Getting to Know Your Situation

• Who are you in this project? Options: CIO / Chief Information Officer, Registrar, VP Enrollment Management, Provost / Academic Affairs, IT Director / Head of Infrastructure, Finance / CFO, Other
• Which statement best describes what triggered this evaluation? Options: Vendor announced end-of-support, A failed registration or critical outage, Security or compliance concern, Proactive modernization effort, Budget or staffing change, Other
• What SIS product and version are you currently running?
• How long has your institution relied primarily on this system? Options: <5 years, 5–10 years, 11–15 years, 16–25 years, >25 years
• Roughly when does leadership expect a decision or migration trigger to occur? Options: Immediate (0–3 months), Near term (3–9 months), Planning window (9–18 months), Longer (>18 months), Unsure

If Your System Could Speak, What Would It Complain About?

• What would it feel like if your SIS stopped being 'good enough' overnight?
• Which day‑to‑day operational processes currently require the most manual intervention or workarounds? Options: Degree audit / program evaluation, Registration and schedule changes, Financial aid processing, Billing and student accounts, Transcripts and records, Compliance reporting, Other
• Tell us about a recent incident where a system limitation caused a visible problem (e.g., delayed registration, lost aid, incorrect transcript). What happened and who noticed first?
• How often do integrations or data feeds require manual reconciliation? Options: Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, Rarely, Unknown
• Which external systems or vendors are the most fragile integration points today? Options: LMS (Canvas/Blackboard/etc.), Financial aid processor, ERP / Billing system, Admissions CRM, State reporting systems, Identity / SSO, Other
• What does this recurring friction cost your team—in hours, delayed processes, or missed enrollments (please quantify if possible)?

Who Really Signs the Checks (and Who Will Stop the Project)?

• If we learned a key decision‑maker hadn't been consulted yet, how would that change timelines or outcomes?
• Which people or groups must sign off on the final SIS selection? Options: CIO / IT, Registrar, Provost / Academic Affairs, VP Enrollment Management, Finance / CFO, General Counsel, Board / Trustees, Other
• For each of these groups—IT, Registrar, Financial Aid, Academic Leadership—what does 'good' look like from their perspective? (Short bullets for each)
• Do you already have a documented governance model or escalation path (RACI, steering committee) for large IT projects? Options: Yes — formal RACI and steering committee, Informal but stakeholders understand roles, No formal governance, Currently being developed
• Is there a non‑negotiable external trigger we need to plan around (e.g., vendor end-of-support date)? If yes, please provide the date or window.
• Who controls the project budget and procurement decisions? Options: Central IT / CIO, Academic division, Shared model, Finance / Procurement office, Unsure

What Would a Data Disaster Actually Look Like?

• Imagine we mishandled your data migration — what is the worst realistic outcome six months after go‑live?
• Which datasets do you consider highest risk or highest consequence if migrated incorrectly? Options: Historical student records (transcripts/grades), Course history and degree audit, Financial aid awards and packaging, Billing and receivables, Accreditation and compliance data, Custom local fields and audit trails, Other
• Approximately how many student records and what data volume are in scope for migration? Options: <100k records / <50GB, 100k–500k / 50–200GB, 500k–1M / 200–500GB, >1M records / >500GB, Unsure / need assessment
• What level of post‑migration data accuracy is required for core records (please choose the closest tolerance)? Options: 99.99% or higher, 99.9%, 99%, 95–98%, Lower / TBD
• Would you accept a phased historical migration (critical history first) or require full historical fidelity at cutover? Options: Phased migration acceptable, Require full historical fidelity at cutover, Hybrid — critical first, others later, Undecided
• If rollback during cutover became necessary, what rollback window and triggers would you consider acceptable?

Imagine Registration Day With No Surprises — What Changes?

