Connected business operations. Flexible deployment.
Discover how parallel running periods reduce risk in ERP migrations by validating data integrity, process accuracy, and system stability before full cutover.
Parallel running is a critical phase in ERP migration strategies where both the legacy and new ERP systems operate simultaneously for a defined period. This approach allows organizations to validate data integrity, process accuracy, and system stability before fully decommissioning the legacy system. The primary benefit is risk mitigation: it provides a safety net to identify and resolve discrepancies in data migration, custom configurations, and integrations without disrupting core business operations. Without parallel running, organizations face significant risks of data loss, reporting errors, and operational downtime that can impact financial accuracy and customer service. The duration and scope of the parallel run depend on the complexity of the migration, the number of integrated systems, and the criticality of business processes. A well-planned parallel running period ensures that the new ERP system is fully functional, reliable, and aligned with business requirements before the final cutover.
Determining the scope and duration of the parallel running period requires a detailed assessment of business processes, data volumes, and integration dependencies. The scope should include all critical modules, such as finance, supply chain, human resources, and customer relationship management, depending on the migration strategy. The duration is typically measured in business cycles, such as monthly closing periods or quarterly reporting cycles, to ensure that all recurring processes are validated. For complex migrations involving multiple entities or geographies, the parallel run may extend over several months. It is essential to define clear entry and exit criteria for the parallel running phase. Entry criteria include successful completion of data migration, configuration validation, and user acceptance testing. Exit criteria involve achieving a predefined level of data reconciliation accuracy, resolving critical defects, and obtaining sign-off from key stakeholders.
Several factors influence the duration of the parallel running period. The complexity of custom modules and third-party integrations often requires extended validation to ensure that data flows correctly between systems. The volume of historical data being migrated can also impact the time needed for reconciliation and error resolution. Additionally, the availability of IT resources and the responsiveness of the ERP vendor or system integrator play a role in how quickly issues are resolved. Organizations should consider the business impact of extending the parallel run, as maintaining two systems simultaneously increases operational costs and user workload. A balanced approach involves setting a target duration with built-in flexibility to extend the period if critical issues are identified.
Data reconciliation is the cornerstone of the parallel running phase. It involves comparing data records between the legacy and new ERP systems to ensure accuracy and completeness. This process includes validating master data, such as customer, vendor, and item records, as well as transactional data, such as sales orders, purchase orders, and financial entries. Automated reconciliation tools can streamline this process by identifying discrepancies and generating reports for review. Manual validation is often required for complex data transformations or custom fields that do not map directly between systems. The goal is to achieve a high level of data fidelity, where the new ERP system reflects the same information as the legacy system. Any discrepancies must be investigated and resolved before proceeding to the next phase of the migration.
Common data discrepancies during parallel running include missing records, duplicate entries, incorrect field mappings, and formatting errors. Missing records may occur if data was not migrated due to filtering criteria or technical limitations. Duplicate entries can result from improper deduplication processes during data cleansing. Incorrect field mappings often arise from differences in data structures between the legacy and new systems. Formatting errors may occur when data types or character sets are not compatible. Resolution strategies involve tracing the root cause of each discrepancy, correcting the data in the new ERP system, and updating the migration scripts or mapping rules to prevent recurrence. It is important to document all discrepancies and their resolutions to create an audit trail and improve future migration processes.
Process validation ensures that business processes function correctly in the new ERP system. This involves executing end-to-end business scenarios, such as order-to-cash, procure-to-pay, and record-to-report, to verify that workflows, approvals, and reporting are accurate. User acceptance testing (UAT) is conducted during the parallel running phase to confirm that end-users can perform their daily tasks without issues. UAT should involve a representative sample of users from different departments and roles to ensure comprehensive coverage. Feedback from UAT is critical for identifying usability issues, configuration gaps, and training needs. Any defects identified during UAT must be triaged and resolved before the final cutover. The parallel running phase provides a realistic environment for testing, as it involves live data and real-world business activities.
