Top Dynamics GP to Business Central Migration Challenges and How to Avoid Them
- Tarana Rana
- 8 hours ago
- 6 min read
Uncover common migration challenges that arise in a Dynamics GP to Business Central transition and learn how to avoid them.
Migrating from Microsoft Dynamics GP to Business Central is far more than a technical upgrade. It is a wide‑ranging transformation that touches data structures, integrations, user expectations, customizations, and even the culture of how teams work within an ERP system. Many organizations see the move as a chance to modernize yet underestimate just how differently the two systems behave.
In this article, Sebastian Alexander, Director of Professional Services at Kwixand Solutions, offers deep, experience‑backed insight into what companies actually face when they begin migrating from GP to Business Central, and the underlying reasons why these projects so often stall, extend, or complicate operations.
Top Challenges Companies Face During a GP to Business Central Migration
1️⃣ Data Challenges That Shape the Migration
Data quality is consistently the biggest migration hurdle and the one that companies least expect. Many organizations enter a migration assuming their data is ready to move, but GP environments often contain years’ worth of inconsistencies that have never been addressed. “I think the most common issues during the migration, number one, are data quality problems. A lot of customers don’t look at this as an opportunity to do reconciliation or clean up on their existing data prior to migrating, so they end up importing a lot of duplicate vendors and customers,” shares Alexander.
Other common data issues that crop up during a GP to Business Central migration include:
Inconsistent chart of account structures
Transactions missing required dimension detail
Segment structures that do not map to dimensions
Delays in deciding how much historical data to bring forward
That mismatch between the two systems is a fundamental architectural difference. GP uses a segment‑based chart of accounts, while Business Central is built around a dimension‑based model. The shift sounds simple in theory, but it requires careful, methodical mapping of the account of charts across both systems prior to migration. According to Alexander, many companies don’t realize the magnitude of that work until late in the process.
Another source of delay and frustration comes from indecision around historical data. Organizations often assume they’ll decide how much history to bring over eventually, but that choice has huge implications on effort, timeline, and cost. Alexander describes how this indecision causes slowdowns: “A lot of customers are on the fence. They are undecided whether they should migrate a full history or maybe just opening balances. That lack of indecision can often cause delays and possibly impact your milestone dates for migration.”
Even so, he encourages organizations to treat migration as an opportunity, not just a challenge. The transition offers a rare moment to eliminate old clutter, improve data hygiene, and move into Business Central with a cleaner foundation.
2️⃣ The Hidden Impact of Customizations and Add‑Ons
Customizations and add-ons can become one of the most demanding parts of a GP-to‑Business‑Central project. GP’s legacy architecture simply does not translate to Business Central’s modern development framework. Alexander explains,“GP uses Dexterity as its programming language, which is for creating custom forms, custom reports, business logic flows. This does not translate directly to Business Central. Business Central uses AL, or application language, which is proprietary to Microsoft. So those two are not going to migrate together.”
This incompatibility means that every customization must be evaluated with these questions:
Can it be replaced?
Does it need to be re‑created?
Is it even still necessary?
The same is true for ISV add-ons. Tools used for payroll, manufacturing, field service, and industry‑specific needs may not have one‑to‑one equivalents in Business Central. Alexander explains the limitations clearly: “You’ll have to find equivalent extensions for Business Central. You can’t just take that add‑on and migrate it directly… or potentially custom‑develop it if a Business Central compatible add‑on doesn’t exist.”
Reports face similar challenges. GP’s reporting tools, built on SSRS or SQL, have no direct pathway into Business Central’s modern reporting stack, which uses RDLC and Power BI. Every modified invoice, purchase order, or sales order must be rebuilt. This is exactly why Alexander stresses early documentation: “In your discovery sessions, you want to document all those customizations early so you’ve got visibility on the level of effort or the scope that is required in order to address those shortcomings between the integrations and customizations.”
When this documentation is delayed or incomplete, teams often uncover critical gaps deep into the design or build phase, and by then, the impact on the timeline is unavoidable.
