Risks of Migrating Everything
At first glance, migrating every piece of historical data seems like the safest option because no information is lost, and every record remains accessible inside the new system. However, bringing everything over multiplies cost, complexity, and operational risk. Here’s how it impacts your organization:
❌ Costs Rise Faster Than Expected
Every piece of data that moves into the new system must be mapped, validated, tested, and reconciled. These aren’t one-time actions; they often require multiple cycles of testing and verification. This typically translates into a higher implementation cost.
❌ Migration Timelines Get Longer
More data doesn’t just increase effort; it also increases the amount of time required to complete the project. Additional records require more reconciliation cycles, more validation, and more testing scenarios. Alexander points out the downstream impact of this: “The more data that you import, the more probability there is you'll have a delay in go live, which
ultimately decreases your ROI.”
❌ Legacy Data Inconsistencies Within the New System
One of the biggest opportunities during an ERP migration is the chance to start with a cleaner data environment. When companies migrate everything, they often carry forward the same inconsistencies and data quality issues that existed in the old system. That can create unnecessary audit risks from legacy data inconsistencies. Instead of simplifying financial reporting, the new system inherits the same complexities that existed before.
❌ System Performance Can Suffer
Another unintended consequence of migrating unnecessary historical data is your system performance. Alexander highlights this operational risk: “The more data, the possibility your system will perform slower. You could introduce more complex reporting logic because of the amount of data and the table relationships you've brought in.”
❌ Challenges in the Reconciliation Process
Perhaps the most overlooked impact of excessive data migration is the long-term burden it creates for finance teams. Once data enters a new ERP system, it becomes part of the company’s operational history. Alexander sums it up simply: “Every record migrated needs to be reconciled and explained forever.” If large volumes of unnecessary records are brought over, finance teams will face challenges in reconciliation once the new system goes live.
❌ Unnecessary Data Can Hurt User Adoption
Another issue that organizations rarely anticipate is the effect on user experience. When a new system is filled with unnecessary or outdated data, it becomes harder for users to find the information that actually matters. Alexander emphasizes this risk: “You don't want to risk decreasing user adoption as the system appears to be cluttered with non-value-add data.” A new ERP system should feel cleaner and more intuitive than the one it replaces, not more complicated.
⚙️ Read More: Why ERP Implementations Fail - And How to Prevent Them
4 Critical Rules for ERP Migration Scope: What Data Should You Move?
1️⃣ Let Finance Decide What Data Is Worth Migrating
There’s no doubt that IT teams are an integral part of any system migration but for migration success deciding what data needs to move over should be a finance-led decision. “IT can consider or can answer how to move the data, the mechanics involved in transitioning or migrating that data. But finance ultimately has to decide what's worth moving, which is different than how to move,” says Alexander
That distinction is easy to overlook during a migration project. Technical teams naturally focus on the logistics of data movement, while finance teams are often brought in later to validate results. However as migrating data is more than a technical step, it’s important to keep in mind that it’s about what becomes part of the company’s financial record going forward.
Finance owns the financial statements, audit outcomes, and regulatory obligations tied to that data. Because of that, they must also own the decision about what historical information becomes part of the new system.
As Alexander explains: “Finance owns financial statements. They own the audit outcomes. They are responsible for regular regulatory compliance, if applicable. So really, migrating data defines what becomes the official history. That decision belongs to those accountable for financial truth, which is finance. When finance leads the decision, migration scope becomes intentional rather than automatic.”
2️⃣ Focus on the Data That Actually Supports Operations
Rather than migrating everything, many successful ERP migration projects focus on a smaller group of high-value data categories. These datasets provide the continuity organizations need without overwhelming the new system.
Typically, the most important data to migrate includes open transactions. These represent the active financial activity of the business and must be carried forward to maintain operational accuracy. Organizations also usually migrate prior-year general ledger balances, which provide financial continuity and allow comparisons across reporting periods.
Historical transaction detail may also be included, but within limits. Alexander suggests keeping the historical window relatively narrow: “You want to look at your detailed historical transactions, maybe a maximum of three years, one year ideally.”
This approach balances historical context with operational simplicity. It gives finance teams enough data to support analysis without creating unnecessary complexity in the new environment.