Measuring process efficiency and accuracy involves comparing key performance indicators (KPIs) between the legacy and new ERP systems. KPIs may include order processing time, invoice accuracy, inventory turnover, and financial closing duration. By analyzing these metrics, organizations can identify areas where the new system may be underperforming or where process improvements are needed. It is important to establish baseline KPIs from the legacy system to provide a point of comparison. Any significant deviations in KPIs should be investigated to determine whether they are due to system configuration, user behavior, or data issues. The goal is to ensure that the new ERP system meets or exceeds the performance standards of the legacy system.
Integration testing is essential during the parallel running phase to ensure that the new ERP system communicates effectively with third-party systems, such as CRM, e-commerce platforms, and payment gateways. This involves validating data flows, API endpoints, authentication mechanisms, and error handling. Integration tests should cover both synchronous and asynchronous processes to ensure that data is transmitted and received correctly. Any integration failures must be resolved before the final cutover to prevent operational disruptions. It is important to monitor integration logs and error messages during the parallel run to identify potential issues early. Collaboration with third-party vendors may be required to resolve integration challenges and ensure compatibility with the new ERP system.
Monitoring integration health and performance involves tracking key metrics, such as message throughput, latency, and error rates. These metrics provide insights into the stability and reliability of the integration layer. Automated monitoring tools can alert IT teams to any anomalies or failures in real time. It is important to establish thresholds for acceptable performance levels and define escalation procedures for when these thresholds are exceeded. Regular reviews of integration logs and performance reports help identify trends and potential bottlenecks. The goal is to ensure that integrations are robust and can handle the expected volume of transactions during and after the cutover.
Risk management is a continuous activity during the parallel running phase. It involves identifying, assessing, and mitigating risks that could impact the success of the migration. Key risks include data loss, system downtime, broken customizations, and integration failures. A comprehensive risk register should be maintained to track identified risks, their likelihood and impact, and the mitigation strategies in place. Rollback planning is a critical component of risk management. It defines the steps to revert to the legacy system if the new ERP system fails to meet go-live criteria. The rollback plan should include clear triggers, such as critical data discrepancies or system outages, and detailed procedures for restoring data and configurations. Regular testing of the rollback plan ensures that it is feasible and effective.
Go/no-go criteria are predefined conditions that must be met before proceeding to the final cutover. These criteria typically include data reconciliation accuracy, resolution of critical defects, completion of user acceptance testing, and validation of integrations. The criteria should be objective and measurable to avoid subjective decision-making. A cross-functional team, including IT, finance, operations, and project management, should review the criteria and provide sign-off. If any criteria are not met, the cutover should be delayed until the issues are resolved. Clear communication of the go/no-go decision to all stakeholders is essential to manage expectations and ensure alignment.
User adoption is a critical success factor for ERP migrations. The parallel running phase provides an opportunity to engage users, gather feedback, and address concerns. Change management activities, such as training, communication, and support, should be intensified during this phase to ensure that users are prepared for the transition. Training sessions should cover new features, workflows, and reporting capabilities. Communication should be frequent and transparent, providing updates on migration progress, known issues, and next steps. Support channels, such as help desks and user forums, should be readily available to assist users with questions and problems. By fostering a positive user experience during the parallel run, organizations can increase confidence in the new system and reduce resistance to change.
Measuring user satisfaction and readiness involves collecting feedback through surveys, interviews, and support ticket analysis. Surveys can assess user confidence in the new system, perceived ease of use, and satisfaction with training and support. Interviews provide deeper insights into specific challenges and suggestions for improvement. Support ticket analysis helps identify common issues and areas where additional training or documentation is needed. The goal is to ensure that users are comfortable and competent with the new ERP system before the final cutover. High levels of user satisfaction and readiness are strong indicators of a successful migration.
