Data Migration Methodology For SAP V01a by Christian Bergeron

Data Migration Methodology for SAP
If one can manage small decisions now, the large ones will gradually disappear or might never appear in the first place. Anonymous
PAGE 1
DATA MIGRATION METHODOLOGY FOR SAP

Y
!HRISTIAN
ERGERON
" cvcby@yahoo.com
PAGE #
A O$T THIS DO!$MENT Thi% do&'(ent i% free) Yo' &an '%e it and di%tri*'te it freely+ a% long a% yo' do not &hange any of it% &ontent or %ell it)
Goal of thi% do&'(ent This document provides you with a procedure to assist you organizing and performing the data transfer from the legacy system. It describes a methodology for data migration I used successfully in different implementations. It is base upon my previous e periences. There is no warranty on its content or on the results. This guide gives you suggestions. It is up to you to ta!e the hints and ma!e up your own methodology. All the templates are derived from models I used in specific implementations and may come from older version of "A# $%. It most probably will not be &''( accurate or ade)uate for your use. There may be omissions and the templates can be for different "A# versions. It is a base to help you build your own template. *ou can start from them, but do not ta!e for granted that everything is there.
,ho( i% thi% g'ide for & "ection & is for every one involves in the data conversion process. + "ection + is for the pro,ect manager and the data conversion manager % "ection % is for the data conversion manager and the members of your team responsible of converting -usiness .b,ects, both technical and functional.

Ter(inology and A**re/iation%0 /ote0 The terms "A# and $1% are both use interchangeably to refer to "A# $1% system.
PAGE .
ig Fi/e 0 2hen referring to the -ig 3ive, it means 4aterial 4aster, 5ustomer 4aster, 6endor 4aster, -ill .f 4aterials 7-.48 and $outings. '%ine%% O*1e&t% 0 To help in the analysis and transfer process, the data are not treated as tables or field contents but rather as ob,ects in term of business operational. These are called -usiness .b,ects. '%ine%% O*1e&t D! re%2on%i*le 0 $esponsible of the conversion process 79egacy data source and integrity, mapping, conversion rules, etc.8 and for the respect of the planned schedule for his -usiness .b,ect. '%ine%% O*1e&t O3ner 0 The one that owns the information in the every day business. This is the person that will ma!e the strategic choices on functional re)uirements for the business ob,ect and that will do the final validation of the converted data. 5an be identified by finding The highest hierarchical person who will be directly and mostly affected if the business ob,ect does not wor! Data !on/er%ion 4 Data Migration 0 The data conversion process. :ata conversion and :ata 4igration terms are used interchangeably in the document. D! 0 Abbreviation for the data conversion process. Do(ain0 3unctional domain within the pro,ect, li!e 3inance, "ales, #roduction, etc. Flat File 0 A file format used to import data into "A#. The flat file is a plain te t file with a tab separator between fields. It can be easily generated from ; cel or Access. Inter(ediate file 0 An ; cel, Access or other type of file, which is manually manipulated in a process between the 9" e traction and the flat file generation. LS 0 Abbreviation for 9egacy "ystem LSM or LSM, 0 9egacy "ystem 4igration 2or!bench. It is a "A# tool for conversion that permits data loading using flat files e tracted from the 9egacy "ystem. Tran%&odifi&ation Ta*le+ !ro%% referen&e ta*le or 5"Ref ta*le 0 A table that shows the relation between fields when one value is related to a parent field. 3or e ample, the <"ales .rganization< will be set accordingly to the material type. , S 0 2or! -rea!down "tructure.
PAGE 6
TA LE OF !ONTENTS
SE!TION 1 " INTROD$!TION TO DATA !ON7ERSION)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))8 &.& I/T$.:=5TI./..................................................................................................................................................> .verview..................................................................................................................................................> -ases from which this methodology was made.......................................................................................> #hilosophy 6" techni)ues.......................................................................................................................? A few facts...............................................................................................................................................? 5onversion rules and business ob,ect ownership ....................................................................................? 4ain steps of the conversion methodology.............................................................................................@ 2here you will, for sure, have a timing problem....................................................................................@ There is no such thing as a free lunch....................................................................................................&' The computer will have the last word....................................................................................................&'
&.+ :ATA 5./6;$"I./ A=I:;9I/;"................................................................................................................&& Thin! "A#..............................................................................................................................................&& #repare the 9egacy :atabase.................................................................................................................&& -efore the last test run, ta!e into account the customizations of your new system...............................&& $educe the amount of historical data to be transferred..........................................................................&& =se controls edition in "A# ..................................................................................................................&& "mall is beautiful...................................................................................................................................&& -e wise...................................................................................................................................................&& #lay it safe..............................................................................................................................................&&
&.% "=AA;"T;: A::ITI./A9 $;A:I/A" .......................................................................................................&+ SE!TION # " ORGANI9E THE DATA !ON7ERSION))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))1. +.& .6;$6I;2.........................................................................................................................................................&B +.+ :ATA 5./6;$"I./ #9A/.............................................................................................................................&B -usiness .b,ects....................................................................................................................................&B :ata type ...............................................................................................................................................&B Information to complete in the conversion plan....................................................................................&C 4ain -usiness .b,ects se)uence of conversion....................................................................................&>
+.% 2-" 7 2.$D -$;AD:.2/ "T$=5T=$;8..............................................................................................................&? 2hy a 2-" E.........................................................................................................................................&? Fow to....................................................................................................................................................&? "uggested 2-" content for data conversion.........................................................................................&@ Are you sure E........................................................................................................................................&@ $e)uest to reGevaluate your 2-"..........................................................................................................&@ "ome pointers to figure out numbers.....................................................................................................+' -allpar! figures......................................................................................................................................+& A formula to help H. Fandle with care.................................................................................................+&
+.I 5A9;/:A$ #9A//I/A...................................................................................................................................+% .verview................................................................................................................................................+% 4"G#ro,ect or not...................................................................................................................................+I "e)uencing the tas!s..............................................................................................................................+I Dey users and consultant availability to wor! on 4aster :ata..............................................................+I ;nd Jat bestJ 6" Jmost probableJ.............................................................................................................+I

PAGE :
Are you sure E........................................................................................................................................+I 2or!load analysis..................................................................................................................................+B
SE!TION . " !ON7ERTING A $SINESS O ;E!T)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))#8 %.& .6;$6I;2.........................................................................................................................................................+? -efore you begin....................................................................................................................................+? :ocumentation of your wor! 7conversion spec. and mapping sheet8....................................................+?
%.+ :ATA #=$AI/A A/: 59;A/"I/A...............................................................................................................+? %.% 4A##I/A A/: 5./6;$"I./ $=9;"..........................................................................................................+? About the rules.......................................................................................................................................+@ A special case for 4aterial 4aster........................................................................................................%' All other business ob,ects......................................................................................................................%I :irectory organization...........................................................................................................................%> 6ersion management of conversion rules..............................................................................................%> 4urphyJs protection 0 "ave it often H and get good bac!ups...............................................................%?
%.I ;KT$A5T A/: 9.A: #$.A$A4"..........................................................................................................................%? %.B :ATA A/: $=9;" A:A#TATI./............................................................................................................................%@ %.C 9.A: =/IT T;"TI/A.............................................................................................................................................I' %.> ;KT$A5T L 9.A: M 3=99 "IN; T;"TI/A A/: :ATA 6A9I:ATI./.....................................................................I' %.?A55;#TA/5; "*"T;4 3=99 9.A:........................................................................................................................I' %.@#$; #$.:=5TI./ A/: #$.:=5TI./ 9.A:...........................................................................................................I& %.&'"=AA;"TI./" ./ TF; :ATA 5./6;$"I./ 9A/:"5A#;.....................................................................................I& !ON!L$SION)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))6# APPENDI5 < 7ARIO$S TEMPLATES)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))6. A G 5onversion plan template................................................................................................................II - G 2-" template..................................................................................................................................II 5 M 4aterial 4aster G 3ields selection sheet..........................................................................................II : G :ata conversion specification G Aeneric template...........................................................................II ; G :ata conversion specification M -.4 L $outing Template "amples.............................................II 3 G 4aterials 5lasses and 5haracteristics structure...............................................................................II
PAGE 8
SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION TO DATA CONVERSION
PAGE =
1.1 INTRODUCTION
O/er/ie3
Implementing "A# is an important challenge, both in terms of resources 7people, money, time8 and in business process. A lot is at sta!e and, for most of you, failure is not an option you can afford. To put all odds on your side, you need a good methodology. .ne that will provide you with a realistic planning, a solid organization, a way to manage the process and control tools to detect and correct slippage before it becomes a problem. An important part of this challenge will be the data conversion. #revious implementations of "A# have shown that data migration can amount up to about I'( of the entire pro,ect. #oor data conversion will ma!e your Ao 9ive very difficult, if not impossible. This guide is aimed at helping you organize the data conversion process, which in turn, will lead to a successful implantation.
a%e% fro( 3hi&h thi% (ethodology 3a% (ade

2hen I was originally as!ed to come up with a method to convert data, I started by analyzing passed e periences. There I found the following recurring problems 0 2hile the pro,ect is going on0 There are many things being wor!ed on at the same time. *et, most of them are not progressing. There are documents all over the place and, somehow, they always seem to be outdated. :ata loaded is regularly incomplete and inconsistent. 3unctional changes are not impacted on the converted data. :ata previously loaded with success is suddenly re,ected by "A#. There is a lot of misunderstanding, friction and frustration between the functional and technical team.
At Ao 9ive 4aster data deadlines where constantly busted and production load is done in JJrush modeJ at the last minute. "ome !ey parts of the data cannot be loaded in production. #atches are applied to the master data in order to forceGload. "ome data ,ust will not get in at all, they will have to be entered after A. 9ive.
After Ao 9ive "ome :ata need to be corrected L entered after Ao 9ive. -ecause the production system is now living, data are moving targets. This ma!es the process difficult and time consuming H. This translates into a costly operation.
After discussing with people who lived these situation 7manager, functional and technical8, we identified the following points 0 #lanning and resources load estimates where way out 7when they e isted8. 4ost of the problems encountered are actually functional issues. Information does not travel well between functional and technical team. As we get near the Ao 9ive, this becomes much worst.