• If registration day were the single true north for this project, what's the one failure you absolutely cannot tolerate?
• Which of these outcomes should we prioritize (select up to 4)? Options: Uninterrupted registration, Migration accuracy, Integration reliability, Acceptable total cost of ownership, High user adoption and training, Reporting and compliance readiness
• Which measurable success signals would make you say the project succeeded after the first registration cycle? Options: Zero critical incidents affecting registration, Data reconciliation within agreed tolerance, All mission‑critical integrations passing smoke tests, User satisfaction above target, On‑time phased milestones met
• What is an acceptable downtime window for registration and for financial aid processing during final cutover? Options: No downtime allowed, <2 hours, 2–6 hours, 6–24 hours, >24 hours
• Are there regulatory or accreditation deadlines or audits within the first 12 months we must design around? Please describe.
• Which 3 KPIs should we track in the first 12 months to evaluate success (pick up to 3)? Options: Registration uptime, Time to resolve critical tickets, Accuracy of migrated grade history, Financial aid processing time, Billing accuracy, User adoption rate

The Hidden Work: Integrations, Customizations, and the People Who Run Them

• How many times have you rebuilt a workaround instead of fixing the system — and what does that pattern tell you about appetite for change?
• List the integrations, interfaces, and data exchange patterns that must be validated during go‑live (APIs, batch feeds, SFTP, middleware).
• Which of these integrations are mission‑critical to remain operational through cutover? Options: Financial aid system, Billing / ERP, Learning Management System, State reporting, Identity / SSO, Third‑party scheduling or room tools, Other
• How extensive are your current customizations or local extensions (estimate)? Options: Minimal (<10), Moderate (10–50), Extensive (50–200), Very extensive (>200), Unsure
• Which customizations are absolutely non‑negotiable to preserve and why?
• What is your internal capacity to support implementation tasks (number of FTEs and available hours per week)?
• Which training model has produced the best uptake for your staff historically? Options: Train‑the‑trainer, Vendor‑led onsite workshops, Online self‑paced, Blended (online + in‑person), On‑the‑job shadowing / mentoring, Other

What Would Make This a True Partnership?

• What would we have to commit to — publicly or contractually — for you to feel this is a partnership rather than a standard vendor engagement?
• What governance cadence and steering mechanism would make you feel informed and in control during implementation? Options: Weekly steering committee, Bi‑weekly project touchpoints, Monthly executive reviews, Ad‑hoc as required
• What specific acceptance criteria must be met before you will sign off on migration acceptance?
• Which commercial or legal terms are non‑negotiable for your institution (e.g., fixed milestones, penalty clauses, rollback commitments, data ownership)?
• What would make you comfortable with rollback commitments and contingency plans (examples: clear triggers, automated backups, rehearse rollback)?
• If we arranged a reference visit with a similar institution, what would you most want to observe or ask them?
• Which of the following next steps would you like from us after this discovery (select up to 3)? Options: Detailed proposal and timeline, Technical integration workshop / whiteboard, Reference calls and site visit, Proof‑of‑concept data migration, Preliminary cost estimate and TCO analysis, Draft governance and acceptance plan

Starting Where You Are — a quick reality check

• To get us moving: which SIS are you running today, and how long has it been in production?
• How was the system originally deployed at your institution? Options: On-premises mainframe, On-premises servers (x86), Hosted by vendor, Vendor cloud (SaaS), Hybrid / mixed
• Who currently owns day-to-day operational responsibility for the SIS (team or title)?
• When did you first become aware that the current platform will need replacing or major remediation? Options: Vendor end-of-support announced, Failed registration cycle, Security/Compliance issue, Performance/availability problems, Leadership initiative, Other
• How would you describe your institution’s general mood about this replacement—panicked, cautiously optimistic, overwhelmed, or something else? Options: Panicked/urgent, Cautiously optimistic, Overwhelmed, Neutral/curious, Excited for change

What Would Break If This Failed Tomorrow?

