Automated migrations have no magic wands–they aren’t feasible with the wrong tool; organizations need the right tool to successfully automate a migration. However, skimming through sales content to understand the true value of a SharePoint Migration Tool can be a daunting effort.
The real question is, are SharePoint Migration Tools documentations and sales pitches good enough for a purchasing decision? Trust but verify: without a proper technical assessment, a tool may easily become too expensive when it doesn’t deliver on its promises. Unfortunately, most often organizations base their buying decision on product documentations or sales pitches and competitive prices only to discover midway in the migration that the tool isn’t a good fit.
In this article, I’ll present the results of a technical assessment conducted to validate specific migration requirements against a set of prominent SharePoint migration tools – Sharegate, Metalogix Content Matrix, AvePoint DocAve, and Tzunami Deployer
Move it! tool (listed on the image above) didn’t meet the technical assessment preconditions (migration to SharePoint 2016 and SharePoint Online), thus was eliminated from the process.
The technical evaluation involved the migration of 2 site collections (300GB content volume) from a SharePiont 2016 source system to both SharePoint 2016 and SharePoint Online target environments. The Evaluation ranked tools based on the following functionality coverage categories:
Extract + analysis, reporting
Analyzing source /target structures and providing comprehensive migration reports
Mapping and moving content, content types and metadata
Load + QA
The nature and quality of migration–incremental runs, content versions and content metadata value
Security + connectivity
Ease of access to source and target systems
Other aspects (non-functional)
Robustness, vendor support, scalability, and performance
Each of these categories is associated with a set of requirements. For instance, the category Load + QA has the following requirements- Delta analysis (source vs. target), delta migration, preserve content versions, selective content migration, migrate themes, migrate existing workflows, etc.
For the rating, each requirement is initially assigned a business ranking( high -10, Medium-5, Low-1) based on value/need (business ranking is organization specific). During the technical evaluation, each requirement receives a functionality coverage value (VH-10, H-8, M-5, L-3). These values are computed to derive the overall percentage of each category.
Although the table below projects some SharePoint Migration Tools as high achievers, there isn’t a clear winner or a one-size-fits-all tool. Each tool has its key strength and limitations, which should be matched with a set of organization-specific business requirements.
|Domain||Sharegate||Metalogix Content Matrix||AvePoint DocAve 6||Tzunami Deployer|
|Extract + analysis, reporting||83%||80%||80%||50%|
|Load + QA||82%||78%||54%||36%|
|Security + connectivity||54%||57%||61%||29%|
|Other aspects (non>functional)||59%||68%||63%||55%|
|Product||Key Strength||Key Limitation|
|Metalogix Content Matrix||
Selecting suitable SharePoint Migration Tools depends heavily on a set of organizational migration requirements. The following considerations might help in establishing a set of requirements:
- Is it a lift and shift (Farm or Site Collections Level) one-time migration
- Is it an incremental migration–based on needs
- Is it a migration of Site Collection structure and to be followed by incremental document libraries/folders/ items level migration
- Is it an entirely on-premise migration (Source and Target SharePoint Servers)
- Is it an on-premise and Cloud (SharePoint Online)
- What’s the volume of data to migrate
- What is the migration run operation- Centralized or Decentralized
- What are the legal and compliance concerns
Latest posts by Carlson Ngwa (see all)
- A technical assessment of leading SharePoint Migration Tools - June 27, 2017
- WCMS Migration – A how-to Guide (part 2 of 2) - April 20, 2017
- WCMS Migration – A how-to Guide (part 1 of 2) - March 29, 2017