Company-X
Office Suite And Editable Document
Format Upgrade Options

Adapt this document for your companies environment:•

Replace Company-X with your company•

Replace Company-Y with your potential migration partner, add their contact details too.
e.g. an IT bod local to your town or country, who is experienced to offer backup support foryour company if you are away – Your manager may like to see this for risk management
peace of mind.

•

Replace Reseller-X with your potential reseller's company name. e.g. Collabora –experienced to offer support for your company if needed – Your manager may like to see
this for risk management peace of mind.

•

Replace Country-X with your country•

This pricing is for Not-For-Proft pricing, replace with appropriate pricing for your business•

Add your Path/Filename to the footer , Insert/Fields/More fields/Document/Filename etc

Table of Contents
Background...........................................................................................................................................3
1) Continuity of access to our IP, document interchangeability......................................................3
2) Security and stability...................................................................................................................33) Efficiency and productivity gains................................................................................................3
Replacement file format considerations...............................................................................................4
Microsoft OOXML..........................................................................................................................4
ODF – OpenDocument Format........................................................................................................4
Google Drive native file format.......................................................................................................4
Replacement office productivity software candidates..........................................................................5
Microsoft Office 2013......................................................................................................................5
Microsoft Office 365........................................................................................................................6
LibreOffice.......................................................................................................................................7
Google Drive..................................................................................................................................10
Recommendations..............................................................................................................................13
Migration plan....................................................................................................................................13
Appendix A: office productivity suite cost comparisons....................................................................15
Appendix B: file format compatibility and support...........................................................................16
Appendix C: migration and support partner.......................................................................................17

Page 2 of 17

BackgroundOur current office productivity suite needs upgrading for three key reasons:
1) Continuity of access to our IP, document interchangeability.

•

Interchanging documents with other agencies is becoming a bigger issue, Microsoft Office
2003 increasingly refuses to open newer Microsoft Office-formatted files.

•

Storing documents in these file formats presents a long-term archival risk. Going forward,
Microsoft will continue to release software incapable of opening our documents.

Other office suite software offers superior compatibility out of the box for these older proprietary
formats than Microsoft's own products do. There would also be significant benefits to Company-X
adopting a non-proprietary and industry-standardised file format.

2) Security and stability.

Microsoft ceased Office 2003 support on 8th April 2014. This gives rise to the following concerns:•

Company-X is exposed to an increasing IT security risk, due to Microsoft no longer
providing the security patching needed to help prevent against malware infections carried in
Microsoft Office files.

•

Newer versions of Microsoft Windows break compatibility with Microsoft Office 2003,
leading to the software's functionality breaking in unpredictable and disruptive ways.

An office suite upgrade will rectify both of these issues, with some office products providing
additional longer-term benefits too.

3) Efficiency and productivity gains.

•

Microsoft Office 2003 is missing some features present in current office software products.
Examples include built-in PDF editing and export, a user interface optimised for widescreen displays, cloud integration, and features for collaborative working styles.

Company-X undoubtedly stands to benefit from a replacement office software suite with modern
features and performance.

Page 3 of 17

Replacement file format considerations
Each proposed replacement office software suite features an attendant native file format. Generally,a product's full features and functionality is implemented using this native file format. A summaryof the available competing in-scope file formats follows.
Microsoft OOXMLThis is the native file format used by current versions of Microsoft Office, as represented in files
with the .docx, .xlsx, and .pptx file extensions. Although officially a standard, in reality – due tovarious reasons including the complexity of the specification – Microsoft is the only vendor
implementing OOXML to any significant degree. The absence of any broad industry support for
OOXML engenders the same long-term risk regarding continuity of access to our IP stored in theformat.
Multiple variants of the OOXML format exist across differing Microsoft Office versions (Office2007, Office 2010, Office 2013, Office for Macintosh). These variants are known as OOXML
transitional, and contain proprietary, non-standardised components available only to Microsoft.
None are the OOXML strict format.
Microsoft's claim of industry standardisation while delivering multiple overlapping versions
containing proprietary technology is in line with their historic business model of locking incustomers to a single product – the precise scenario which Company-X is currently in.
ODF – OpenDocument Format

