You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 7 Next »

Status

 Pending Stakeholder Review

Owner

Gautier Todeschini, Beatrix Gabrielli, Cristiane Rocco

Stakeholders

John Donovan, Frank Bolata, Boris Foiselle

Issue

AODocs is a complex and customizable system embedded within Google Workspace, and there is not a simple/obvious way of migrating the AODocs libraries towards the Microsoft environment.
Indeed, AODocs combines storage (on Google Drive), with advanced permissions management, metadata, and customization elements like worflows and scripts.
It is used in many auditing and compliance processes (ex: version control).

Recommendation

Option 3 : A combination of manual recreation and automation based on Scripting and export tooling.

Background & Context

As of early November, there are 2115 AODocs libraries at Syensqo with various levels of complexity: 133 complex, 330 Intermediate, and 1537 basic.

Metadata is contained both in the AODocs layer, and in the Google My Drive files that are owned by the libraries' service account ("storage account").

The migration process can be seperated into 3 levels: data migration, metadata migration, process flow migration.

NB: AODocs library owners (and subsequent users) already went under two disruptions recently. Firstly in 2023 for the spin-off where most libraries had to be copied to split the data between Solvay and Syensqo, and Syensqo got the copies (with different links, amongst other impacts). Secondly, in S1 2025 during the separation programme as all libraries had to be moved to a new tenant to follow the Google Workspace migration - this created the same impacts (punctual freeze periods for cutovers, URL changes for files contained within the libraries, etc.).

Assumptions

Basic libraries can be moved to Sharepoint with a good level of automation of the migration process, and without losing any functionalities at target.

Intermediate and Complex libraries will required additionnal effort of rebuild, with PowerPlatform elements, to recreate their current functionnalities (worflows, scripts, etc.).

In all cases, metadata must be preserved as they play an important role in the AODocs use cases (audit, version control, etc.)

Constraints

  • Limited tooling availability to facilitate the data migration with metadata.
  • Difference in Legal and Auditing requirements.

Impacts

Third party tooling requires an elongated pilot phase, and security validation. 
Manual migration requires creation of complex scripting.

Options considered

Option 1: Scripted approach & Rebuild.
Option 2: Third party tool & Rebuild.
Option 3: Approach 1 or 2 in combination with business enablement to recreate basic processes on their own.

Evaluation


Option 1: Scripted approach & Rebuild

Option 2: Third party tool & rebuild

Option 3: Approach 1 or 2 in combination with business enablement to recreate basic processes on their own.

Technical Feasibility

(Complicated)

1) Export of metadata and history 

2) Move to a Google Shared Drive 

3) Fastrack migration towards Sharepoint

4) Custom script execution

5) Process recreation

6) Pilot and incremental execution

(Complicated)

1) Export of metadata and history

2) Custom script execution

3) Process recreation

4) Pilot and incremental execution

(Complicated)

1) Advanced training required in SharePoint

2) Advanced training required for Power automate

3) Data migration still required with either scenario one or two

4) Complicated processes still to be rebuild by Avanade

User Impact

(High)

1) Limited coexistence as the application can be rebuilt in parallel

2) Testing & validation required

3) Time required for process definition and detailing

(High)

1) Limited coexistence as the application can be rebuilt in parallel

2) Testing & validation required

3) Time required for process definition and detailing

(High)

1) Strong coexistence as users are rebuilding parts of the AODocs libraries

2) Testing & validation is still required for the more complicated libraries handled by the COE

3) Time required for process definition and detailing

Support Impact

(Medium)

1) Less support impact as the entire recreation / orchestration is handled by COE

(Medium)

1) Less support impact as the entire recreation / orchestration is handled by COE

(High)

1) Higher impact due to self development and potential additional questions regarding redevelopment

Time to implement

(Very high)

1) Clean rebuild

2) Centralized metadata stores

3) Every process flow requires inventory and detailing

(High)

1) Duplication rebuild, migration tooling does not centralize components or fields. Everything is recreated every single time in a seperate sharepoint

2) Every process flow requires inventory and detailing

(High - Medium)

1) Partially clean rebuild for the complicated applications

2) Less work for the COE team in regards of development effort, but increase in support and training effort

Security & ComplianceScripting and custom coding follows the highest security standard, Microsoft validated endpoints and Azure security principles.
Requires a very extensive pilot phase.
Requires third party tooling validation.
Requires a very extensive pilot phase.
No guarantees on throughput speed or time line
Higher error rate, end users are more likely to make mistakes

Operational Complexity

1) (After transformation)Clean and centralized rebuild allows for easier management on the longterm

2) (during transformation) Higher effort and complexity in the initial setup and configuration

1) (After transformation)One to one builds give much more overhead and duplication of components

2) (During transformation) Less effort for the data migration and initial setup due to the inclusion of metadata migration

1) Business rebuilds are highly dependent on the creator for the quality

2) Can result in additional operational tasks after the transformation period

CostHigh external resource costMedium - High resource cost
Tooling cost
Medium - High resource cost
Internal resource cost


See also

LM01-KDD002 - Gmail Migration to Exchange Online

[WIP] LM01_KDD00x - Migration to SharePoint

[WIP] LM01_KDD00x - Personal Drives Migration to OneDrive


  • No labels