3️⃣ Don’t Migrate Data That Adds No Operational Value
Just as important as deciding what to migrate is deciding what not to migrate. Many legacy systems contain large amounts of historical information that simply doesn’t add value to a modern ERP environment.
Closed payables and receivables transactions, for example, often provide little operational benefit once they are settled. Similarly, fully depreciated assets or outdated master data rarely justify the effort required to migrate them.
Alexander states, “Any fully depreciated assets, there's no value in bringing those in. And then any obsolete master data, there's again no value in migrating that data.”
Leaving this data behind simplifies migration, reduces reconciliation effort, and improves overall system clarity. It also helps prevent the new system from inheriting unnecessary complexity from the old one.
4️⃣ Keep Historical Data Accessible Without Migrating It
One of the biggest concerns finance leaders have about limiting migration scope is the potential impact on audits. If historical data doesn’t exist inside the new ERP system, will auditors still have access to the information they need?
In most cases, the answer is yes. “Auditors care about access and traceability. They don't care about cross-system data duplication,” shares Alexander.
Organizations can meet those requirements without loading every historical record into the new system. Legacy systems can be preserved in read-only archives, allowing finance teams and auditors to access historical records when needed. Detailed transaction data, such as vendor entries, subledger entries, and customer ledger entries, can also be stored externally.
Modern reporting solutions also provide another solution. “Introduce Power BI or some other similar reporting tools… that way you can access historical data and perform analysis without any operational burden,” suggests Alexander. This strategy keeps the operational system lean while preserving full historical access.
⚙️ Read More: 10 Steps to ERP Implementation Success
A Real-World Example: How One Migration Scope Decision Saved the Project
The impact of migration scope becomes clear when looking at real implementations. Alexander described a project involving a mid-market distributor that was moving to a new ERP system. Initially, the company planned to migrate more than ten years of historical data, including general ledger, accounts receivable, accounts payable, and inventory records.
At first glance, this seemed like a responsible approach. But when the project team analyzed the implications, several issues emerged. The migration scope would have doubled the effort required for data validation. It also threatened to extend the implementation timeline by four months and created potential performance concerns for the new system.
Instead of continuing with the original plan, the team reevaluated what data the business truly needed. They ultimately decided to migrate open transactions, prior-year balances, and two years of detailed historical data while keeping the rest accessible through read-only archives.
The results were significant. “The result of that was we decreased the migration effort by 40%, recovered the original go-live date. They also found there was cleaner financial reporting when we moved into acceptance testing, and higher confidence on day one from a user adoption perspective,” shares Alexander.
He summarizes the lesson clearly: “Migrating everything might feel safe, but it also translates into accepting maximum cost, complexity and risk without scrutiny.”
Key Takeaway: Treat Migration Scope Like Capital Allocation
According to Alexander, successful migrations aren’t about moving data, they’re about curating financial truth for the future. “If you don’t actively decide what to migrate, you’ve already made the most expensive decision possible,” he says.
Finance leaders should approach it with the same discipline they apply to any investment decision. “Migration scope should be treated like capital allocation. Every data set has to justify its cost, risk, and ongoing burden,” says Alexander.
He recommends asking three questions when determining how much historical data to bring over to the new system.
Is this data required for statutory or audit purposes?
Does the business actively use this data for decisions today?
Would you recreate that data if it didn't already exist?
“If the answer to these questions is no, don’t migrate it,” he advises.
This mindset forces organizations to think carefully about the value of each dataset. When companies apply that principle, migration becomes more than a technical upgrade. It becomes an opportunity to build a cleaner, faster, and more reliable financial system for the years ahead.
Planning an ERP Migration? Kwixand Solutions Can Help
Data migration can be arduous and missteps can risk the integrity of your ERP data. By keeping these best practices in mind, you can ensure a smooth migration and avoid delays or future issues.
Got questions about migrating? The team at Kwixand Solutions is happy to help and guide you through your ERP migration journey. We're a Microsoft Dynamics 365 Partner, and our team of highly experienced consultants bring over 50 years of combined experience helping businesses across Canada and the US digitally transform.