ODF is recognised as the leading industry-standard (ISO/IEC International Standard) officeproductivity file format. ODF's straightforward specification, absence of any single controllingvendor – with oversight from a standards body – has seen it gain significant uptake in enterprisescale public institutions and government agencies worldwide. The UK Government for example has
mandated ODF as its sole standard for document interchange – rejecting Microsoft's OOXML fileformat, and invalidating OOXML's rationale as a "defacto" standard.1
ODF's open nature has lead to a range of competing business office productivity alternatives
becoming available, with complete native feature support for the OpenDocument format. Examples
include LibreOffice, and Apache OpenOffice. This changing competitive landscape has also lead toMicrosoft and Google (see below) moving to support ODF files.
Files saved in ODF format today are guaranteed to open tomorrow, irrespective of product andvendor. This ensures continuity in access to IP.
Google Drive native file format

While Google supports both OOXML and ODF for file import and export with their cloud-based
Google Drive service, editing performed in Google Drive uses a Google-only proprietary,
undocumented native file format – there is no choice of vendor. This is similar to Company-X's
current situation with Microsoft Office file formats.

1

www.gov.uk/government/news/open-document-formats-selected-to-meet-user-needs
Page 4 of 17

Replacement office productivity software candidates
Four product candidates are proposed. Each product is described below, with key advantages anddisadvantages of each, specific to Company-X's use case. Relevant detailed information is
documented in appendices.

Microsoft Office 2013
Microsoft's current Office product version is delivered as a full traditional installation on acomputer hard drive, similar to our existing Microsoft Office 2003 installations.

Advantages
Full-featured, comprehensive office productivity suite.

In terms of features, Office 2013 will fulfil Company-X's current office productivity needs. It
contains many modern amenities introduced in the intervening 12 years since Office 2003's release.

Disadvantages
Effectively proprietary native file formats, poor support for legacy file formats.

Referring to the "Replacement file format considerations" section above, Office 2013 will keep us
locked in to using Microsoft file formats, with the attendant highlighted risks and drawbacks.
Similarly, Microsoft is gradually retiring support for their older file formats. In both cases thisleaves us exposed to both the short-term and long-term risk of being unable to access our own IP
saved in these formats.
Relatively high cost.

Although the retail pricing for Microsoft Office is typically hundreds of dollars, discounts areavailable for NFPs. However, as well as the initial license cost, many hidden costs are associatedwith Microsoft Office suites.2
Deeply complex product licensing.

Microsoft licensing requires sustained staff effort performing software asset management to ensure
license compliance. Non-compliance gives rise to the risk of a Microsoft license audit and costly
penalties. This complexity is compounded with the adoption of BYOD and remote working.
Revised user interface is a substantial, disruptive change.

Office 2013 ships with the latest revision of Microsoft's controversial “ribbon” interface. For our
staff with years of experience using Office 2003's traditional menu-based interface, we can expect
to incur significant downtime for staff retraining – even for basic tasks. This may carry an
2Appendix A: office productivity suite cost comparisonsPage 5 of 17

additional cost for paid training materials. Also, IT consultant rates for Microsoft products arehigher than competing alternatives.
Full features and functionality only on Microsoft Windows.

Although Office 2013 is available for Apple Mac computers as Office for Mac, it differs in featuresand functionality. Other business operating system (OS) products such as Ubuntu are not supported
at all. According to Microsoft, in 2000 the Windows operating system was on 90% of devices, yet in2014, it is only 14% of devices.3•

This keeps Company-X locked in to the Windows platform, and limits our options should
future business needs require investigation of an alternative, non-Windows OS product.

•

Upgrading our Microsoft Windows licenses is a potential significant associated cost, if
Microsoft for example drops support for future versions of Office for our current Windows
version.

Product activation risks.

Microsoft mandates proof of license purchase via an online activation process, without which thesoftware will only function with crippled functionality, or not at all. Activation schemes introduce
an additional layer of risk arising from legitimately-licensed software potentially ceasing to function
at critical times.
Extra computing hardware costs.

Office 2013 in tandem with Microsoft Windows generally requires a more expensive, higherspecified computer to run the product with acceptable performance compared to competingalternatives. In some cases this may require upgrading existing computer hardware or more likely
replacing it outright – effectively just to run Office 2013.
High exit cost.

The combination of practically proprietary file formats, Windows-only support for fullfunctionality, and severe licensing complexity increases the cost and effort of migrating toalternative office software products in the future.