3️⃣ Integration Challenges That Slow Down Migration
Integrations are another area where GP and Business Central diverge significantly. GP often relies on SQL‑based connections, flat files, and batch transfers. Business Central, being cloud‑native, requires API‑driven communication and more modern data‑exchange methods. This creates a disconnect between old integration approaches and the requirements of the new system.
Manufacturing systems add even more complexity. GP’s manufacturing module organizes bills of material, routings, and configurations in ways that do not align cleanly with Business Central’s data structures. As Alexander notes, “GP’s manufacturing structure is completely different than Business Central’s in terms of bill of material configurations, routings - those sorts of things. They can be very complex entities which would require significant time to reconfigure into Business Central.”
EDI and point‑of‑sale systems introduce another layer of rework. GP does not support the modern middleware, custom APIs, or Power Automate flows that Business Central uses. These must be built from scratch, and Alexander warns that many customers underestimate this effort. Discovering integration dependencies late in the project can push timelines back dramatically.
On top of that, insufficient testing remains one of the most widespread issues across ERP implementations. “Not enough time is dedicated to testing. It’s understandable because people are doing their day‑to‑day jobs, but that’s something that is important for stakeholders to champion,” says Alexander.
Testing is not just a technical step - it’s a validation of processes, integrations, and user behavior. Without robust testing cycles, go‑live becomes riskier than it needs to be.
4️⃣ User Experience and Security Challenges
Beyond technical challenges, user adoption is one of the most underestimated aspects of moving from GP to Business Central. The interfaces of the two systems are fundamentally different. GP is an on‑premise, desktop application with heavily menu-driven navigation. Business Central, on the other hand, is cloud‑based and visually aligned with modern Microsoft applications.
Yet despite that difference, Business Central feels familiar to many users because of its alignment with the broader Microsoft ecosystem in terms of Excel, Word, and those sorts of applications.
To support user adoption, Alexander recommends role‑based training that focuses on the tasks users need to accomplish rather than how to navigate menus. He also highlights the value of giving users access to a sandbox environment as early as possible. “Bring a sandbox online as soon as possible so that users can play in there, familiarize themselves with navigation at their own speed during the transition.”
Identifying power users early in the project also contributes to smoother adoption. These individuals become internal champions who support their colleagues and help reinforce best practices.
Finally, security configuration is another area where organizations underestimate the work required. GP and Business Central operate with completely different permission frameworks, and misconfiguring these roles leads to daily frustration. “GP and Business Central use completely different permissions and authentication methods for users, so any misconfiguration can cause ongoing restrictions for users as they’re trying to navigate through their day-to-day operations,” shares Alexander.
What Companies Can Do to Be Truly Migration‑Ready
Becoming migration-ready requires preparation on both the partner and customer sides. One of Alexander’s strongest recommendations is to build a pre‑migration checklist that clearly outlines all activities and dependencies. This includes cleaning up master data, documenting customizations thoroughly, making early decisions about historical data, preparing users conceptually for Business Central, and ensuring network readiness for a cloud environment.
He emphasizes the importance of deciding how much historical data to bring in as early as possible: “That decision has to be made early on because the deeper you go in your data transition, the more time that’s going to be required.”
Finally, he recommends an approach that has consistently proven valuable: performing a test migration. It requires time and effort, but it helps identify mapping issues, configuration gaps, missing data, and integration problems long before the actual cutover. As he puts it, “I’ve seen this done a few times. It’s time consuming, but the value is huge. The ROI is great because you can identify gaps prior to the actual go‑live cutover.”
Key Takeaway
Migrating from GP to Business Central is a complex undertaking, one that touches data, processes, technology, and people. Companies that approach the project as a strategic modernization initiative, rather than a technical upgrade, are more likely to succeed. With the right preparation, thorough documentation, early training, and thoughtful decision‑making, organizations can transition to Business Central with confidence and clarity.
Take the Next Steps with Kwixand Solutions
Ready to leverage the benefits of Dynamics 365 Business Central? Reach out to the Kwixand Solutions team to discuss your move from Dynamics GP to Dynamics 365 Business Central. We are a Microsoft Dynamics 365 Partner based in Vancouver, Canada, and we help businesses through all stages of their cloud ERP transformation and set them up for continued success. Book a free consultation to chat with one of our experienced consultants.