• If the SIS became unavailable during peak registration, what are the top three processes that would stop or degrade first?
• Which user populations would feel the impact most immediately (students, registrars, financial aid, faculty, advisors)? Options: Students, Registrar office staff, Financial aid staff, Faculty, Advisors, IT/Integrations team, Executive leadership
• What is your acceptable maximum downtime during registration or financial aid processing windows? Options: Zero tolerance (must be continuous), < 1 hour, 1–4 hours, 4–12 hours, >12 hours
• Tell us about a recent incident that revealed fragility—what happened, who noticed it, and what were the consequences?
• When disruptions happen, how do campus teams typically respond emotionally and operationally? Options: Calm and process-driven, Stressed but coordinated, Ad-hoc heroic fixes, Blame and finger-pointing, Other

The Hidden Threads — integrations that hold everything together

• List the systems that currently integrate with the SIS and the direction of the integration (SIS → other, other → SIS, bi-directional).
• Which of these integrations are absolutely mission-critical for term start (pick all that apply)? Options: LMS (Learning Management System), Financial Aid system, Billing/Student Accounts, Enrollment/CRM, HR/Payroll, Identity/SSO, Library systems, Reporting/analytics/data warehouse, Residence life/ housing
• How are integrations implemented today (batch ETL, real-time APIs, flat-file transfers, custom connectors, middleware)? Options: Real-time APIs, Scheduled batch ETL, Flat-file SFTP exchanges, Custom point-to-point integrations, Enterprise middleware (ESB/iPaaS), Manual exports/imports
• Who owns each integration on your side (IT, functional owners, third-party integrator)?
• Have any integrations failed during a critical window (registration, census, FA disbursement)? Describe the failure and fallout.
• What SLAs or uptime expectations do you have for integrations with external systems? Options: 24/7 real-time, Business-hours real-time, Within 1 hour, Within 4 hours, End-of-day batch acceptable, None formalized

Customization Graveyard or Competitive Advantage?

• How many customizations or home-grown modules are running in your SIS today (simple configs, moderate custom code, extensive bespoke modules)? Options: None/minimal, A few (1–5), Several (6–20), Many (21–100), Extensive (100+)
• Which custom features do you consider core to operations and non-negotiable to replace or replicate?
• Where does the custom code live and who maintains it (internal developers, retired staff, vendor, third-party consultant)? Options: Internal developers, External vendor/partner, Contractors/consultants, No active maintainer / legacy
• Do you have up-to-date documentation and test coverage for your customizations? If not, how much is undocumented? Options: Fully documented, Partially documented, Mostly undocumented, No documentation
• How do you currently estimate the cost and timeline to migrate or rebuild each customization? Options: We have formal estimates, Rough internal estimates, Depends per module, No reliable estimate
• Thinking emotionally: how attached are functional teams to current custom workflows versus open to standardized best-practices? Options: Highly attached, Somewhat attached, Open with caveats, Eager to standardize

Who’s Still Doing the Work That Nobody Talks About?

• What manual processes exist because the SIS can’t support them (examples: manual grade posting, hand-maintained rosters, offline degree audits)?
• How many FTEs or contractor hours per week are spent on manual workarounds during a typical term? Options: < 5 hours, 5–20 hours, 20–80 hours, 80–200 hours, >200 hours
• Which manual tasks spike during registration or financial aid cycles and how long do those spikes last?
• What’s the typical error rate or remediation effort tied to manual processes (e.g., percentage of records requiring rework)? Options: <1%, 1–5%, 5–15%, 15–30%, >30%
• Have you attempted to automate these workarounds before? What succeeded and what failed?
• If we could remove one manual task overnight, which would create the most relief and why?

Data at Risk — how much of your history really matters?

