Transitioning from Old Systems to New Customer Experience Software

Many companies rush into CRM deployments without proper preparation, leading to poor adoption and wasted resources. Here's the proven 5-step process that ensures a smooth transition: 1. Host a Workshop with Sales and Marketing: - Gather key stakeholders - Define clear objectives - Identify pain points - Align on expectations 2. Map Sales' Actual Workflows: - Document current processes - Identify inefficiencies - Understand daily routines - Note manual workarounds 3. Decide Must-Have vs. Optional Data Fields: - Focus on essential information - Eliminate unnecessary fields - Prioritize data quality - Consider reporting needs 4. Validate with the Team Before Building: - Share proposed structure - Collect feedback - Make necessary adjustments - Get buy-in from users 5. Implement Iteratively: - Start with core features - Train in small groups - Gather user feedback - Add complexity gradually Key Questions to Ask: - Has the team validated the structure? - Have you involved all stakeholders? - Are your data fields truly necessary? - Does the workflow match reality? - Is your rollout plan manageable? Remember: Success isn't measured by how quickly you implement the CRM. It's measured by how effectively your team adopts and uses it. The most successful implementations are those where teams feel ownership of the process from day one.

Modernizing a legacy platform is like rebuilding an airplane mid-flight. You’ve built something better—maybe even a whole new version of your core product. It’s faster, cleaner, more scalable. But there’s a catch: You’re already serving a large customer base on the old platform. And moving them all to the new one at once? Too risky. You’d be inviting breakage, support chaos, and a hit to customer trust. But not launching the new platform? That’s even riskier long-term. Because while you hesitate, your competitors aren’t waiting. So how do you balance progress and stability at scale? Here are six release strategies we’ve seen work—especially in fintech, where trust is everything and legacy systems run deep: 1️⃣ Let users choose when to switch (like Salesforce Lightning Mode) Allow end users to opt into the new experience. This gives them time to adjust—and gives your team space to gather feedback and make refinements before going wide. 2️⃣ Roll out by user role Start with a specific persona. For example, upgrade your loan officers before your servicing team. This narrows the blast radius and helps your team learn fast in smaller, safer increments. 3️⃣ Route a small % of traffic to the new version Think of it like controlled randomness. Divert a small, randomized slice of users to the new experience (a classic A/B approach), monitor the impact, and refine from there. 4️⃣ Launch for new customers only New customers have no prior expectations—no habits to unlearn. Starting here lets you prove the new platform works without disrupting active workflows. 5️⃣ Let existing customers self-select into early adopter or laggard groups Some customers love to be on the bleeding edge. Invite them to opt in as early adopters—offering advanced access to the new platform and, if appropriate, incentives like preferential pricing. Meanwhile, let your more risk-averse customers remain on the legacy platform until the new experience is fully validated. This creates a natural adoption curve without forcing change on anyone before they're ready. 6️⃣ Start with your simplest customers The bigger and more complex the client, the more edge cases. Begin with smaller, simpler accounts to reduce risk and accelerate learning.

If you work on a service that has non zero customers, chances are your projects are somewhat invovling migrating old to new, while keep the service running. The Strangler Migration pattern is a common model used to gradually migrate an existing service to a new system or technology stack. The key idea is to "strangle" the old system by incrementally replacing its functionality with the new system, similar to how a strangler fig plant grows around and eventually takes over an existing tree. This approach allows the migration to happen in a controlled and iterative manner, minimizing disruption to the existing application and its users. It involves creating a facade or proxy layer that routes requests to either the old or new system, gradually shifting more traffic to the new system over time. The Strangler Migration pattern is often used when the existing service is large, complex, or tightly coupled, service downtime is unacceptable or must be minimized, making a big-bang migration risky or impractical. It allows the new system to be developed and tested in parallel, while the old system continues to operate. Here are the key steps of the Strangler Migration process, specifically tailed for online services: 1. Prevention of New Dependencies * Stop new services from integrating with the legacy system * Ensure all new development connects to the new system * Establish clear guidelines for new development teams 2. Incremental Migration with Fallback * Gradually move existing dependencies from old to new system * Implement "kill switch" mechanism for safety * Allow quick rollback to old system if issues arise * Test each migration phase thoroughly * Monitor system behavior during transition 3. Complete Transition with Shadow Mode * Switch all use cases to the new system * Keep old system running in parallel (shadow mode) * Verify all functionality works correctly in new system * Compare outputs between old and new systems * Ensure no regression in business processes 4. Legacy System Decommissioning * Confirm all functionalities are working in new system * Verify no remaining dependencies on old system * Plan and execute resource cleanup * Document system retirement * Remove old system infrastructure If you are philosophy junkies like me, here is a bonus note: The Ship of Theseus paradox and the Strangler Fig Pattern are closely related concepts that deal with gradual replacement and identity. The Ship of Theseus is an ancient philosophical paradox about whether an object remains the same after all its components are gradually replaced. The paradox comes from a ship that had all its parts replaced over time, raising the question of whether it remained the same ship. Philosopher Thomas Hobbes asked - which ship would be the "original" if someone collected all the old parts and built another ship? Regardless what your answer is, migration is the only thing constant!