This methodology was made to solve these issues.
PAGE >
Philo%o2hy 7S te&hni?'e%
The approach I ta!e to the data conversion is as much a state of mind as a techni)ue. -oth aspect of it must be applied for results to show up. This is actually true of any concept. 4ost of concept failures are due to application of the techni)ue while neglecting the philosophical aspect of it. The mindset re)uired in our case is that we must do things right from the start and solve issues as they occur. Ta!e the time that it re)uires to do thing properly and thoroughly. /o e pediting, no bypassing of step, no piling of unsolved issue to !eep going. $esults will initially be slower to come. Fowever, because you will get things right on the fist time, you will eventually pic!Gup an impressive speed. As in car racing, it is not the speed at which you enter a turn that is most important, it is the one at which you get out of it.
A fe3 fa&t%
The data conversion is not some technical stuff to give to the programmers and wait until it comes bac!. 4ost, if not all, of the issues and problems you will encounter in the conversion process will be functional. Although the e tract 1 load process itself will not be effortless, it is the part between the e tract and the load that is the most difficult. Aetting the right data at the right place with the values re)uired for your business process is always a functional problem. "A# is a processGoriented system and master data is an integral part of this process. /ice, but what does it meansE The answer is that everything is tied together. 4aster data is dependent of the customizing, the customizing is made accordingly to the way you do your process, and master data is needed to run your process. If you change master data, it will most probably change the behavior of the process. If you change customizing, your master data may become incomplete or incorrect. 2hichever phases you are in the pro,ect, data conversion always seem to be the one step that can be pushed a little bit forward in time when you run behind in the overall schedule. :oing this will put the conversion process too close to the end of the pro,ect. In that situation, you will end up shoveling a ton of data into "A# at full speed with little control, if any, on data )uality and coherence. $emember the old saying <garbage in, garbage out<. There is no Jeasy does itJ way to do the data conversion and it ta!es time. :ata conversion is made with lot of brain stuff mi ed with hard wor! and some programming. /o technological gadget or guru will ma!e this otherwise.
!on/er%ion r'le% and *'%ine%% o*1e&t o3ner%hi2

.!, we now !now :5 is a functional thing, data must not be shoveledGin and it will ta!e lot of wor! and time. Fow do we manage his E To solve this, I ma!e the :5 process part of the functional process, both in term of timing and deliverable. Dey users must do a thorough analysis of the master data and lin! their usage to the process as they are customizing. They must understand which data does what, which are needed, how it relates to the customizing L process flow and figure out where it will come from. This !nowledge will get things to fit progressively one into the other li!e a set of bloc!s. 3or !ey user to get this !nowledge, I give them the responsibility and ownership of the 4apping and conversion rules. It is OtheirP master data and they will do mapping L rules documents. At first, this process will not simplify the technological aspect of the conversion, nor will it ma!e it shorter or easier H say whatQ As I already mentioned speed will come, eventually. The goal of the mapping and rules writing is to get !ey users to sweat it out and understand "A# way of doing things. This will also help the !nowledge transfer between consultants and !ey users. 2hen they are done with this, their brain will play that master data G business process G customizing G game without even thin!ing about it. The mapping document and conversion rules will become the common ground for discussions between the different domains. 5ross reading of :5 specs is essential as, for e ample some action ta!en by ## may affect ": and 3I. :o not underestimate this, a small change in ## can bloc! all e peditions. I saw this !ind of issues in all the pro,ects I wor!ed on. It will also be the only common language document between the functional team and the technical team.
PAGE @
The mapping document and conversion rules will become the technical staff road map. If it is not in the rules, it does not e ist. "o any discussion, decision or answer must be documented in the rules. *ou will be surprised to see how things change between verbal decision, sometime made in the hallway between meetings, and written decision which re)uired thin!ing about it and assuming responsibility for it. Again, ta!e the time that it gets to have clear and unambiguous :5 rules. 2hen the spec has no ambiguity and has been cross read and validated by all domains and the technical team, and only then, can you start the development of the e tract and load programs. That will be the point where will start pic!ing up speed, lots of it.
Main %te2% of the &on/er%ion (ethodology

-efore you even start to wor! on specs, you must first get organized. Aetting a good planning and organization structure ta!e about two wee!s for the first draft, which will leave you with some )uestions on pro,ect organization. Aetting a complete and final planning will ta!e at least one more wee!. Any unsolved issues on these will haunt you throughout the pro,ect, so finish this completely before stating any other step. The data conversion re)uires functional and technical resources from most departments. These same resources will most probably be involved in other part of the pro,ect. 3or this reason, the ris! of conflicting tas! is high and can )uic!ly lead to a bottlenec! where !ey peoples are overloaded. 3or this reason, you should consider the data conversion as a pro,ect within the pro,ect. This translates into the preparation of a complete conversion plan that will help you go through the process and will permit to foresee and solve the conflicting resources usage before the bottlenec! ever occurs. The methodology is based on a top down process. Aoing through this will permit to plan, organize, e ecute and followGup your conversion. As the pro,ect is going, you will control the evolution of the data conversion process. ;ach step has its own use. *ou may sometime feel li!e you are not going to the end by the shortest route. $emember, the goal is not to get first results faster, it is to finish the OwholeP process faster. This method is based on many pro,ects e perience and will help you to avoid the pitfall usually associated with data conversion. The main steps of the data conversion are0 .rganization of the data conversion 7#ro,ect manager L data conversion coordinator8 :ata conversion plan The 2-" with wor!load estimates The calendar planning with resources loading Aoing on with the -usiness .b,ects data conversion 7The resource responsible of the -usiness .b,ect :58 :ata #urging and 5leansing 4apping and conversion rules ; tract and 9oad #rograms from rules :ata and $ules Adaptation 7ad,usting rules and programs following testing8 9oad =nit Testing 7unitary testing G small volume of manual data8 ; tract and 9oad 3ull size testing 7data test and validation G large volume with real e tracted data8 3ull data loading into A55;#TA/5; "*"T;4 3ull data loading into #$; #$.:=5TI./ "*"T;4 6alidation of converted data and Dey =ser R -usiness .b,ects .wner "ignoff 3ull conversion into #$.:=5TI./ "*"T;4 and final "ignoff
,here yo' 3ill+ for %'re+ ha/e a ti(ing 2ro*le(

The business process analysis is done by the !ey users, business issues are dealt with by !ey users, tests are done by !ey users, functional issues are solved by !ey users, training is prepared by !ey users, data conversion rules are done by !ey users, data validation is done by !ey user, master data issues are solved by !ey users H. In addition, when you start validating master data, it is usually that time where !ey users are out giving training. If you try to identify where there will most probably be a bottlenec!, do not loo! any further. The intersection of 4aster :ata validation, integration testing and training will be JitJ. *ou will need a very realistic wor!load estimate and resources wor!load planning to avoid !ey users being schedule I? hours of wor! per day.
PAGE 1A
There are not many solutions to this. Assuming your team is sized correctly, doubling the resources will double the cost, double problems but probably not double the output. Therefore, we are bac! to the basic rule, this !ind of pro,ect ta!es time and the best way to minimize it is to plan for it correctly. *ou will have no other choice than spreading the load throughout the entire pro,ect. 5omplaisance planning will ,ust ma!e a long pro,ect longer, sometimes much longer and always a lot more e pensive. Trying to go too fast with insufficient resources is usually the basic recipe of most horror story you hear about "A# implementations.
There i% no %'&h thing a% a free l'n&h

This is a simple system, but simple does not mean easy. :oing things right the first time is an investment and li!e any investment it has a cost 7money, people, time8 to be paid before you gets profits. /o free lunch here. *ou will need discipline, lots of it. :o no pile up delay or issue. -etter to slow down, cut your loss and figure out how to resolve problems than trying to !eep going the wrong way. *ou must give &''( at all steps to achieve the point where the result will be bigger than the sum of your efforts. ; pediting, bypassing or neglecting a tas! will have a negative effect further down the road, which will eventually create important delays. There is no Oeasy does itP way to do data conversion, there are ,ust some path easier than others.
The &o(2'ter 3ill ha/e the la%t 3ord

5omputer does not do politic and cannot be <convinced< of anything. If the final data set is not accurate and well structure, your computer will bring you bac! to reality the hard way.
PAGE 11
1.2 DATA CONVERSION GUIDELINES