Microsoft Office 365
Microsoft Office 365 takes the existing Microsoft Office 2013 product and bundles it withadditional cloud-based services. It's delivered as an ongoing paid subscription (i.e. software rental).

3

www.computerworld.com/article/2490008/microsoft-windows/microsoft-gets-real--admits-its-device-share-is-just14-.html
Page 6 of 17

Advantages
Nominally low cost for NFPs.

The monthly cost per staff member is prima facie more attractive than Office 2013's initial upfront
cost.
Integration with other Microsoft services.

Office 365 features integrated cloud storage, video calling with Skype, and a range of otheramenities.
Web-app versions of Word, Excel, and PowerPoint.

This enables web browser-based access to these applications with real-time collaborative
functionality – albeit with a significantly stripped-back feature set.

Disadvantages
The following disadvantages highlighted above for the standard Office 2013 product also apply to
Office 365:•

Practically proprietary native file formats•

Poor or non-existent support for Microsoft's own legacy file formats•

Revised user interface is a substantial, disruptive change•

Full features and functionality only on Microsoft Windows•

Product activation risks•

The on-going subscription fees add up rapidly•High exit cost – heightened by Office 365's additional bundled services

LibreOffice
LibreOffice is a professional-grade business office productivity suite, with equivalent applications,features, and functionality to that found in Microsoft Office 2013. It's delivered as a full installation
on a computer hard drive.

Advantages
Full-featured, comprehensive office productivity suite.

Like Microsoft Office 2013, in terms of features LibreOffice will fulfil Company-X's current andfuture productivity needs. It ships with equivalents for Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Access, and Visio.
It also contains many modern amenities introduced in the intervening 12 years since Office 2003's
release – with additional features not present in any version of Microsoft Office (for example, full
Page 7 of 17

editable PDF support, a presentation remote control app for smartphones).4`
Industry standard file formats and open source technology.

As highlighted in "Replacement file format considerations", LibreOffice uses the industry standard
ODF file format. No proprietary vendor-only technology is used. This guarantees long-term accessto our IP, gives us the broadest range of product alternatives, enables deep product customisation if
needed, reduces our vendor lock-in, and significantly reduces our exit cost.
Support for a wide range of other file formats.

LibreOffice can open, modify, and save documents in a variety of proprietary Microsoft fileformats, including legacy file formats no longer supported by Microsoft. This will allow us to
manage the majority of OOXML-format files sent our way, and, give us continued access to ourexisting IP stored in older Microsoft formats.5
LibreOffice's can handle dozens more file formats, compared to Microsoft Office's support of only a
few dozen.
No cost or very low cost.

LibreOffice is available in two editions, with little difference between the feature set:•

LibreOffice (community version) This is free for both business and home use. It is notcrippled in any way and by itself is equivalent to Microsoft Office 2013. New versions
containing feature enhancements are available every six months.

•

LibreOffice from Collabora: This is an enterprised-hardened LibreOffice version, tested for
maximum stability and intended for large-scale use. Security and bug fixes are released
immediately, feature enhancements generally ship a few months after the community
version.

Familiar yet modern user interface.

LibreOffice features a traditional menu-based user interface, much closer to the existing Office
2003 interface our staff presently use. This translates to far less disruption for staff adapting to thenew product compared to the alternatives.
Full cross-platform OS support.

LibreOffice runs with full feature parity across Microsoft Windows, Apple OS X, Ubuntu, andmany more OS products. For staff not using Windows this means we do not have to sacrifice any
functionality, and all documents can be interchanged with 100 percent compatibility.
This enables broader options should migration to an alternative OS in future be desired, without
vendor lock-in to Microsoft. This also helps reduce our exit cost.

45

LibreOffice/Office2013 comparison: wiki.documentfoundation.org/Feature_Comparison:_LibreOffice__Microsoft_Office
Appendix B: file format compatibility and support
Page 8 of 17

No product activation.

LibreOffice requires no product codes or online activation. The software will work the same way as
the day it was installed, in perpetuity.
No licensing, or simplified licensing.

The LibreOffice community version can be installed anywhere and distributed to anyone forbusiness and home use. There is no license management to speak of.
The LibreOffice from Collabora version features simple license management, tracked via computer
installations. Additional license purchases are a simple, straightforward cost.
Work-at-home use is covered.

