The system works. Whoever wrote it left years ago.
Replacing a system that the business depends on is not a technical problem — it is a risk problem. We treat it as one.
Does this sound familiar?
- Any change takes weeks, and nobody can promise what else it will break.
- It runs on a version that stopped receiving support some time ago.
- Half the business rules live in the code and are written down nowhere else.
- The people who could answer questions about it have retired or moved on.
- You have tried to replace it once already, and it did not go well.
How we approach it
01 — Map
Dependencies before anything else
What calls what, which reports, jobs and integrations depend on it, and which rules exist only in the code. Most failed migrations skipped this.
02 — Decide
Target architecture, argued
Chosen against the map and against your constraints — not against whatever is fashionable. Written down, with the reasoning.
03 — Build
The new one runs beside the old
Both live at once, reading the same data, so you compare real results in production before trusting anything.
04 — Migrate
Piece by piece, with a way back
Never a single switch on a weekend. Each step is reversible, and the old system stays available until it is genuinely unused.
What you get
- A dependency map of what the system actually touches.
- Target architecture, with the reasoning behind each decision.
- A migration plan where every step has a rollback.
- The new system in production, with the old one still reachable.
- The documentation that should have existed all along.
Technologies
Mastercard
An integration platform moved off Informatica PowerCenter onto SSIS — strategy through execution, without interrupting the operation.
Read the case →Tell us what you are trying to fix.
A tangled integration, a slow database, a system nobody understands any more. The first conversation is 30 minutes and costs nothing.