ThinB SAP
3orget your actual system and understand "A#. 3irst and foremost, get familiar with the "A# business process you will be implementing. Then, according to the "A# process needs, establish what the 4aster :ata re)uirements are. Then, and only then, see what can be salvage from your legacy system. Thin! "A#, do not try to fit in your old system into it.
Pre2are the Lega&y Data*a%e

5lean the data on your legacy system. It is easier to start from a sound legacy system than trying to fi inconsistencies during the conversion. :elete obsolete data and ma!e the rest of it coherent. These two steps are called data purging and data cleansing. This can be done without specific !nowledge of "A# and can begin way before the pro,ect Dic! .ff. It will save you a lot of time.
efore the la%t te%t r'n+ taBe into a&&o'nt the &'%to(iCation% of yo'r ne3 %y%te(
-ecause both the organizational structure and the actual customizing influence the data you transfer for business ob,ects, finalize all customizations before the last test run. 5ustomizing changes after the final transfer may result in additional re)uired fields, this re)uires preparing and transferring more data. It can also invalidate the loaded data, which leaves you with an incoherent data set that will be very costly to correct after Ao 9ive.
Red'&e the a(o'nt of hi%tori&al data to *e tran%ferred

If your system has lot of historic data, thin! about archiving data. There is no need to spend large amount of money to !eep live data that are otherwise used sporadically and could very well be stored in an archive database. 9arge data set due to nonGarchiving of your 9" will add a lot of strain on your "A# implementation and will ma!e the data conversion more difficult because of the volume. Also, because data tend to be less accurate when they where created a long time ago, it will be much more difficult to adapt them to "A#.
$%e &ontrol% edition in SAP

:ata entered in "A# should de chee!ed using some controls reports. This is especially useful for manual data entry and transactional data.
S(all i% *ea'tif'l
"tart small. The first time you transfer data, begin with a few records of a business ob,ect. This way, you learn how the program wor!s. After transferring some records successfully, try transferring a larger amount of data. 4a!e sure that you transfer each different type of data before you transfer on a larger scale.
e 3i%e
The full data integration in your production system is the end of the process and should mostly be a technical operation where we push some buttons to get some results. To reach this goal, it implies that all functional and technical issues where dealt with before starting the full size transfer from the 9egacy "ystem. The hard wor! is in the mapping and establishment of conversion rules from the old to the new system. That is where you will ma!e or miss your conversion. :onJt even thin! about loading large volumes into production if you are not completely ready.
Play it %afe
I strongly suggest that you perform a system bac!up 7or client copy8 after transferring a significant amount of data. The bac!up allows you to secure a specific level you have reached during the data conversion process. If you have any problems, you can return to this level, and you do not have to begin the process all over again.
PAGE 1#
1.3 SUGGESTED ADDITIONAL READINGS

"A# :ata Transfer 4ade ;asy guideboo!. It can be found on the "A# "implification Aroup web site "ystem 9andscape 79andscapeGII.pdf8 fount on "ap9abs website Suic! $eference Auide 9"42 7Fow to H8 and #resentation of 9"42. 5an be found on web site http011service.sap.com1lsmw It re)uire a user name a password
PAGE 1.
SECTION 2 - ORGANIZE THE DATA CONVERSION
PAGE 16
:ata 5onversion #lan
2-"
5alendar planning
PAGE 1:
2.1 OVERVIEW
This section describes the organization of the conversion. This is the first building bloc! of your conversion process and must be completed right at the beginning of the pro,ect. This part of the process is to be done by the pro,ect manager and the data conversion coordinator.
2.2 DATA CONVERSION PLAN

'%ine%% O*1e&t%
A -usiness ob,ect is a general category for data that defines something li!e material master, vendor master, stoc!s, orders, purchase re)uisitions or organizational units. The first step is identifying which business ob,ects are re)uired in your "A# implementation.
Data ty2e
There are three types of data involved in a "A# system0 master data, transactional data, and historical data. Ma%ter Data) Application master data tends to be more static once defined. 4ost master data can be driven by the legacy applications. ; amples include vendors, customers, charts of accounts, assets, bills of materials, material masters, info records, and so on. Tran%a&tional Data) Transactional data is current and outstanding transaction data that needs to be captured from the legacy system and defined to the "A# $1% applications for business process completion. ; amples include accounting documents, open purchase orders, open sales orders, bac! orders, and so on. Hi%tori&al Data) Fistorical data needs to be brought over from the legacy system to the "A# $1% "ystem for reference purposes. ; amples include closed purchase orders, closed sales orders, summary general ledger information, and so on.
Data &on/er%ion 2lan %a(2le
PAGE 18
Infor(ation to &o(2lete in the &on/er%ion 2lan

,hat ,here 2hich business ob,ects will be converted from the legacy system into "A#. 2here are the data, which 9egacy "ystemJs are involved for the e traction.
Ho3 ('&h ;stimate the number of records to be ultimately loaded into "A#. Ho3 There are two aspects to be considered 0 The way data is e tracted from the 9egacy "ystem Automatically e tracted from the 9egacy system without manual intervention. 4anually filled spreadsheet 5ombination of an automatic 9egacy "ystem e traction R 4anual ;ntry into a spreadsheet
The way data is in,ected into "A# 0 Automatic data transfer from a flat file into "A# 4anually entering data with online transactions into "A# 5ombination of both
The data transfer method you choose will determine the types of resources you need. 3or e ample, you may need temporary employees for the manual data entry and programmers for writing your own e traction programs. *ou need to !now both what data is in your legacy system and which "A# applications correspond to the business ob,ects that will be transferred. .ne person does not have to !now all of this, but the people who !now this information should wor! closely together. ,ho 2ho is involve on each -usiness .b,ect 0 Dey user 73unctional responsible of -. conversion 0 $ules, manual data corrections, test, validations 8 5onsultant $esponsible of data cleaning and purging in the 9egacy "ystem $esponsible of the e traction $esponsible of loading data in "A# -usiness .b,ect 4anager 7Fierarchic owner who is responsible of day to day use and integrity of information and the one which will be signing off for data acceptance 8
This part seems easy enough. Fowever, you will )uic!ly see that getting a clear answer to these )uestions is no easy tas!. Ta!e the time and energy it needs to answer these )uestions meticulously. It will avoid a lot of turning in circle and save you lot of time throughout the pro,ect. Fa yes, I forgot one thing, 4AD; "=$; that all whose name is on the document are aware of it, understand what it mean and approve it.
Data Migration Methodology for SAP Main '%ine%% O*1e&t% %e?'en&e of &on/er%ion
PAGE 1=
#reG$e)uired
G A9 account 4aster 7Include primary cost L revenue elements8 G #rofit centers hierarchy G #rofit centers G 5ost centers hierarchy G 5ost 5enters G Activity types .ptional Internal orders 2-" elements if #" module.
G 5haracteristics G 5lasses
4aterial 4aster
2or! 5enters -an!s :oc 4ast
5ustomer 4aster
-.4
6endor 4aster
5ondition record G :iscount G #ricing
"ales info records
#urchase info records
$outing Te t
"ource lists
$outing 1 Tas! list
"torage -ins .pen A1# .pen A1$ .pening -alances "toc!s 7648 "toc!s 7I48 .pen "ales .rders .pen #roduction .rders 5ontracts .pen #urchase .rders
PAGE 1>
2.3 WBS ( work br !k"ow# $%r&'%&r (

,hy a , S ;stimates for a pro,ect planning must be deducted and ,ustified from a logical process. They represent the real wor!load re)uired for the different tas!s of the pro,ect. The 2-" is a great tool to figure out these numbers. It will permit to estimate the wor!load of each tas! without any duration or calendar consideration. Ignoring the date factor help in getting as ob,ective as possible. The wor!load is calculated in #erson1:ays. 2hether there is one or five persons assigned to a tas!, the wor!load is always the same. The usage of #erson1:ays will help in getting a more precise calendar planning and will ma!e evaluation of the conversion progress easier.
, S Sa(2le
Ho3 to
The idea is to brea! the pro,ect in chun!s and then brea! each of these in tas!s. *ou then proceed to evaluate the wor!load re)uired for each of these elements. It will be much easier to get accurate and ob,ectives numbers on small specific tas!s than on a large chun!. Fow to brea! it and at which level is more an art L e perience mi than it is a science. The more 2-" you do, the better you will get at it. If your 2-" is not granular enough, your estimate is more difficult to get and will be less accurate. An error on one element will also have a greater impact. As for progress followGup, it will be less accurate, since any detected slippage will involve higher number because the element is itself too big. If the 2-" is too granular, you will get lost in a forest of details and numbers. The followGup will also be much more difficult and it will be difficult to get the whole team to use it 7too comple 8. In this methodology, the 2-" I suggest is a middle ground between these two limits. I got to this one by trials L errors on different pro,ects. I thin! it is granular enough to be precise and usable for efficient followGup. *et, simple enough, for the whole team to easily contribute in evaluating the numbers.
PAGE 1@
In order to get a successful evaluation, follow these guidelines 0 ;valuate each and every element of the 2-" while ma!ing abstraction of the other tas!s. This gets you an ob,ective evaluation of each tas! independently of each other. It is important at this point to ma!e complete abstraction of calendar planning or any target date. 3orget when this should be finish or how long should it last. Tust try to figure out the real wor!load needed to complete each element of the :5 process. After that, we will see how we can meet deadline by acting on the organization of the pro,ect rather than <fi ing up< the estimate. "tarting a 2-" while ta!ing into consideration a goal to meet, li!e a specific date or target total of #erson1:ays, will only lead to complaisance planning which will be false and get you in trouble.
S'gge%ted , S &ontent for data &on/er%ion