For staff wanting to use the software at home, the community version of LibreOffice can beinstalled for no cost on an unlimited number of computers. Additionally, LibreOffice fromCollabora contains a work-at-home clause in the EULA.
Built-in PDF editing and export support.

LibreOffice features one-click PDF export. Full editable PDFs can also be created, removing theneed for expensive third-party software such as Adobe Acrobat.
A wide range of third-party enhancements.

LibreOffice features a thriving add-on ecosystem, enhancing the already full-featured product withhundreds of useful customisations.

Disadvantages
No cloud-based web applications.

The competing office suites are available as web-based alternatives (albeit with a far reduced
feature set), with real-time collaborative functionality. Cloud support for LibreOffice is under active
development, but native LibreOffice web-apps are not yet shipping. However it should be remindedthat Company-X's complete desktop and application portfolio has been cloud based since the lastcentury. It is accessible via web browser HTML5, Microsoft Remote Desktop, and 2x Remote
Desktop.
Microsoft OOXML compatibility.

All competing office suites occasionally fail to render files saved in one of Microsoft's OOXML
file formats. This can be mitigated by one of several options including having access to a Microsoft
product, or asking the sender to resend as a PDF or in an open editable document format such as
OpenDocument.

Page 9 of 17

Google Drive
Google Drive is a component of the Google Apps for Work suite, and consists of word processing,spreadsheet, and presentation applications. It's delivered as an online subscription-based service,
and most functionality is accessible from a customer's web browser. With the exception of someminor components, there is no software installation needed on a computer's hard drive.

Advantages
Nominally low monthly cost.

The cost for the Google Apps for Work suite is between $US5.00 and US$10.00 per staff member
per month and when used on a ChromeOS device like a Chromebook has negligible device support
cost.
Most functionality is available anywhere.

Google Drive is delivered over the Internet and accessed in a web browser. Consequently it is notdependent on any one OS product, and will work across Windows, OS X, Ubuntu, and otherplatforms, with close to full feature parity.
Integrated features for collaborative work.

Google Drive is set up for group collaboration out-of-the-box. Assuming a robust Internet
connection, staff working across physically disparate locations can collaborate in real time on
documents, with modifications and comments automatically recorded.
Simplified license management.

License compliance is much easier than Microsoft Office, as it's an online-only service with nosoftware installation, no product activation, and no need to track license key codes.
Integration with additional Google services.

The Google Apps for Work suite bundles a range of additional services within the subscription cost
including video calling, hosted email, and tools for building basic intranet sites.
Better resource usage for older computers.

Because Google Drive is delivered over the Internet and requires only a web browser, it will run on
older computer hardware. (Note however that this advantage may be offset against the Internet
connection's performance and availability.)
An emerging trend.

Schools nationwide are either providing Chromebooks in the classroom or expecting children towork with school administered Google accounts. A generation of people will soon be wondering
why businesses spend so much time with high maintenance, high cost Windows computers.

Page 10 of 17

Disadvantages
Entirely closed, proprietary native file format.

As highlighted in the "Replacement file format considerations" section above, Google Drive's
native file format is not standardised and is entirely proprietary. From the standpoint of long-term
continuity of access to our IP, this is an arguably even worse scenario than using Microsoft Officeformat files – as the sole vendor implementing and supporting it is Google. The format can bechanged, modified, or obsoleted at any time – with no recourse to alternative product vendors or
support channels.
Different user interface is a substantial, disruptive change.

Staff with years of experience using Office 2003's traditional menu-based interface shifting to acompletely web browser-based interface will require significant amounts of retraining.
Missing many powerful business-oriented features.

Google's office productivity web applications are adequate for basic use, but are missing a
multitude of features present in LibreOffice and Microsoft Office. This is due to Google Drive's
relative immaturity compared to the decades of development and iterative improvements made in
the alternatives, and limitations in Google's chosen technology.
Costs, terms of use, or the product can change at any time.

Google can for example at any stage:•

Increase the monthly or annual cost per customer account.

•

Change or remove features.

•

Substantially alter or retire the entire product.

Google are well known to frequently alter their products' user interface, which can cause significant
disruption to familiar, established workflows.
It is relevant to note that paid services make up a comparatively tiny amount of Google's bottom
line. Generally, over 90 percent of Google's total global revenue on any given quarter is generated
by online advertising – compared to other competing vendors for which office productivity software
is a core business. Google also have a well-established track record of retiring large numbers of
products on a frequent basis.
Ongoing subscription costs.