• Estimate the volume of records that would need to be migrated (student records, transcripts, financial aid, grades) and any high-level sizes (rows/GB/TB).
• Which historical records are legally or operationally required to retain intact (e.g., transcripts, financial aid audit trails, Title IV records)? Options: Official transcripts, Financial aid records, Academic records/grades, Enrollment history, Demographic/FERPA data, Other
• What is your acceptable threshold for data loss or transformation error during migration (zero loss, minor non-critical fields, tolerable reconciliation exceptions)? Options: Zero tolerance, Only non-critical fields tolerable, Small % exceptions tolerable, No formal threshold
• Which data formats or legacy artifacts will require special handling (mainframe COBOL files, packed binary, proprietary exports, scanned records)?
• Do you have archival systems or third-party repositories where historical data currently lives? Describe their accessibility. Options: Accessible and documented, Accessible but poorly documented, Inaccessible without specialised tools, No separate archive
• Tell us about one example where missing or corrupted historical data caused a compliance, audit, or student-service problem.

Performance, Capacity and the Support Reality Check

• What is the current hosting and infrastructure model (vendor-managed, self-hosted in datacenter, cloud provider, unsupported hardware)? Options: Vendor-managed hosting, Self-hosted datacenter, Public cloud (IaaS/PaaS), Unsupported/legacy hardware, Hybrid
• Is your current SIS vendor still providing active support, security patches, and upgrades? Options: Full active support, Limited legacy support, End-of-life/no support, Variable depending on contract
• Describe your backup, disaster recovery, and restore capabilities today—how recently were they tested? Options: Regularly tested (quarterly), Occasionally tested (annually), Planned but untested, None / unknown
• How do you currently monitor system health and who gets alerted when things go wrong? Options: Automated monitoring + alerting to IT, Ad-hoc checks by operations team, Users report issues manually, No monitoring
• Share one example of a performance or capacity issue that limited a critical business process and how long resolution took.
• What third-party support relationships (consultants, integrators, hosting partners) are part of your operational model?

If We Reimagined This — what would be non‑negotiable?

• If you could set three non-negotiable requirements for a replacement SIS, what would they be (in plain language)?
• What are your minimum acceptable migration success signals (examples: record-level accuracy target, reconciliation windows, roll-forward capability)? Options: 100% record accuracy, 99.9% critical-field accuracy, Reconciliation within 30 days, Rollback option available, Other
• What is your preferred cutover approach for registration—big bang, phased by module, phased by student population, or parallel run? Options: Big bang, Phased by module, Phased by population, Parallel run/dual operation, Undecided
• What governance or steering committee structure will make migration decisions and who should be involved?
• What would make your teams feel emotionally confident about committing to a migration plan (reference visits, pilot success, guarantees, co-managed runbooks)? Options: Reference visits, Successful pilot/proof-of-concept, Clear rollback plan, Contractual acceptance criteria, Dedicated transition team
• What are the biggest unknowns or risks you worry we might not have mentioned yet?

Countdown: Your Pre-Deployment Snapshot

• What is your target cutover window (give month/quarter and preferred days/time windows)?
• Who is the single institutional sponsor who will sign final go/no‑go decisions for cutover? Options: CIO, Provost, Registrar, VP Enrollment, CFO, Other
• Which teams will need full system access immediately after cutover? (select all that apply) Options: Registrar/Enrollment, Financial Aid, Bursar/Billing, IT/Infrastructure, Academic Departments, Advising/Counseling, HR/Payroll, Other
• How would you rate your overall readiness to begin deployment on the target date? Options: Fully ready, Largely ready with a few open items, Contingent on resolving several risks, Not ready
• List the top three open items that must be closed before we schedule execution (be specific: e.g., access to prod extracts, vendor SLA, training slots).

If Registration Breaks, What Happens Next?