7ol'(e% Suantity of records Suantity of fields ( 4anual fields '%ine%% O*1e&t% Ma22ing 4 !on/er%ion D 3or detailed information on these items, refer to section % E :ata #urging and 5leansing 4apping and conversion rules ; tract and 9oad #rograms from rules :ata and $ules Adaptation 7ad,usting rules and programs following testing8 9oad =nit Testing 7unitary testing G small volume of manual data8 ; tract and 9oad 3ull size testing 7data test and validation G large volume with real e tracted data8
A&&e2tan&e load and /alidation 3ull data loading into A55;#TA/5; "*"T;4 3ull data loading into #$; #$.:=5TI./ "*"T;4 6alidation of converted data and Dey =ser R -usiness .b,ects .wner "ignoff 3ull conversion into #$.:=5TI./ "*"T;4 and final "ignoff
Total Total G at best 7total in #erson1:ays of each business ob,ect8 Total G most probable 7total at best R +' to +B( buffer8
Are yo' %'re <That much, are you sure E< This is probably the first thing you will hear when showing your 2-". In many pro,ects, the notion of estimating wor!load in #erson1:ays e ists in theory only. 2hen you actually get the numbers, it seams a lot of time and a lot of money ,ust for converting data. 2ell <,ust converting data< is an understatement, as stated earlier this is an important part of the pro,ect. A value of &'' #erson1:ays on a +' people team is not a lot of time. It adds up very )uic!ly. Tust have a + hours meeting once a wee! with seven people and it will consume two #erson1:ays each wee! throughout the pro,ect. "tretch the meeting ,ust a little hour more than e pected 7sounds familiarQ8 and the e)uivalent of a whole day of wor!, for one person, ,ust went by. Add to this the little informal meetings between !ey users, consultants and :5 team members for each business ob,ect to convert. This )uic!ly adds up to a nonGnegligible amount, and that is ,ust for meetings, no tangible deliverable is produce yet.
Re?'e%t to re"e/al'ate yo'r , S

"ometimes, after the <are you sureE<, comes the <please reGevaluate with the !ey users L consultants<. This is a very ,ustified re)uest H but. -e careful, this usually results in trying to reduce the largest numbers by hammering them down with various theories, totally forgetting the smaller values.
PAGE #A
2hen getting the numbers for the original 2-", you average each element. .verall, you under estimate some and over estimate others, but the average law will ma!e it a globally reasonable measure. Fowever, if you start concentrating on some numbers while forgetting others, the average law is out the window. This is why you must consider, both the large and small values, when reGevaluating a 2-". Fere are some suggestions I give to those concerned when reGevaluating a 2-" 0 ; plain clearly what a #erson1:ay is0 <letJs say you have only this to one tas! to do and you have to do alone, how many days will it ta!eE<. ; plain the wor! to evaluate. 3or e ample, ma!ing the conversion rules mean U tal!ing about it with the consultants and 9egacy "ystem e pertsU writing the first version U having meetings to answer gray areas U doing some tests for uncertain fields U cross reading the documents and finally, some reflection time. Therefore, as you see, it is lot more than ,ust figuring how long it would ta!e to write some lines of rules. 5ount everyoneJs time. In the above e ample, you must count time for you, the consultants, the 9" ; perts, those present at the meetings, those doing tests, etc. It adds up very )uic!ly. ; plain the average law I mentioned above and ma!e sure they do reGestimate all the elements with the same scrutiny. 2hile some high wor!load tas!s may be overestimated, some smaller one are probably underestimated as well. Avoid tal!ing about deadline or total wor!load. They have to evaluate all elements independently from each other.
I personally went through that process a few times. Interestingly in all cases, the reGevaluation turned out with a slightly higher global number. 4ainly because they realize there is more, small but still time consuming, tas!s than originally thought so.
So(e 2ointer% to fig're o't n'(*er%

These are pointers to help you come up with the first draft. *ou need that first draft as a starting point of discussion before you start trying to get help from the rest of the team. If there are two legacy systems, it will ta!e twice the time 7see ne t title J-allpar! figures for more info8. As mentioned earlier, avoid thin!ing about deadline or total wor!load. Tust honestly evaluate each element independently from each other. 3or some elements, you are clueless. It is very difficult to find someone who !nows all, but there is always someone who can help you on a specific topic. This is where splitting a pro,ect in small elements will help. :o not hesitate to as! around. Ta!e into account the number of fields you need for each -usiness .b,ect. If you have no clue, ta!e +'' for 4aterial 4aster, &'' for 5ustomers, &'' for 6endors, I' for -.4, I' for $outings. These figures are for an implementation with modules 3I, 5., 44, ## and ":. 9ater on, you can ad,ust to values that are more e act. 3or -.4 and $outings, if they are merged in a single structure in your 9" 7i.e. multilevel8, count that -.4 will ta!e double the time you originally estimated and $outing will most probably have to be done manually from scratch. "A# is "ingle 9evel 7unless it changed in newer versions8 which mean that materials hierarchy is in the -.4 and the operations se)uences are in routings. 4aterial 4aster is huge. It re)uires time and energy, lots of it. .n top of being a difficult one, it is the first one you will have to do. It involves many of people from different domains. There is much to learn while doing 4aterial 4aster, and this learning will put in )uestion the process, which !ey users though they had already cornered. :ifferent people come up with their own set of rules, which need to be put together in a single 4aterial
PAGE #1
4aster. This will create collisions and conflicts, which will need meetings, discussions and testing before the issues are solved. The conversion rules are different for each 4aterial Type and it is not always the same !ey users who have the info for the different types.
.ther than the -ig 3ive, wor!load estimates are rarely lin!ed to the number of fields. The !ey is then the )uality of the 9egacy "ystem data. Fere are some factors on that will ma!e the process much longer0 Fistorical data that was never purge Inconstant data 7well, no one have these in their systems, rightQ8 #art of the data e isting aside in ; cel, Access or other non formal system Information spread into different systems /o clear owner or manager of a business ob,ect in the 9egacy "ystem 7then it is probably messy8
-e conservative, in doubt, over estimate rather than under estimate. /ever mind how much you investigate or !now the 9". There is always one business ob,ect where you will discover, at the last minute, that it ,ust will not fit into "A# without ma,or unplanned efforts. It is not bad luc!, it ,ust happens every time. -ad luc! is when you did not consider it in your planning. If the data is not e tracted from the 9" but generated manually, it will ta!e longer. The time is however more predictable as manual data is rarely bugged. 2hen you e tract data automatically from the 9", it should be faster. Fowever ta!e into account that programming means possible bugs. It also needs modifications when the rules change 7and change they will8, which again may bring bugs If you have part automatic and part manual, li!e <yes we can e tract most of it, but need to do some ad,ustments in ; cel<, add e tra time 7B' to &''( more8. At first glance, this seems li!e the easiest way to go. 2ell, itPs notQ Trust me, these will be real headaches. Although almost impossible to avoid them, try having as little as possible of these. In all cases, prefer ma imum usage of conversion rules.
all2arB fig're%
Fere are some figures to give you a ballpar! of the pro,ects I wor!ed on. These are not absolute figures, as they vary from one pro,ect to another. In pro,ects involving the modules 3I, 5., 44, ## and ":, having from +' ''' to I' ''' material master items with all related -.4 and $outings, about + ''' vendors1customers, &' ''' inventory records and all other basic :5 stuff, it gave me something between I'' to C'' #erson1:ays per legacy system. I say per legacy system and this is something important to consider. If you have different legacy systems, you tend to thin! the second one will go faster than the first. There is absolutely no gain. ;ach system must be evaluated as if it was a different pro,ect. If one ta!e B'' #erson1:ays, than two 9" will ta!e &''' #erson1:ays. This will probably be a ma,or disagreement point among the team when you will show your numbers. Deep in mind that for all the pro,ects I wor!ed on, it proved to be true. 4apping is different, conversion rules are different and issues with 9" data will not be the same. "ince these three items represent the bul! of the :5 process, you can see why two 9" will be twice the energy.
A for('la to hel2 F) Handle 3ith &are