Google can change the monthly subscription costs at any time. Also, consider a hypothetical futurescenario involving severe financial constraints. If subscription costs cannot be met, access to theservice is cut off entirely. Compare this to traditional, non-rented software which will continue towork the same way, in perpetuity.
Depends on a Internet connection.

Generally, constant high-speed Internet connectivity is required for Google Drive, and mandatory
Page 11 of 17

for collaborative features. This will pose an issue for remote workers with intermittent or slow
Internet access.
If the company Internet connection performance is impaired, or goes down entirely, this will create
large-scale disruption with staff unable to work.
Requires a Google account.

Google Drive's tight integration with Google's other services is a two-edged sword, as the more anorganisation consolidates on Google services, the higher the degree of vendor lock-in andassociated exit cost.

Page 12 of 17

Recommendations
Replacement office software suite
LibreOffice is the recommended replacement office suite for Company-X, based on the key
considerations of:
1. Guaranteed continuity of access to our IP.
2. Costs – both direct and indirect.
3. General features and functionality, balanced against Company-X's particular use case.
LibreOffice from Collabora should be considered as the primary replacement product, due toits additional enterprise-focused layer of security and stability.
LibreOffice adoption should be aligned with a carefully documented and executed migration plan.

Adopted standard file format
ODF should be adopted as Company-X's standard file format, replacing the existing Microsoft
Office file formats.
New file format adoption should also be aligned to a migration plan.

Migration plan
A detailed migration plan is outside the scope of this document. As a summary however, thefollowing example approach could be taken:
1) Install LibreOffice in tandem with Microsoft Office on all staff computers.

Staff can become familiarised with the new software, in tandem with a welcome pack and online
introductory training provided by a local technical migration partner.6
2) Assess special use cases.

Use cases where Microsoft Office is required should be identified and ring fenced. Examples might
include external agencies which mandate Microsoft document formats. At the least, this serves to“buy time” to explore workarounds and permanent alternative approaches, without delaying the restof the migration project.
Note that the eventual outcome may be Company-X retaining limited isolated installations ofMicrosoft Office for these specialised scenarios.
3) Assess existing documents stored in proprietary Microsoft formats.

These can be sorted into a) editable documents and b) non-editable documents.
Documents needing to be in an editable format should be converted to ODF.
6

Appendix C: Migration and support partner
Page 13 of 17

Documents not needing to be edited should be converted to the open standard PDF format.
The original files can then be backed up and archived permanently.
4) Greenlight staff to use LibreOffice exclusively.

On an agreed date, LibreOffice becomes the primary office software suite. Files in Microsoft format
are opened in LibreOffice, and saved in ODF format.
Consistency issues (for example, caused by particularly complex source material) should be flagged
and documented for further investigation by IT and a migration partner.
A feedback process can be introduced to help staff feel they are engaged in the migration effort, andalso to head off any potential issues.
5) Identify a sunset date for retiring Microsoft Office.

On an agreed date, Microsoft Office 2003 is uninstalled from all staff computers, excluding any
special use cases.
IT and migration partners continue with post-adoption support and training.
The migration is now complete.

Page 14 of 17

Appendix A: office productivity suite cost comparisonsProduct

Initial Costs

Hidden Costs

Microsoft Office2013 Professional

Via Reseller-X: $46,500

Microsoft Office365

Via www.office365.com: $35,600 then
$15,600 per annum. (charity pricing!)✗✗

With Email option:$39,500 then $19,500 per
annum.

✗

The following existing costs are necessary per user:✗ $100 Windows licence per Windows upgrade
Comprising:✗ $20 Windows Svr CAL per Windows upgrade
Licenses: 200*$132.08 =$26,418 (charity✗ $20 Windows RDS CAL per Windows
pricing!)
upgradeMigration/Training: $20,000✗ $250 device support time pa✗ $50 server support time pa
Devices are getting cheaper and proliferating,✗ $20 client AntiVirus pa
the per user/seat/device count is increasing✗ $20 AntiVirus support time pa
enormously. We have 750 staff.
✗ “eee” costs✗ Hooks to push to Office 365 subscription
below

