STATUS: CALIBRATED
    REV: 2025.02
    02

    Stage 2 of 5

    Pre-Migration Health Check

    The 4–6 week window nobody uses.

    Recognition Pattern

    You're here if…

    • You've selected a platform and an SI but the implementation hasn't started yet
    • The SI is scoping the project and you're about to sign a contract worth seven or eight figures
    • Nobody has independently validated whether your team, your JDE environment, and your governance structure are actually ready for dual-track execution
    • You have a feeling something is being missed but can't articulate what

    Risk Assessment

    What's at risk

    Between selecting an ERP and handing the keys to the SI is the highest-leverage window in the entire lifecycle. Everything found here costs almost nothing to fix. Everything missed here costs everything later.

    Three specific risks live in this window:

    Resource modeling gaps

    The implementation plan assumes your team can run JDE and build the new platform simultaneously. Nobody has measured whether that's true. The 35-45% reactive load means it almost certainly isn't.

    Compliance exposure

    Dual-run periods create SOX, audit, and regulatory risk that neither your team nor the SI has mapped. Access controls, segregation of duties, and data integrity across two live systems require explicit governance before day one.

    SI contractual risk

    Implementation contracts are written to protect the SI. Change order thresholds, milestone definitions, acceptance criteria, and liability caps deserve independent review before you sign. This is not adversarial — it's due diligence.

    Deliverables

    What Allari does

    Capacity assessment

    Measure the actual reactive-to-strategic ratio of your Core Team using the Power of 15 methodology. The output is a number your CFO can use: "X% of our team's capacity is available for the migration. The rest is absorbed by operations."

    Resource modeling audit

    Does the implementation plan account for the dual-run burden? Are the people assigned to the build the same people running production? Where are the single points of failure?

    Compliance risk mapping

    SOX, audit, and regulatory exposure during the transition period. Access control gaps across two live environments.

    SI contract review

    Independent review of scope, change order triggers, milestone criteria, liability, and exit clauses

    Governance readiness

    Does a steering committee exist? Are escalation paths defined? Who arbitrates scope disputes between the SI and the client?

    90-Day Readiness Report

    A single document that says "here is what's ready, here is what's not, and here is what must be addressed before implementation begins"

    Engagement Structure

    How it works

    Duration

    4–6 weeks

    Entry point

    The Forensic Capacity Assessment — a 45-minute diagnostic that determines whether a full health check is warranted

    Deliverable

    90-Day Readiness Report with specific findings, risk ratings, and recommended remediation before implementation kickoff

    Timing

    Designed to be completed in the gap between SI selection and SI kickoff

    Field Evidence

    Proof

    HellermannTyton's pre-migration assessment identified capacity gaps that would have stalled the implementation. The engagement expanded from Stage 2 into Stage 3 based on what the assessment found.

    Across 62 environments, the median reactive load is 38.4% — meaning most teams enter migration with less than 62% of their capacity available for the build. The Health Check makes that number visible before it becomes a schedule failure.

    Ready to map your journey?

    The Forensic Capacity Assessment identifies where you are, what's at risk, and what the operating model needs to support what's ahead. 45 minutes. Zero sales friction.