Independent quality assurance of a data migration delivered by a systems integrator — for the board that wants proof the new system’s data is actually correct, not just present.
A major system replacement lives or dies on whether the data migrated correctly — and the systems integrator delivering the migration has a structural incentive to declare it complete on schedule, whether or not every record genuinely reconciles. What you don’t have is an independent reconciliation framework that checks the integrator’s own claim of success against the actual data.
That is what this engagement is.
Two stages. A fixed-fee assurance framework review to establish how reconciliation will be verified, followed by ongoing QA oversight quoted on the actual scope and duration of your migration.
No implementation work. No commissions. No relationship with the systems integrator delivering the migration.
Why clients commission independent assurance
- A major system replacement is underway, and the board wants independent proof the migrated data is correct before the legacy system is decommissioned.
- The systems integrator has declared the migration complete, but no one outside the integrator has independently verified the reconciliation.
- A previous migration produced data quality problems that only surfaced months after go-live, and the board wants this one caught before cutover, not after.
- Master data — customer, product, financial records — carries genuine consequence if it migrates incorrectly, and the board wants that risk specifically managed.
Who this is for
Boards and programme sponsors overseeing a major system replacement delivered by a systems integrator, who want independent verification of data migration quality specifically.
Organisations where master data accuracy carries genuine financial, operational, or regulatory consequence if it migrates incorrectly.
Who this is not for
Organisations wanting the migration itself executed, or broader programme oversight beyond data reconciliation specifically — for that wider scope, see Build-and-Oversee Programme Governance.
Stage one: the Assurance Framework Review
€15,000. Three to four weeks. An independent assessment of the migration plan’s reconciliation approach, design of a specific, testable assurance framework for verifying data completeness and accuracy, and a written report establishing exactly how “the migration is correct” will be independently proven, not just asserted. Delivered as a written report and board presentation.
Stage two: ongoing QA oversight
Where the Assurance Framework Review surfaces a genuine need for continued independent QA through the migration itself — running the reconciliation checks, verifying data quality at each cutover phase — this is scoped and quoted separately, based on the migration’s actual scope and duration.
What this is not
A substitute for the systems integrator’s own testing. We provide independent verification on top of, not instead of, the integrator’s own process.
Broad programme governance beyond data assurance specifically — see Build-and-Oversee Programme Governance for that wider scope.
Proof
References available on request.
What happens next
Start a ConversationThirty minutes. We confirm where your migration actually stands and whether to start with the Assurance Framework Review or discuss ongoing QA oversight directly.