If we get just 50 more users, is there a
massive price hike? Check the licensing...
Comprising:
Office 365 Nonprofit E3
200user*$6.50*12months=15600pa
250user*$6.50*12months=19500pa
If for profit , 50 more users does pricing morethan double?
300user*$15.30*12months=$55080pa

✗
✗
✗
✗

$250 device support time pa
Subset of Office 2013 functionality and stillneeds Office 2013 suite for full functionality
according to reseller
Functionality is reduced on non-Windows
devices, only 14% of devices devices run
Windows
Same hidden costs as office 2013
We already have 250 email accounts, the max
allowed is 300 then pricing more than doubles“eee” costs
Bewildering licensing issues add enormous
costs to what is already listed here

Migration/Training: $20,000
LibreOffice(community
version)Via migration partner: $8,000
No charge.

Less mandatory “hidden” Windows related costs as per
Office 2013, so there is a potential for big savings.
✗ $250 device support time as above.

Comprising:
Licenses: no cost
Migration/Training: $8,000
LibreOffice fromCollabora

Via Collabora Productivity Reseller: $10,000 As community version above.
then US$2,000 per annum.
Licenses: 200*US$10.00=US$2,000 per
annum
Migration/Training: $8,000

Google Drive

Via Google: $24,000 per annum
Licenses: 200*$120.00=$24,000 per annum
Migration/Training: $20,000

Less mandatory “hidden” Windows related costs as per
Office 2013, so potential for savings in this respect.
Option for ChromeOS based devices with extra costsavings, some are dependant on wireless access✗ $250 device support time as above, unless
ChromeOS devices are used

pa = per annum
CAL = Client Access License
eee= Embrace Extend Extinguish7
7

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish
Page 15 of 17

Appendix B: file format compatibility and support
File Format

Microsoft Office 2013 Support

LibreOffice Support

Google Drive Support

Doc 2003

Yes

Yes.

Yes.

docx 2007/2010
(doc)

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

docx 2007/2010(OOXMLtransitional)

Yes, still used by Office 2013 as
default.

Yes.

Yes.

docx (OOXML
strict) ISO standard

Yes, not as default in any
Microsoft Office suite.

Yes.

Yes.

OpenDocument
Format (ODF)
document
compatibility

Yes.
Wordpad on the Windows
Operating Systems support it toan extent too.

Yes.

Yes – via import.

General file format
compatibility

Poor.
Best.
Perhaps business reasons dictate Compatibility for 100s.
that their office suites support
relatively few current file formats,and will not open their older
formats.

General Microsoft
file format
compatibility

Best
Good.
Good.
However: x-staff member worked Occasionally LibreOffice will Occasionally Google Docsat the University she spent 50% of have trouble displaying
will have trouble displaying
her time troubleshooting
Microsoft file formats. Yet
Microsoft file formats.
Microsoft documents corrupted
ironically it is better at
between Microsoft's own Office recovering corrupted
suites.
doc/docx files than Microsoft
After several years Microsoft start Office, many IT
to cripple the ability to open or
administrators worldwide use
work nicely with files that haveit as a tool to recover
been created by their own
corrupted Microsoft files
software.
where Microsoft Office fails.

Office 95 and earlier
document
compatibility (docword processing fileas an example)

No.
Yes.
By default cannot open
documents saved in Microsoft
Office 95 and earlier file formats.

No.

Quick opening ofMicrosoft's Officefiles from earlier
years (xls file as an
example)No.
e.g Microsoft Office security
updates introduced for Office
2003 c2010 slowed opening files
by >10x, e.g. a file that used toopen in a second or so becameover a minute to open.

Yes – via import.

Yes.

Poor.
Only a limited range.

Page 16 of 17

Appendix C: migration and support partner
Company-X can choose to work with a Country-X-based IT services consultancy to ensure asmooth and successful transition. This migration partner will provide:•assistance for designing the migration plan.

•

LibreOffice from Collabora product licenses.

•

access to customised online video training material, and a LibreOffice “welcome pack” forstaff.

•

one-on-one remote support for staff as and when needed both during and post-migration.

The objective of the welcome pack and online training materials is to help staff rapidly familiarise
themselves with the new product.
The migration partner will work closely with the Company-X Information Systems Manager andmigration Project Manager.
Company-Y is a potential migration partner:•

www.Company-Y.co

Page 17 of 17