Migrating facilities data to a new system without losing history

Choosing new facilities software is, in a real sense, the easier half of a switch. The harder half — and the one that determines whether the switch actually pays off — is moving existing data across without quietly losing the history that made the old records useful in the first place. A clean new system with a shallow, history-free asset register isn't much better than the spreadsheet it replaced.

What's genuinely worth preserving, and what isn't

Not every field in an old system deserves the effort of migration — stale notes, duplicated entries and long-decommissioned assets can reasonably be left behind. What matters is service history on live assets, current statutory inspection dates and certificates, and contractor accreditation records — the things that, if lost, recreate real risk rather than just administrative tidiness.

Data quality problems surface during migration, not before

A migration is often the first time anyone looks closely at whether existing records are actually accurate — duplicate assets, inconsistent naming between buildings, and gaps that were never obvious in the old format tend to surface once someone's trying to map everything cleanly into a new structure. This is uncomfortable but useful; better to find it during a planned migration than to discover it later when a report doesn't reconcile with reality.

• –Prioritise service history, current statutory dates and certificates, and contractor accreditation above cosmetic data
• –Expect and budget time for cleaning up duplicate or inconsistent records discovered during the process
• –Run both systems in parallel briefly rather than switching over on a single date, if the new system supports it
• –Verify a sample of migrated records manually against source documents before fully retiring the old system

Retiring the old system properly

It's worth resisting the temptation to keep the old spreadsheet or system "just in case" indefinitely — a facilities team working from two sources of truth, even briefly, tends to end up with records drifting apart rather than staying in sync. A clear, planned cutover date, with the old system genuinely archived rather than quietly still being edited by habit, keeps this from becoming a permanent half-migrated state.

None of this is a reason to avoid switching — the case for moving off spreadsheets generally still holds once an estate outgrows them — but a migration plan deserves the same deliberate attention as choosing the platform itself.