Fere is a formula for the -ig 3ive. I came up with it when I started doing data conversion. I established it by loo!ing bac! on previous pro,ects. I as!ed how many #erson1:ays it too! in average to do each of the -ig 3ive. This was the total time including meetings, writing rules, updating data manually, programming loading tool, etc. Then, with the precious help of people who had first hand e periences doing :5, we came up with a formula to calculate a first estimate. As I went on different pro,ects, I realized it was good enough to give me a first estimate in all cases. Fowever, handle this with care. This really needs to be used as a tool that will help on a first draft. *ou need to challenge these numbers and use

your ,udgment to ad,ust the values.
PAGE ##
-ase on the volume data from your 2-", you can calculate as follow 0 3or mapping 0 5ount &' min per field 7'.'+ day per field8 and add & day to the total for set up and e planations 5onversion rules 0 5ount &' rules per day 7'.& day per field8 :ata and $ules Adaptation 0 5ount &+ seconds 7V'.'''I&C day8 per record and by field 7number of fields records '.'''I&C8. There is more, later on, e plaining what is O:ata and rules adaptationP. number of
As you see, you need to establish how many fields need :ata and $ules Adaptation. I use a percentage in the 2-" so that I can recalculate all the wor!load easily as I learn more about the 9". -ase this on the number of fields you will populate in "A#. I usually count that about ?'( of the fields are solved by conversion rules and +'( will need data and rules adaptation. If the data are in bad shape in the 9", go toward >'(G%'(. This formula is most pertinent for 4aterial, 5ustomer and 6endor masters. 3or -.4 and $outing, the time is less dependent on the number of fields than on the comple ity of the data to e tract. 3or those two, you can use the formula and then add between B'( to &''(, depending on the legacy data comple ity. As stated earlier, if -.4 and $outing are merged in a single structure in your 9" 7i.e. multilevel8, count that -.4 will ta!e double the time you originally estimated and $outing will most probably have to be done manually from scratch. .ther than the -ig 3ive, the number of fields has little to do. It is the comple ity of the process, which needs to be ta!en into consideration. If you really count all the time spent on one business ob,ect, none will ta!e less than &' #erson1:ays. =se you ,udgment and apply between &' to %' #erson1:ays per business ob,ect according to e pected comple ity. ;ach time someone tells you <this is a one day thing<, ma!e a note of it and follow the time it really too! from start up to a loaded and validated data set H you will see, nothing ta!es less than &' days. Another business ob,ect, which is also special, is inventory. At first it loo! simple enough, but getting &''( of the data in "A# will prove to be a challenge... if you plan to shoot less than &''(, go bac! to page & of this document. If you use 24 in "A#, it will be even more challenging. If you have a good wor!ing 24 in your 9", it will be a challenge. If you use 24 in your 9" and it is not wor!ing perfectly, it will be a great challenge. If you do not have 24 in your 9" and want to use 24 in "A#, than you are in for a hec! of a ride. In this situation, consider converting without 24 and implementing it later, once you system has been stable for a while in production.
3or Inventory, count %' days for I4 R up to &'' days for 24 according to the three possible scenarios I ,ust mentioned. If you have a doubt, try finding someone who went through it before. :one right the inventory load ta!es lots of wor! but the process will go well. -adly managed it will !eep you up +Ihrs1day for a few days before A. 9ive H and after.
PAGE #.
2.) CALENDAR PLANNING

O/er/ie3
At this point, you have assigned resources in the :ata 5onversion #lan and estimated the charge for each of the 2-" elements in #erson1:ays. *ou must now transform this information in duration for each tas!, this is the calendar planning. To do the calendar planning, using 4"G#ro,ect or other planning tool, you will enter the tas!s and complete it with the following information 0 Tas!s efforts in #erson1:ays Tas!s dependency /ames of the resources assigned to each tas! and the percentage of their availability on it /on wor!ing days and Foliday.
This will not only give you a calendar date planning based on an ob,ective wor!load estimate, but it will also permit a )uic! identification of resource overGallocation, overlapping of dependant tas!s, and delay due to non wor!ing time and bottlenec!s. .n most conversion, the overload on !ey user is always a ma,or problem. *our !ey users will be strongly solicited right from the beginning of the pro,ect. Deep in mind that the more you go on with your pro,ects, the more they will be solicited to troubleshoot problems, and this will be on top of their normal conversion wor!. The result is that their availability will only get lower as the pro,ect is going on. :o not under estimate this fact in your planning. .nce you will be done with the :5 calendar planning, you must integrate it in the overall pro,ect planning and do a resources load analyses. This tas! is most difficult, time consuming and very frustrating 7especially if you do not master 4"G#ro,ect8.
!alendar 2lanning %a(2le
Data Migration Methodology for SAP MS"Pro1e&t or not)
PAGE #6
4ost probably, the only planning tool youJll have available will be 4"G#ro,ect. Although it is a nice tool, it also has great talent in Jauto messingGupJ your schedules 7ma!e bac!up copies H and ma!e them often8. 4y first advice is that you should learn the basics of 4"G#ro,ect before you get into it. It will be a much less frustrating e perience. "ome )uic! learning boo!s can be found and are useful 2hichever tool you use must be able to give you a resources load analysis. This will be a !ey element of you planning.
Se?'en&ing the ta%B%

2hen I se)uence the tas! within one business ob,ect, I never overlap two tas!s. *es, since the process between test and rules and loading is iterative, we should be able to do them in parallel. Fowever to do this realistically you would need to consider the effort on each tas! to be nonGlinear. If you get into this, your planning will ta!e forever H if ever you finish it. ; perience has proved that the best way to get an accurate calendar planning for the :5 process, while !eeping it simple enough, is to never put tas! in parallel within a business ob,ect.
Gey '%er% and &on%'ltant a/aila*ility to 3orB on Ma%ter Data

2hen assigning !ey users and consultant to the :ata 5onversion tas!s, count only +'( of their time available. This gives you an average of the time they will be able to give you throughout the entire pro,ect. "ometime it will be less, sometime it will be more, but overall it will be +'(. <+'(, that is only one day a wee!Q<. *es, remember that bottlenec! we mentioned before. *ouJll see that getting this much attention from !ey users will be )uite a challenge when you get towards that bottlenec!. And remember, if you ta!e +'( of the !ey userPs time for :5, whoever is planning other wor! on the pro,ect must ta!e into account that the key users are available at only 80( for them.
End Hat *e%tH 7S H(o%t 2ro*a*leH

In the 2-" you estimated all the tas!s as honestly as possible, which gives you the re)uired wor!load at best. Then you added +' to +B( buffer, which gives you the most probable effort. In the calendar planning, all tas!s are entered with the 2-" value at best. The end date will then be the <at best<. To get the most probable end, you need to add a single tas! at the very end of that planning which is e)ual to the buffer in the 2-" is entered. The resources allocation is to all !ey users at +'( 7ta!e into account only lead !ey users for each domain, not support consultants8. 3or e ample, 4y calendar planning end on April %'th I had +'' days buffer in my 2-" I have B !ey users At the very end of the calendar planning, I will add a +'' days tas! with B resources. This will translate as a +' days duration buffer for the lead !ey users. /ow I have the most probable end date.
-elieve me, it is very difficult to do better than the most probable date.
Are yo' %'re <That long, are you sure E< Fere we go again, the same phenomena as in the 2-" will occur. 4any peoples will challenge your calendar planning. They would whish all could be done )uic!er, faster, easier and all in parallel. As in 2-", they will focus only on some big tas!s, generate great theories and totally ignore the overall picture and possible side effects on the overall planning caused by any change on some tas!s. $emember the part in the first section of this document, which stated <It ta!es the time that is needed.< Fere is the part where this statement ta!es most of its sense.
PAGE #:
G :o not parallel the tas! hoping to save time. There are only +Ihrs in a day and people need sleep. G :o not forget the +'G+B( margin G :o not change the #erson1:ays established in the 2-", it is the most ob,ective values you can get. G If you need to finish a tas! faster, never change an end date or the wor!load. 5hanges the resources allocations to obtain the timeframe you want H then reGvalidate the resources wor!load.
,orBload analy%i%
Fere you are, now you have to identify the resources overload and play with the tas! se)uencing until all resources are in normal wor!load. This is a very difficult and frustrating step. In addition, since 4"G#ro,ect will regularly mess things for you, 4AD; -A5D=# copies before ma!ing changes in the calendar planning. .nce the planning is done and resources wor!load is realistic, you are ready to go. At this point youJll only have to identify slippage as the pro,ect go and ta!e corrective action before it has an impact on the pro,ect duration.
PAGE #8
SECTION 3 - CONVERTING A BUSINESS OB*ECT
PAGE #=
:ata #urging L 5leansing
#ro,ect !ic!Goff
4apping L 5onversion $ules
; tract and 9oad #rograms
9oad =nit Testing
:ata and $ules adaptation
; tract L 9oad M 3ull "ize Testing and :ata 6alidation
Acceptance "ystem full load #re #roduction "ystem full load #re #roduction "ystem "ignoff #roduction 9oad L "ignoff
PAGE #>
3.1 OVERVIEW
This section gives you information on the ma,or steps involve for each -usiness .b,ects. ;ach person who is responsible of a -usiness .b,ect should read this. In the previous section we saw one of the methodology main ingredients. It involved mainly planning and is actually a basic management concept, which is applicable to any !ind of pro,ect, computing or other. The second main ingredient of the methodology, which will ma!e it so efficient, is the way we deal with the conversion process itself.
efore yo' *egin)

2hen wor!ing on the conversion, do not try to fit your 9egacy "ystem into "A#. Thin! "A# and understand it. Then you can see what can be recuperated from your 9egacy "ystem. 5onverting into "A# while having in mind your 9egacy "ystem process will for sure lead you into the wrong path. Aet familiar with your "A# -usiness .b,ect. 5reate ob,ect, read the on line documentation, understand the re)uirements, go through your complete process. This will ma!e the conversion easier.
Do&'(entation of yo'r 3orB D&on/er%ion %2e&) and (a22ing %heetE