• If the new system causes registration or financial aid disruptions during the first enrollment cycle, what would the immediate institutional consequences be (operational, reputational, regulatory)?
• How likely do you think a significant disruption is if we proceed with the current plan? Options: Highly likely, Somewhat likely, Possible but unlikely, Very unlikely
• Which past incident (if any) best captures the kind of failure you most fear—what happened and who felt the impact most strongly?
• How much service interruption (hours/days) would leadership consider unacceptable during a registration cycle? Options: Less than 1 hour, 1–4 hours, 4–24 hours, More than 24 hours
• How would a disruption affect your internal confidence in the project—would it pause funding, governance support, or accelerate rollback demands? Options: Pause funding, Pause governance, Trigger rollback, Cause increased oversight but continue, Other

Are Your Data and Environments Actually Deployment-Ready?

• How confident are you that the data extracts we’ve been given represent complete, validated copies of decades of student records? Options: Very confident, Moderately confident, Somewhat unsure, Not confident
• Which environments are currently available for integration and full‑scale testing (select all that apply)? Options: Dev, Test, UAT, Performance/Staging, Pre‑Prod, Other
• Do you have documented data owners and stewards for each major dataset (student record, financial aid, grades, course catalog, billing)? Options: Yes — all documented, Partially documented, No — needs assignment
• What are the approximate data volumes we must migrate (records, years of history, attachment counts) — and which datasets feel most fragile?
• Have you run sample migrations and reconciliation checks? Provide the last pass/fail result and any outstanding data quality issues.

Who Holds the Authority When Things Go Sideways?

• If integration tests fail 48 hours before cutover, who has the authority to delay go‑live and what is the decision threshold?
• Do you have an escalation matrix with 24/7 contact info for critical roles (include vendor, IT, registrar leads)? Options: Yes — fully populated, Mostly populated, Partial contacts only, No
• Who will be on call during cutover windows and what are their expected response SLAs for severity 1/2/3 incidents?
• If a major outage occurs, what internal committee or governance body will convene and who chairs it? Options: Executive Steering Committee, IT Crisis Team, Registrar Leadership, Cross‑functional Incident Board, Other
• Describe one recent decision where this governance model worked well or failed—what did you learn?

Can We Recreate Your Worst-Cases in Test?

• Which institution‑specific scenarios must pass in test for you to consider go‑live acceptable (e.g., large batch transfers, concurrent registration spikes, complex aid packaging)?
• Of those scenarios, which have historically failed or required manual workarounds in your legacy system?
• Do you have existing test scripts for these scenarios or do we need to author them together? Options: All exist and can be reused, Some exist and need updates, Most need to be authored, None exist
• How will we measure pass/fail for each scenario—who signs acceptance and what artifacts prove it?
• What load/performance targets must we meet for peak registration windows (transactions/minute, response times)?

Where Are The Hidden Dependencies?

• Which third‑party vendors, integrations, or campus systems represent single points of failure for cutover?
• For each critical integration, who is the technical owner and do we have test endpoints and SLAs in writing? Options: Yes — owners and test endpoints exist, Partial — some owners or endpoints missing, No — needs full setup
• Are there contractual or licensing expirations tied to your current SIS that will force timelines or impact rollback options? Options: Yes — contract/end‑of‑support deadlines, Possibly — under review, No
• Do any campus business processes rely on undocumented manual steps or scripts that must be recreated in the new system? Options: Many, Some, Few, None
• Please list integrations that require vendor coordination during cutover and provide vendor contact/availability windows.

Who Will Be Using the System on Day One — Really?

• When students and staff first log in after cutover, which user journeys must be flawless (e.g., registration, financial aid award viewing, grade posting)?
• What percentage of your day‑one users have completed their role‑based training by cutover? Options: >90%, 70–90%, 50–70%, <50%
• Who are the local super‑users/champions by area and are they committed to being first responders during week one?
• What support channels will be live day one (phone, chat, ticketing) and what are expected staffing levels? Options: Phone + Ticketing, Chat + Ticketing, All three, Limited hours only
• How comfortable are end users with major UI/process changes emotionally—are they excited, anxious, resistant, or a mix? Options: Excited, Cautiously optimistic, Anxious, Resistant, Mixed

If We Have To Stop, What Is Our Rollback Reality?

