What should I do when a destination app cannot represent part of my old workflow?

Separate information from actions. Information is what the old app stores or displays, such as a note, status, attachment, or relationship between records. Actions are what people do with it, such as assigning, filtering, approving, or producing a report.

For each item, ask:

1. Can we find the information in the destination, an export, or another agreed location?
2. Can someone still complete the necessary action, in the destination or through a defined alternative?

If the information is present but the old button or process is not, that suggests a feature or workflow mismatch—not necessarily missing data. If a required item cannot be found or accounted for, record it as an unresolved data question. Check the relevant records before labeling it lost.

Assess the affected workflow, rather than comparing every feature in both apps.

Make one row per workflow and describe what people actually do, not just the old app’s feature name. Record:

• Purpose and owner: What outcome does it support, and who relies on it?
• Steps and information: What goes in, what changes, and what must come out? Note important fields, links, attachments, or history.
• Frequency and timing: How often does it happen, and when is it needed?
• Impact of a gap: What work would stop, be delayed, or require manual effort?
• Evidence and open questions: What have you checked, and what remains unverified?

For example, suppose the old app flags a record when a review date is near. Note which date matters, who needs to notice it, and what they do next. Then check whether the destination stores the date and whether a saved view, reminder, or manual check could meet the need. Treat those as possibilities to evaluate, not assumed app features.

Choose the simplest option that still preserves the needed outcome:

1. Adapt when the essential information is accounted for and the team can use an alternative process. Write down the steps, owner, and extra checks. Ask a representative user to walk through an example before relying on it.
2. Archive when people need the old information for reference but do not need to keep doing that workflow there. Specify what will be retained, who may need it, how they will find it, and who owns access. An archive does not replace an active process.
3. Postpone that part when a required task has no acceptable alternative, information is unaccounted for, or consequences and ownership are unclear. Set an owner and a review date, with a clear condition for proceeding; avoid an indefinite exception.

Use your team’s criteria for what counts as critical. Record the trade-off and get agreement from the people responsible for the workflow.

Copy this once for each affected workflow. The example is hypothetical; replace it with your findings.

Workflow: Near-date review flag Purpose / owner: Prompt the review team to act / [owner] Old steps: Record a review date; old app flags approaching dates. Information to account for: Review date, record, relevant history. Destination check: [Where each item was found, or what remains unverified] Needed action: [Who notices the date, and what they do next] Option: [Adapt / archive / postpone] Plan: [Replacement steps or archive approach, and owner] Test or open question: [Example to walk through; unresolved issue] Decision: [Choice, rationale, approver, date] Review or exit condition: [What must be true to proceed or revisit]

For this example, the team could test a manual date review as an adaptation. Choose it only if the right person can find the records and complete the follow-up. The worksheet helps document a decision; it does not establish what the destination app can do.