Inspect a representative sample
Choose accounts and opportunities with missing owners, duplicate names, closed records and unusual stage histories. Compare source values with the proposed destination fields. Record what is excluded and why.
01 / An illustrative case record
One opportunity, two versions of the truth.
Consider an opportunity marked as qualified in one export and early stage in another. Its account appears twice, and the owner field is blank on one copy. The issue is not just where to put the data. It is which version the team will trust.
Before / the unresolved handoff
A field-by-field copy
A migration plan maps both stage values into the new CRM without explaining which record wins. Sales operations inherits duplicate accounts and a pipeline report with inconsistent stage meanings.
After / a decision-led handoff
A documented interpretation
The team agrees on a source for each field, a duplicate review rule, and a definition for qualified. A sample record is checked against those decisions before the broader migration is approved.
02 / Workflow critique
Test the meaning before testing the move.
When evaluating CRM software or external implementation help, bring real examples of the decisions your team struggles to make. Ask how the proposed approach will expose exceptions, not just transfer fields.
Challenge the matching rules
Ask who decides whether similar accounts are duplicates and what happens when a match is uncertain. Test a few ambiguous records. Keep a review queue rather than assuming every match should be merged automatically.
Rebuild a pipeline view
Use the sample to check whether each opportunity lands in the intended stage. Compare the resulting view with the agreed stage definitions and investigate discrepancies before signing off on the mapping.
Decision to make
Agree in advance who can approve a mapping change, who resolves exceptions and what evidence is needed for migration sign-off. Include sales leaders where stage definitions affect reporting.
03 / Annotated scope index
Ask for artifacts your team can use.
A useful consulting scope names the decisions, deliverables and reviewers. Discuss these items with prospective partners and adapt them to the systems and data you actually have.
Data inventory and field map
List source objects, destination fields, transformations and exclusions. Identify the owner of each unresolved mapping decision.
Pipeline definition sheet
Document stage entry and exit criteria, required information and the person responsible for approving changes. Use examples where judgment is likely to differ.
Test and exception log
Describe the sample, expected results, actual results and open issues. Agree on how exceptions are resolved and which issues must be closed before migration.
Handoff and ownership plan
Clarify who maintains the mapping and definitions after implementation, where the documentation lives and how the team will review future changes.
A useful next conversation
Start with the decisions that are still disputed.
Bring a sample export, your current stage definitions and a short list of known data problems to an implementation scoping discussion. Ask prospective consultants to explain what they would test and what they would leave behind for your team.
Review the scope index