Deep in mind that "A# is a highly integrated system. 4aster :ata has direct and indirect impacts on all process, which is not always obvious. 3or this reason, all rules and mapping must be documented in clear format to permit cross reading and validation among the whole functional team. This will permit a better circulation of information between domains and awareness of other modules decisions. Although a structured documentation process might ta!e a bit longer at first, it will permit to have a synergy that will eventually ma!e the whole bigger than the sum of the parts. I !now, it sound li!e a theory from a big boo!, but it really does wor!.
3.2 DATA PURGING AND CLEANSING

The purging and cleansing of the 9egacy "ystem will save you lot of time and effort in the following steps of the conversion. "tart this as soon as possible and do as much as possible. This can be done without specific !nowledge of "A#. Data P'rging -efore transferring data from your legacy system, delete all the old and obsolete data. 3or e ample, you may delete all oneGtime customers or those for which there where no transaction in the last two years, also delete unused materials. Data !lean%ing This process corrects data inconsistencies and ensures the integrity of the e isting data during the migration process. 3or e ample, there are often lots of inconsistencies in 5ustomer and 6endor address fields. *ou will )uic!ly find that "A# will not let you load any address fields unless you get them clean.
3.3 +APPING AND CONVERSION RULES

The documentation of each business ob,ect will contain the :ata conversion rules 7or specification8, which include 0 9egacy sources and e traction procedures. 3rom which 9egacy system7s8 are we e tracting the data and how. :ocument here specific steps that need to be ta!en. #urging and cleansing rules 2hat are the cleaning steps to be ta!en and e traction filters to be used. Aeneral 5onversion rules Auidelines to apply or rules that is used by many fields 7thus avoiding to retype it and ma!ing updating easier as it is only in one place8. 3ields "pecific rules

2hich "A# fields to use and how do we get the final value for each "A# field.
PAGE #@
A*o't the r'le%

Aetting the conversion rules to be written is a !ey element of this methodology. Aetting rules, rather than getting raw data in ; cel, permit the following 0 Dey user must understand "A# fields usage Dey user are as! to )uestion their 9egacy "ystem values and integrity $ules permit a clear statement of what a !ey user thin!. Thus permitting to identify conflict and misunderstanding between domains. $ules document can be versioned, ma!ing change management easier as the pro,ect is progressing. 5ommunication between functional and technical people is facilitated by using a common ground language.
*ouJll have to !eep in mind that these will be made by !ey users who may not be familiar with writing computing rules. Therefore, it is necessary to give some e ample and to e plain some basic !ey element in rules writing. -asic properties of a rule 0 Aeneral rules 6" 3ield $ules Aeneral rules are the one that does not yield directly to a field value. 3or e ample the way in which we differentiate the material types in the 9egacy "ystem is such a rule. 3ield rules are those that give a value for a specific field. 3ields names This is a crucial one. 2hen discussing or writing notes, A92A*" refer to a field in the form TA-9;G3I;9:. *ou will )uic!ly realize that as the pro,ect go, different people will start using different names for the same field. As well they may start using the same name for different fields. .n top of this, some fields e ist in different views in "A# master data. "ometime it is the same field that is shown at two places while other times it is really two different fields. The best way to !now which case apply is to have the TA-9; R 3I;9: information. ; ample0 In 4aterial 4aster, the field WAvailability chec!X e ists in the <4$#+< and the <"ales Aen< views. If you loo! at the TA-9;G3I;9: of each view you get 0 4$#+ 0 4A$5G4T63# "ales Aen 0 4A$5G4T63# In both cases the TA-9;G3I;9: name is the same, so it is the same field. In 5ustomer 4aster, the field < Terms of #aymentJ e ist in <#ayment Transactions< and <-illing< views. If you loo! at the TA-9;G3I;9: of each view you get 0 #ayment Transactions -illing 6iews 0 D/66G NT;$4 0 D/-&G NT;$4
It is not the same field. In the payment view, the field is lin!ed to the 5ompany 5ode while for the -illing view it is lin!ed to the "ales .rganization 7you find this by loo!ing at the tables !eys8. "o both of these fields can have different values. "hort and clear $ules should be short, using I31;9";1;/: structure as much as possible. 4a!e certain that the use of A/:, .$ and 7 8 is clear. A long sentence embedding many A/: L .$ will most probably be wrongly interpreted. :o not hesitate to spread the rule on many lines, ma!ing it easy to read. 5hun! of te t is difficult to read.

4ust be clear and without ambiguities 3or e ample 0 If product is a sold semiGfinished H. ;nd
PAGE .A
This is not clear enough, Fow do we !now which product are <sold semiGfinished<. This must be clearly stated in the rule or be part of a general rule. =sage of discrete values in au iliary file In some case, it is impossible to group items or to get values by rules. 6alues must be entered manually. In this situation you must enter these values in a separate file 7usually ; cel8 using a search !ey 7li!e the item number8 and specify in the rule to use the au iliary file. In the rules document, all tables must be specified li!e the following 0
; ample of a rule referring to an au iliary table0

I3 -=*;$G5.:; on legacy is blan! TF;/ #urchasing Aroup is -lan! ;9"; 9ocate -=*;$G5.:; in #urchasing group table to find #urchasing group ;/:
A %2e&ial &a%e for Material Ma%ter

4aterial 4aster involves all the domains and may re)uire anywhere form +' fields to a few hundreds depending on the comple ity of your implementation. "ome fields will be used by different domains while others will be used by only one domain but its value will have an impact on functionality used by another domain. This is the most comple -usiness .b,ect to document and, at the same time, it is the one you must start with in you conversion process. 4aterial 4aster is a !ey to all domains and a lot of fields need to be discovered and understood. To get that understanding from !ey users we proceed as follow 0

&st step 0 "election of the fields by each domain
PAGE .1
Aet each domain with their consultants to go through the mapping file and loo! at the fields for each material type. The goal here is to see all the fields that are important and as! )uestions to understand them. This is done separately by each domain and documented in different mapping files. At this point we are not interested about where the values will come from and how will we get them. T="T A;T TF; 4A##I/A :./; and wor! on understanding what material master is. ;ach time a domain select a field for a specific material type, they must enter their domain type in the list. Fere are some 7theoretical8 e amples of mapping from 44, ## and ":
EIa(2le of field% %ele&tion *y ea&h do(ain
,hat to do 3hen the %a(e field i% fo'nd in different /ie3% In 4aterial 4aster, some fields can be entered 1 modified in different views. 3or e ample, the field Aoods receipt processing time in days 74A$5G2;-AN8 e ists in views #urchasing, 4$#+, Suality management. 2hen doing the rules and the load program, the same field canPt be in different views. To solve this, proceed as follow0 "ee with all implicated domains who is the lead for the field and decide in which view the field should be included.
PAGE .#
Ta!ing the e ample of the field Aoods receipt processing time in days 74A$5G2;-AN8, it can be decided among the domains to put it in the #urchasing view 7and nowhere else8. This means that #urchasing is the lead on this, but do not stop other domains to use it of have specific rules for it. It is however #urchasing role to ma!e sure this field is used correctly. -e careful, ma!e sure it is really the same field. 3or e ample0 In 5ustomer 4aster, the field < Terms of #aymentJ e ist in <#ayment Transactions< and <-illing< views. If you loo! at the TA-9;G3I;9: of each view you get 0 #ayment Transactions -illing 6iews 0 D/66G NT;$4 0 D/-&G NT;$4
It is not the same field. In the payment view, the field is lin!ed to the 5ompany 5ode while for the -illing view it is lin!ed to the "ales .rganization 7you find this by loo!ing at the tables !eys8. "o both of these fields can have different values. SPE!IAL M$LTI 7IE,S In can however happen that no specific domain can be identified as the lead or main user of a field. 9etPs ta!e for e ample, 44 1 ## status 74A$5G44"TA8 which is in views 0 purchasing, 4$#&, wor!scheduling, costing &, )uality management. If no one can be clearly identified as the lead for that field, then we put it in a dummy view called "#;5IA9 multi views. This is used to put all the fields that e ist in different views and for which we canPt assign a lead functional. +nd step 0 $egroup selection of all domains .nce this is done for each domain, than you 7the :5 manager 8 have to put together all the results. This would yield something that loo!s li!e this 0
EIa(2le of field% %ele&tion gro'2ed for all do(ain%
%rd step 0 -uild the data conversion rules template with all the selected fields. "pecify for each field, which domain selected it. If more than one domain selected the same one, put the name of all the domains who selected the field.
PAGE ..
Data &on/er%ion r'le% te(2late %a(2le
Ith step 0 Aet the rules from each domain, independently As! each domain to specify the conversion rules for all the fields they are concerned with. This is purposely done independently for each domain so that misunderstanding or conflicting rules between domains may be put in evidence in the ne t step. Bth step 0 4erge the rules from all domains. 4a!e a single document that contains all the functional domainJs rules and note, for each one, which domain wrote it. Cth step 0 Analyses of the results and creation of the Issue list. At this point, I usually create what I call the S=;"TI./" 9I"T. It is a simple 2ord document where I put all the )uestions, the name of who is responsible for the solution, creation date, target date 7with history if the target is changed8. #repare yourself for a very long list at first. I usually endGup with an average of + )uestions per field. Therefore, if you have %'' fields, that is C'' )uestions. And if you happen to merge % 9egacy "ystems into one "A#, you will have C'' )uestions per 9egacy "ystem. H That is &?'' )uestions. 4ost of these will be )uic!ly dealt with, they are unclear rules or obvious problems that get solved within the first wee!. .ne interesting thing that usually happens here is rules conflict. This happens when more than one domain use the same field and they come up with contradictory or incompatible rules. 3inding this at the beginning of the process will be a great time saver, as you ,ust identified important issues between domains before you developed anything. .ne of the main challenges of implementing "A# is integration of the different functional domains into a single product. 3ailure to understand this is will get you into trouble, and this is true for all the "A# implementation process, not ,ust the :ata 4igration part of it. As the pro,ect goes, the S=;"TI./" 9I"T becomes the data conversion T.:. 9I"T. Anything that is promised, due, scheduled or to be given must be noted there.
PAGE .6
*ou now have 4aterial 4aster conversion rules documented and a T.:. 9I"T to follow up on the issues to be solved before you can load the data.
Material Ma%ter &on/er%ion r'le% %a(2le
All other *'%ine%% o*1e&t%