The final cutover is the transition from the legacy system to the new ERP system. It involves stopping data entry in the legacy system, performing a final data load, and activating the new system for live operations. The cutover should be executed according to a detailed runbook that outlines all steps, responsibilities, and timelines. Communication with users and stakeholders is critical to ensure that everyone is aware of the cutover schedule and any potential disruptions. After the cutover, the legacy system should be decommissioned in a controlled manner. This involves archiving historical data, revoking access, and shutting down servers. Decommissioning should be completed only after a stabilization period, during which the new system is monitored for any residual issues.
Post-cutover stabilization involves monitoring the new ERP system for performance, stability, and user adoption. IT teams should be on standby to address any issues that arise during the initial weeks of operation. Regular reviews of system logs, error reports, and user feedback help identify and resolve problems quickly. A hypercare period, typically lasting two to four weeks, provides enhanced support to ensure a smooth transition. During this period, the focus is on resolving critical issues, optimizing configurations, and providing additional training as needed. The goal is to achieve a stable and reliable ERP system that meets business requirements and supports ongoing operations.
Successful parallel running requires careful planning, execution, and monitoring. Best practices include defining clear scope and duration, establishing robust data reconciliation processes, conducting comprehensive process validation, and managing risks proactively. It is important to involve key stakeholders from all departments to ensure that all business needs are addressed. Regular communication and transparency help build trust and confidence in the migration process. Leveraging automated tools for data reconciliation and integration testing can improve efficiency and accuracy. Finally, documenting lessons learned and best practices can improve future migration projects and enhance organizational capabilities.
| Phase | Key Activities | Responsible Roles | Success Criteria |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preparation | Scope definition, data profiling, environment setup | Project Manager, IT Lead | Approved plan, ready environments |
| Parallel Running | Data reconciliation, process validation, UAT | Business Users, IT Team | Data accuracy >99%, critical defects resolved |
| Cutover | Final data load, system activation | IT Team, Project Manager | System live, no critical errors |
| Stabilization | Monitoring, support, optimization | IT Support, Business Users | Stable performance, high user satisfaction |
Parallel running is an indispensable component of ERP migration strategies. It provides a controlled environment to validate data integrity, process accuracy, and system stability before the final cutover. By carefully planning and executing the parallel running phase, organizations can mitigate risks, ensure business continuity, and achieve a successful migration. The key to success lies in defining clear scope and duration, conducting thorough data reconciliation and process validation, managing risks proactively, and fostering user adoption. With a well-executed parallel running strategy, organizations can transition to their new ERP system with confidence, ensuring that it meets business requirements and supports long-term growth.
Common questions on this topic. Talk to our team for anything specific to your business.
The duration varies based on complexity, typically ranging from one to three business cycles, such as monthly or quarterly periods, to ensure all processes are validated.
While possible, skipping parallel running increases risk. For small migrations, a shortened parallel run or intensive testing in a staging environment is recommended to validate critical processes.
Discrepancies are identified through reconciliation tools, investigated for root cause, corrected in the new system, and documented to prevent recurrence in future migrations.
Key risks include undetected data errors, process failures, integration issues, and operational downtime, which can lead to financial inaccuracies and customer dissatisfaction.
Parallel running provides a realistic environment for users to practice and provide feedback, increasing confidence and readiness for the final cutover.
Monitor data reconciliation accuracy, process efficiency KPIs, integration health, system performance, and user satisfaction to ensure the new system meets requirements.
Learn how distribution ERP standardization resolves data silos between sales, warehouse, and finance. Discover architecture strategies, process mapping, and integration models to improve operational visibility and control.
A practical guide for CIOs and IT leaders to maintain data integrity across ERP and integrated systems during cutover, covering reconciliation, freeze windows, and validation strategies.
Discover how modern manufacturing ERP frameworks eliminate manual inventory and costing reconciliation through automated workflows, real-time data integration, and robust governance structures.
Discuss your workflows, modules and deployment options with our team.
Back to resources