Impact and template analysis
Understand what the estate actually contains before anything moves.
xPression → Exstream migration and modernization themes, tied back to Assessment when support-gap drives the timing.
Retained from the current site and reorganized under the OpenText / xPression practice.
Understand what the estate actually contains before anything moves.
Structured testing through cutover, with support that does not end at go-live.
Conversion work runs as a factory beside production, not inside it.
Where historically offered for defined migration scopes. Fixed-fee language does not extend to whole-estate harvest.
When support-gap risk drives migration timing, start with Assessment so the sequence is chosen deliberately rather than under pressure.
Bounded truth: inventory, risk register, migration options, and a clear go / nurture / disqualify recommendation.
Migration factory delivery after Assessment: inventory → map → pilot → cutover, with scope control written up front.
Hypercare against written success criteria before go-live is called done. Harden and hand off.
Ongoing managed support for OpenText / xPression estates that elect it. Recommended attach — not auto-bundled.
Waiting compresses the factory window; it does not lower the risk. Assessment prices the cost of waiting against acting. If there is no trigger yet, nurture is a fine outcome — but book a revisit date and keep the risk register current.
No. Assessment first, then Sprint in controlled scope, then expand. Whole-estate fixed bids before Assessment are exactly the promise that breaks correspondence programs.
That is what the phased Sprint plus Stabilization gates are for. Each unit has a pilot and a cutover gate, and go-live is only called done against written success criteria.
Then ECM Tek is not the right fit for that request on its own. Our work is services-led; we can point you to a partner path.