3or the other -., because they are simpler than 4aterial 4aster and involve fewer people, we will start directly with the 5onversion rules document. It is in this document that we will both, decide which fields we need and, in a second step, start wor!ing on the rules. Fere are some samples of -. conversion rules.
PAGE .:
OM &on/er%ion r'le% %a(2le
O2en A&&o'nt Re&ei/a*le &on/er%ion r'le% %a(2le
PAGE .8
7endor Ma%ter &on/er%ion r'le% %a(2le
EIa(2le of general r'le%

ID
A''' A''&
R$LE
/ote that "A# term "ecurity deposit e)ual $etention in #$4" Type of transaction T*#; field in #$4" 0 #artial #4T0 #ay. 5redit 4emo0 5r 4. :ebit 4emo0 :r 4. Invoice 0 Inv. /on A1$ cash0 /on A$ Ad,ustments0 Ad, Any other type is an error. 6alidation to apply both at e traction and load. #artial #4THHH. must be negative in #$4", if not ;$$.$ 5redit 4emoHHHmust be negative in #$4", if not ;$$.$ :ebit 4emoHHH.must be positive in #$4", if not ;$$.$ InvoiceHHHHH..must be positive in #$4", if not ;$$.$ Any other type is an ;$$.$. 9"4 9oad parameters DT.#9 G 5hart of account 0 5A'' -=D$" M 5ompany code0 ''>' A"-;$ G -usiness Area 0 ''I' -=:AT M #osting :ate 0 'BG%&G'+ or last day of last closed period. .33";T M Account 7+8 0 $;#$I";59 "D#;$$ M "!ip err 0 K
A''+
A''%
PAGE .=
Dire&tory organiCation
As you go, you will end up with lots of documents and versions. To store the different files on your local server, use a specific directory structure. I suggest having a structure with a directory for each -usiness .b,ect to store all the files relevant to the data conversion. Fere is an e ample. 50Y. Z[ :ata 5onversion \ \ \ Z[[[ '' G .rganization \ \ \ :5 #9A/ \ \ \ :5 2-" \ \ \ :5 "5F;:=9; \ \ \ \ \ ][[[[[ .ld \ \ ^ "tore here previous versions of above mentioned documents _ \ \ \ Z[[[ '& G 4aterial 4aster \ \ \ 4aterial 4aster G 3ield "election "heet. ls \ \ \ 4aterial 4aster G :ata 5onversion "pec.doc \ \ \ ^ Deep here only the latest version of each document _ \ \ \ \ \ Z[[[[[ .ld \ \ \ ^ "tore here previous versions of above mentioned documents _ \ \ \ \ \ ][[[[[ 2or!ing 3iles \ \ ^ #ut here various wor!ing files _ \ \ \ Z[[[ G-. name \ \ \ -. G :ata 5onversion "pec.doc \ \ \ ^ Deep here only the latest version of each document _ \ \ \ \ \ Z[[[[[ .ld \ \ \ ^ "tore here previous versions of above mentioned documents _ \ \ \ \ \ ][[[[[ 2or!ing 3iles \ \ ^ #ut here various wor!ing files _
7er%ion (anage(ent of &on/er%ion r'le%

As the pro,ect goes, rules will change. This is a certitude. As you get closer to Ao 9ive, changes will get more fre)uent, they will occur faster and will re)uire a )uic!er reaction time. 5onsidering the stress on the whole pro,ect team and the overall load on all members near A. 9ive, there is a real danger to loose control here. .ne way to stay on top of things while having e tra )uic! reaction time is good document management, which will permit a good change management. Although it may sometime feel frustrating to go through versioning for !ey users, it will ultimately be the best way to go fast without brea!ing something else that already wor!s 7regression8. Fere how it goes 0 5reation of the first version rules 6'&.doc 3reezing version 6'& .nce everyone agree that 6'& is .D 7functional and technical staff8, freeze the version. #assword protect 6'&, so no one changes it afterwards 4a!e a copy of 6'& as 6'+ In 6'+, activate 4"G2ord change trac!ing #ut 6'& in the <.ld< directory =nprotect 6'+ 7This is where we start the new version8

:evelopment and testing of 6'& As! the technical team to wor! on 6'& and only on 6'&. Any change re)uired by functional team must be done in 6'+. :. /.T 5FA/A; 6'& .nce 6'& is programmed, load it and as! functional team to validate. All correction has to be entered in 6'+. 3reezing of 6'+ .nce everyone agree that 6'+ is .D 7functional and technical staff8, freeze the version. #assword protect 6'+, so no one changes it afterwards 4a!e a copy of the document as 6'% In 6'%, accept all changes so that there is no visible change. In 6'%, activate 4"G2ord change trac!ing 7should already be on8 #ut 6'+ in the <.ld< directory =nprotect 6'% :evelopment and testing of 6'+ As! the technical team to wor! on 6'+ and only on 6'+ A99 5FA/A;" between 6'& and 6'+ are visible through 4"G2ord change trac!ing. Any change re)uired by functional team must be done in 6'%. :. /.T 5FA/A; 6'+ .nce 6'+ is programmed, load it and as! functional team to validate. All correction has to be entered in 6'%. And so on H
PAGE .>
If you are not familiar with 4"G2ord change trac!ing I strongly suggest that you get ac)uainted with this functionality.
M'r2hyH% 2rote&tion 0 Sa/e it often F and get good *a&B'2%)

*ou will be wor!ing with 4"G2ord, using change trac!ing, and ; cel. These are nice tools but they regularly go wild and scrap your document. This is mostly true with large documents. "o save often and ma!e bac!ups of all your :ata 5onversion documents. I usually !eep a > days rolling bac!up of all my files somewhere on a local #5 to protect me from 4"G.ffice bad behavior as well as networ! failure H and human error. -e certain of two things 0 If you have many large 4"G.ffice documents, at least a few of them will go totally corrupted during the pro,ect. It always happens. It also always happens that someone messGup a document, usually the most critical one. .
This all happens because of a certain 4urphyJs and there is no way around it.
3.) E,%r!'% !#" Lo!" Pro-r!.$

The rules documents for each -. have sections for 9egacy sources and e traction procedures and #urging and cleansing rules. This should e plain what to clean1purge, what to e tract and how to proceed. If it does not, IT 4="T -; :./; -;3.$; *.= :. A/* #$.A$A44I/A. It is essential that this be clearly documented and validated by the !ey user responsible for the -.. 2e are at the start of the process and any error or omission at this point will affect us for the rest of the pro,ect. .nce this is all documented, validated and understood, you can start wor! on the e traction programs and process. .nce the e traction is clear, we must loo! at the load programs and process. This implicates all the aspects of loading the re)uired fields into each -.. Again, as for e traction, if there is ambiguity or incomplete information in the specs, :. /.T #$.5;;:. At this point, ta!e your time to solve the issues you can see on paper before you do any programming.

This will prove to be an enormous time saver later on.
PAGE .@
4ost of the time, when you do not begin any programming until all e tract and load rules are &''( clear 7and I mean &''(8, there is a tendency to thin! that you ,ust ma!e everyone loose time. /ot so. If you found issues at this point, it means that there will be errors in the process and you will have to address these issues anyway. It ,ust will be more difficult and time consuming to do it after the programming is done than now.
3./ D!%! !#" R&0 $ !"!1%!%2o#