• If cutover must be halted mid‑window, what are the exact rollback triggers and who triggers them?
• How long can your institution operate using the rollback state before critical processes (registration, aid disbursement) are compromised? Options: <24 hours, 24–72 hours, 3–7 days, >7 days
• Do you have validated backups and a tested recovery process for the legacy system to restore to a known good state? Options: Yes — tested recently, Yes — but not recently tested, No
• What communication plan exists for students, faculty, and staff if we announce a rollback or service degradation? Options: Prewritten templates exist, Templates need creation, No plan exists
• Who is responsible for external communications (media, regulatory reporting) if an outage impacts service delivery? Options: Communications Office, Executive Sponsor, Registrar, Other

What Will Convince Leadership This Was Worth It?

• What are the top 3 measurable success signals we must show within the first 30 days to satisfy your executive sponsors?
• Which ongoing KPIs will you track to judge migration accuracy and operational stability (select all that apply)? Options: Data reconciliation rates, Registration completion success rate, Financial aid packaging accuracy, Integration uptime/errors, End‑user support volume, Other
• Who owns each KPI and how often will leadership review them post‑go‑live? Options: Project PM — weekly, Executive sponsor — monthly, Operational owners — daily, Other
• What is your acceptance window for correcting migration or integration defects before you consider remediation or compensation? Options: 7 days, 30 days, 90 days, Depends on severity
• Describe one small, visible win we could deliver in week one that would restore confidence if issues appear.

Final Signoffs, Loose Ends, and Next Steps

• Are there any unresolved legal, commercial, or acceptance items that could block final approval (e.g., rollback commitments, data residency, penalties)? Options: Yes — list below, Some — under negotiation, No
• Please list any outstanding checklist items (technical, operational, contractual) and indicate owner and due date for each.
• On a traffic‑light scale, what's your team’s current readiness status for deployment: Green/Amber/Red — and why? Options: Green — ready, Amber — concerns exist, Red — not ready
• What immediate next step would most increase your confidence right now (e.g., additional test window, vendor shadowing, extra training session)? Options: Run extra full dress rehearsal, Extend test cycle, Add vendor on‑site support, Deliver focused training, Other
• Who should we schedule a final readiness review with (name, role, preferred times) to confirm go/no‑go?

Tell Us About Your World — a quick orientation

• Which best describes your institution and the role you play in this project? Options: Community college, Regional public university, Private college/university, Research university, System office, Vendor/third party
• Who will be the primary decision-maker(s) for selecting and accepting the new SIS? Options: CIO/IT leader, Registrar, Provost/Academic leader, VP Enrollment/Admissions, Finance/Bursar representative, Other — please name
• What triggered the move away from your current SIS (select all that apply)? Options: Vendor end-of-support announcement, Failed registration cycle, Inability to integrate modern apps, Security/compliance concerns, Cost/maintenance escalation, Leadership mandate, Other — please describe
• What is your target timeline for a decision and for first go-live? Options: Decision within 3 months, Decision within 3–6 months, Decision 6–12 months, First go-live in <12 months, First go-live in 12–24 months, Unsure

Are You Comfortable With ‘Just Enough’? — uncovering accepted friction

• How often do you tolerate manual workarounds in core processes (degree audit, registration, financial aid)? Options: Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Only during peak cycles, Rarely/never
• Which manual processes are most entrenched and why are they still in place?
• How has relying on those workarounds affected staff morale, student experience, and risk exposure?
• If we left those workarounds in place after migration, what would that mean for long-term cost and reliability? Options: Acceptable for now, Increases cost modestly, Creates unacceptable risk, Will block strategic initiatives, Unsure

When Migration Has to Be Flawless — consequences and stakes

• If a migration error impacted registration or financial aid during a term, what would the real-world consequences be for students and the institution?
• Which data domains do you consider mission-critical to migrate with zero tolerance for error? Options: Academic record/transcripts, Enrollment history, Financial aid awards, Billing/accounts, Admit/student demographics, Course catalogs/schedules
• How many historical student records (approx.) and years of history will need migration? Options: <50k records / <10 years, 50k–200k / 10–20 years, 200k–1M / 20+ years, 1M+ / 20+ years, Unsure — need help estimating
• Tell us about a previous data incident (migration or otherwise): what went wrong, how long to recover, and what was learned?

