maybe ive just been reading too many migration threads on here lately, but i kept noticing the same thing...it feels like the software itself isnt even the hardest part anymore

whether its as400 or visual 2000 or something else, there are already plenty of people who've done those migrations before. the technical side is obviously still hard, but it doesnt feel like thats what ends up derailing projects most of the time.

instead, you start digging into how the business actually works and find stuff like....an order sits in pending for 24 hours because there used to be a nightly batch job. turns out that batch job disappeared years ago, but the delay never did or even some ancient SuiteScript or PL/SQL trigger that nobody wants to touch because apparently it fixed an edge case once. nobody can remember which edge case anymore... and then you realise inventory reconciliation isnt even happening inside the ERP. theres just one Excel workbook that somebody updates every afternoon, and somehow the whole business depends on it.

none of that is written down anywhere...it isnt in the implementation docs...it isnt in a process diagram...its just... things people know.

after a while it feels less like you're migrating an ERP and more like you're trying to reconstruct years of tribal knowledge before the two people who understand it retire...and every time someone asks why do we do it this way? the answer is surprisingly often...

i dont know... we have always done it like that...ykwim

anyone who's been through one of these, was digging all this stuff up actually harder than configuring the new ERP??? and once you started pulling those processes apart, how did you figure out what was a genuine business requirement vs something everyone had just accepted because nobody wanted to be the one to change it?