This is, by far, the most time consuming part of the conversion process. This is also the most difficult, where "ystem 4igration 4anagers can loose control of the conversion process. $emember this throughout the whole process0 As in car racing, it is not the speed at which you enter a turn that is most important, it is the one at which you get out of it. The migration process is an iterative one. After you have the specs, you do the e tract and load programs "ome )uestions or issues will arise. *ou must address them and document in the specs whatever corrective actions are needed. The specs must always be updated to reflect the new re)uirements -;3.$; you correct any program. :o unit testing of the load "ome )uestions or issues will arise. *ou must address them and document in the specs whatever corrective actions are needed. The specs must always be updated to reflect the new re)uirements -;3.$; you correct any program. 3ollowing the modifications, you need to redo the unit testing of the load. 3ull size test cycle "ome )uestions or issues will arise. *ou must address them and document in the specs whatever corrective actions are needed. The specs must always be updated to reflect the new re)uirements -;3.$; you correct any program. 3ollowing the modifications, you need to redo the unit testing of the load and redo a full size test cycle. 3or all the "ystems 4igrations I did, these iterations accounted for a ma,or part of the :5 process duration. This is time consuming and can be very frustrating if not properly managed. In a nutshell, here are the guidelines most useful at this point 0 &. 3irst, when something needs a change, it must be documented and validated in the specs so that it is clear and unambiguous to all. Deep in mind that a change from one domain can affect others and they will find this only later in the process, once everyone forgot about what was e actly changed. The -usiness .b,ect Dey user is the one accountable for the rules 7all of them8 relating to his1her -., for their maintenance and for the end result. This is not the technician part of the wor!. The tech team is there to develop programs according to what the rule says. If it is not in the rules, it does not e ist. "o if you do not see what you need, get it documented. Fave the discipline to manage change by versioning the documents and ma!ing sure they are crossGvalidated by all implicated sta!eholder. It is better to ta!e your time to do it correctly rather than rushing it, which usually means you may have to slow down at some points. $esults will initially be slower to come, but you will eventually progress faster and faster. As problems can accumulate in a snowball effect, so does success 7and this is a good news8. Ta!e the time to do it right now and you will eventually pic!Gup an impressive speed in the ne t steps. The specs must always be updated to reflect the new situation -;3.$; you correct any programs. *ou must be thin!ing, .D, stop repeating the same thing again and again, I got it. I do so because this is the most common error I saw on pro,ects that failed. Trying to save time a team starts wor!ing on new solutions without ta!ing time to document, cross read and validate the specs. They sure are getting output )uic!ly this wayH but are they going in the right direction E
+.
%. I. B.
C.

>.
PAGE 6A
If you start running in all directions and canPt !eep you head out the water, "T.#, and go bac! to step &.
3.3 Lo!" U#2% T $%2#Fere we want to test the load programs at a unitary level. The goal is to see if we can load all the fields for all the data types without error. 2e are more concerned about going through the load cycle without "A# stopping us, rather than validating the correctness of the values. 3or this we use a very small volume of data, usually creating data manually from scratch rather than using real e tracted data. The !ind of issues you usually encounters at this point loo!s li!e the following 0 "ome mandatory fields are missing "ome dependency between + fields in one view where not considered and you canPt load as e pected Invalid values where given to you in the rules ;rrors in the load programs =sing a load program, "A# did not behave as you e pected 7it sometimes behave very differently with a load tool than it does with manual data entry8 As mentioned earlier, the conversion process is iterative. 3ollowing the issues youPll find here, you will have to go bac! to the functional !ey user, find solutions and document them in the specs 7this is the responsibility of the !ey user8.
3.4 E,%r!'% 5 Lo!" 6 7&00 S28 T $%2#- !#" D!%! V!02"!%2o#

At this point, we want to !now if we can load the data with the processes we developed 7e traction and load8, as well as validating the results of the conversion in "A#. At the end of this step, we will have a fully functioning and validated conversion cycle. This is done it two steps0 &. +. 9oad data that comes from the full e traction process 7starting with small size and progressing with larger data set, up to B'( of the complete data to be converted8 9oad a full size data set 7at least B'( of the complete data to be converted and progressing towards &''(8 using the full ; tract and 9oad cycle. The goal is to achieve &''( of loaded data
After each load, the functional that is responsible for the business ob,ect must validate the data. This is time consuming and must be done as soon as possible. $emember the bottlenec! with !ey user I mentioned earlier in the planning section, the farther you are in the pro,ect, the less availability youPll get from the !ey user responsible of the -.. 3inally, of course, following the issues you will find here, you will have to go bac! to the functional !ey user, find solutions and document them in the specs 7this is the responsibility of the !ey user8.
3.9
A'' 1%!#' S:$% . 7&00 Lo!"
-efore going into preGproduction, you must be able to start from an empty "A# client, e tract, load &''( of the data, and have full data validation from the -.Ps !ey users and the -.Ps .wners. 3rom this point on, if you change something, you must redo a full e tractGloadGvalidation cycle for the -. affected. 3ailure to do so 7i.e. ma!ing last minute changes and not validating them full size8 will @@( of the time creates bugs in the load process at production time. Again, to achieve this you will need lots of discipline. 2hile you can correct bugs in dev, it is difficult to correct them in pre prod 7and suicidal8. If at the end you load in production and create data inconsistencies, it can ta!e up to a year to correct this. -ecause the production system is living its own life and canPt be controlled as in dev, correcting 4aster :ata errors is li!e shooting a moving target H the more you try to fi it, the more you seems to brea! everything around it. I
PAGE 61
have seen teams cheating on this step and still have corrupted -.4 after a year. "ince -.4 affect #urchasing, 5osting, 4anufacturing, Inventory, etc. you can imagine in which condition their "A# got after a while.
3.;
Pr Pro"&'%2o# !#" Pro"&'%2o# Lo!"
"ince you went through all the steps and followed all the methodology guidelines, this is ,ust a formality. *ou do a full load in preGprod, starting from a copy of prod and doing everything e actly as you will do in prod *ou get the whole thing validated by the -.Ps !ey users and the -.Ps .wners Then you get written signoff from the -.Ps .wners that all is AG.D 7insist to have it written, not verbal8 After, you do the final production load and get final signoff 3inally you have nothing else to do, as by following this methodology, you managed to load &''( accurate 4aster :ata and no rewor! is needed 7yes, this happened to me for real8
Fere are the guidelines to follow here. Again simple but re)uiring a lot of discipline 0 :o not change any e tract1load programs to correct errors found in reGprod. It is better to ma!e manual corrections or create programs the correct the data after loading them. This way you do not induce regression into the e tract1load process. 2hen it is time to load in prod, do e actly as you did in pre prod, and then apply the manual changes or run the data correcting programs e actly as you did in pre prod. If you must change the anything in the load1e tract process or programs, you must again do a full preG prod load test1validation of everything.
3.1< S&-- $%2o#$ o# %= D!%! Co#> r$2o# L!#"$'!1

As I did different 9egacy "ystem migrations into "A#, one situation !ept showing up about the clients re)uirements. .nce you will be done with the first loads of 4aterial 4aster R -.4 R $outing, the following will happen0 ## will be ma!ing corrections to -.4 and $outing 3IG5. will be doing costing runs and are directly affected by -.4 and $outing The rest of the team will be ma!ing corrections to the other -usiness .b,ects $egularly, at some points, they will all need to change the e tract1load rules, adapt the programs and load the data to validate the results. This is where it gets tric!y, they will the need to reload data at different intervals from each other, and you cannot do this without affecting another team that is proceeding at a different pace in their 6alidationG5orrection process. 3or e ample, you cannot load data in the -.4 for ## without affecting the 3IG5. team in their costing validation. In all cases, we came up to the same conclusion, at one point we need three clients organized li!e this 0 &. A 5lient for ## wor!ing on -.4 and $outing +. A 5lient for 3IG5. wor!ing on costing %. A 5lient for all the other -.Ps been wor!ed on "ince it ta!es time and resources to setGup these clients, better to !now it is coming and plan for it right at the beginning of the pro,ect.
PAGE 6#
CONCLUSION
/ow you !now how I did different 4aster :ata migrations faster and better than others did. I successfully used this methodology in different industries, in different countries and with starting pro,ects as well as with pro,ects already running which needed to be turned around. The methodology itself is mainly a mi of good old common sense and management &'&. ;ach step is the foundation needed for the ne t step. 5omplete each step at &''( and the ne t one will be easier. This will have a snowball effect, permitting you to gain more speed from step to step. /ot following this rule will also have a snowball effect, but in the other direction, reaching a point where the conversion process becomes totally out of control. The difficulty is not in understanding the methodology. #ressure to show rapid results 7any results8, tendencies to push forward issues so we can !eep progressing, and resistance to slow down when the process starting to get out of hands. These are the most difficult challenges you will have to overcome in order to complete each step at &''( Although it may sometimes loo!s to others that you are ta!ing the long route to get there, remember that the ob,ective is not to finish a specific step A"A#. The goal it is to complete the whole process in the best time possible and to deliver a complete set of 4aster :ata that will not need rewor! once in production. This is how I managed to !eep my head above the water and continuously see where we are going, even when everyone else seems to be in crises.
PAGE 6.
APPENDI? 6 VARIOUS TE+PLATES
Data Migration Methodology for SAP A " !on/er%ion 2lan te(2late

Data Conversion Plan.doc
PAGE 66
" , S te(2late
WBS Template.xls
! < Material Ma%ter " Field% %ele&tion %heet

MAT MASTER Fields Selection Sheet SAP 4. .xls
D " Data &on/er%ion %2e&ifi&ation " Generi& te(2late

Data Conversion r!les template.doc
E " Data &on/er%ion %2e&ifi&ation < OM 4 Ro'ting Te(2late Sa(2le%

B"M conversion spec sample.doc Ro!tin# conversion spec sample.doc
F " Material% !la%%e% and !hara&teri%ti&% %tr'&t're

I included this as it may be useful to understand, and e plain, the structure of 4aterials 5lasses and 5haracteristics
Materials Classes and Characteristics str!ct!re.ppt

Data Migration Methodology For SAP V01a by Christian Bergeron

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Data Migration Methodology For SAP V01a by Christian Bergeron

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Data Migration Methodology for SAP