Who's In The Room When It Matters? — aligning decision power and accountability

• Who currently needs to sign off on migration acceptance and go/no-go decisions? Options: CIO/IT, Registrar, Financial Aid Director, Business Office/Controller, Provost, Board/Executive leadership, Other
• How confident are you that those signatories share the same criteria for 'acceptable' cutover results? Options: Completely aligned, Mostly aligned, Some differences exist, Significant misalignment, Unsure
• Who will be the day-to-day escalation contact during cutover (name/role) and what authority will they have?
• Describe any governance bodies (steering committee, change board) that must be engaged and how frequently they will meet through deployment.

What Keeps Your Registrations Awake at Night? — protecting the registration engine

• If registration availability degrades during term start, what thresholds (minutes of downtime, transaction failures) become unacceptable? Options: Any downtime unacceptable, <30 minutes, 30–120 minutes, >2 hours acceptable temporarily, Unsure
• Which registration scenarios must be replicated and validated in our testing (e.g., mass adds, waitlist conversions, special load windows)? Options: Mass section enrollments, Cross-listed courses, Waitlist to enroll, Late add/retro enrollment, Priority registration rules, Other — specify
• How do you currently validate registration accuracy (manual checks, reconciliations, student complaints)? Options: Automated reconciliations, Manual spot checks, Post-term audits, Student-facing complaint tracking, Other
• What would successful validation of registration continuity look like to you at cutover + first term?

Financial Aid: Can It Withstand a Cutover? — regulatory pressure and timing

• How sensitive is your financial aid process to schedule slips (FAFSA windows, enrollment rosters, disbursement schedules)? Options: Extremely sensitive, Moderately sensitive, Somewhat sensitive, Not sensitive
• Which financial aid integrations or external submissions are mission-critical and have fixed deadlines? Options: Cohort/default rate reporting, NSLDS/ED submissions, Third-party servicers, State grant systems, Bank disbursement/ACH, Other — specify
• How do you currently detect and resolve FAFSA/enrollment mismatches that could impact aid disbursements?
• What level of reconciliation accuracy and timing do you require immediately post-cutover (e.g., daily reconciles within 24 hours)? Options: Daily within 24 hrs, Weekly reconciles, Post-term audits only, Other — specify

Integrations: How Fragile Is Your Campus Ecosystem? — mapping dependencies

• How many distinct integrations feed or consume student records from your SIS (estimate)? Options: <10, 10–25, 25–50, 50–100, 100+
• Which types of integration are most common on campus (choose all that apply)? Options: Real-time APIs, Scheduled batch exports/imports, Flat-file transfers (SFTP), Middleware/ESB, Manual CSV imports, Custom point-to-point
• Which integrations have historically failed most often or are least documented?
• Who owns each integration (department/third party) and how quickly can they respond during a cutover? Options: Internal dev team, ISH/IT ops, Vendor/partner, Third-party service, Not assigned/unknown

Data: How Confident Are You in What You'll Move? — truth about data quality

• How would you rate your current data quality across student records, grades, transcripts, and financials? Options: High — minimal issues, Moderate — some cleanup needed, Low — extensive cleanup required, Unknown — no assessment done
• Which specific data issues concern you most (duplicates, missing transcripts, inconsistent codes, historical grade corrections)? Options: Duplicates, Missing historical records, Inconsistent course/term codes, Unmapped transcript notes, Incorrect financial balances, Other — specify
• Do you have a data retention/archive strategy for pre-migration records that are rarely accessed but legally required? Options: Yes — defined and ready, Planned but not finalized, No strategy, Unsure
• What tolerance for migrated record discrepancies will you accept (e.g., % mismatches, allowable fields out-of-sync)? Options: 0% — zero tolerance, <0.1%, 0.1–1%, 1–5%, Depends on domain — discuss

People and Change: Will Your Team Embrace the New System?

• What emotions do staff feel about replacing the existing SIS—relief, skepticism, exhaustion, excitement, or something else? Options: Relief, Skepticism, Exhaustion, Excitement, Fear/concern, Other — describe
• Who are your likely early adopters and who are the strongest resistors? Please name roles and reasons.
• What training model has worked best historically (role-based cohorts, train-the-trainer, on-demand microlearning)? Options: Train-the-trainer, Role-based cohort sessions, Self-serve microlearning, Blended approach, Other — specify
• What adoption metrics will convince leadership the change has 'stuck' (percentage of self-service usage, error reduction, time-to-complete tasks)? Options: Self-service usage %, Task completion time reduction, Support tickets reduction, Training completion rates, Student satisfaction scores, Other — specify

Failure Modes & Contingencies: Do You Have a Real Plan B?

• If cutover shows critical failures, how willing are you to pause and roll back versus continue with mitigations? Options: Stop and roll back immediately, Pause and fix in place, Proceed with mitigations and continue, Undecided — need guidance
• What rollback criteria and measurable thresholds should trigger a reversal to the legacy system?
• Describe your contingency resources (staffing surge, vendor support hours, emergency contacts) available during cutover.
• What maximum downtime window is tolerable during cutover for core services (registration, billing, financial aid)? Options: None — zero downtime, <1 hour, 1–4 hours, 4–12 hours, >12 hours

Test Coverage: How Deep Will Acceptance Testing Go?

• Which acceptance tests are non-negotiable for migration sign-off (select up to 5)? Options: Record-level migration accuracy, End-to-end registration workflows, Financial aid award and disbursement workflows, Integration health (real-time & batch), Performance under peak load, User acceptance by role
• How will test data represent real-world edge cases (e.g., historical grade changes, retroactive enrollments, split funding sources)?
• Who will execute acceptance tests and who has authority to accept/reject each test case?
• What reporting format and cadence do stakeholders prefer during validation (daily dashboard, exception lists, executive brief)? Options: Daily dashboard, Exception/error lists, Twice-daily operational brief, Weekly executive summary, Ad-hoc as issues arise

What ‘Good’ Looks Like — success signals and measurable outcomes

• If we reached the end of the first term on the new SIS and leadership asked 'Did we succeed?', what three measurable outcomes would you want to point to?
• Which KPIs will you use to evaluate TCO and operational improvement in year one? Options: Reduction in support tickets, Staff time saved on core tasks, System uptime/availability, Integration failure rates, Cost of customizations, Other — specify
• How will student-facing outcomes be measured (registration success, self-service adoption, student support requests)?
• Who will own the post-go-live lessons learned and enhancement backlog? Options: Project PMO, Registrar office, IT/SIS team, Vendor partnership team, Shared governance

Let’s Make a Real Plan — next steps and immediate risks to address

• What top three risks would you like us to mitigate first (data quality, integration mapping, staffing, regulatory deadlines, other)? Options: Data quality/mapping, Integration readiness, Staffing/skill gaps, Regulatory deadlines, Rollback/contingency planning, Other — specify
• What is the best way for our teams to work together in the coming 30 days (weekly checkpoints, joint workshops, dedicated war room)? Options: Weekly checkpoints, Joint workshops, Dedicated daily war room, As-needed escalation, Other — specify
• Who should we schedule for a technical discovery workshop (roles and approximate availability over the next 2 weeks)?
• Is there any additional context, documents, or recent incidents you want us to review before kickoff?