AWS Migration Partner Checklist: 15 Questions to Ask Before You Sign the Contract
Before you sign with an AWS migration partner, ask 15 questions that cover comparable experience, the discovery process, the migration strategy for each workload, target architecture, downtime, dependencies, security, cost assumptions, contract scope and exit terms, testing, rollback, the named delivery team, post-migration operations and how success will be measured. The answers show whether a partner can execute, not just sell.
By the time a contract is on the table, most organizations have already shortlisted providers. The risk at this stage is different. Almost every AWS migration company promises experienced engineers and successful migrations, so the difference between a controlled migration and an expensive one usually sits in the details of the statement of work: what is in scope, what is assumed, who does the work, what happens when something goes wrong and who owns the environment afterwards.
This AWS migration partner checklist is written for that contract stage. It gives CIOs, CTOs, IT managers, infrastructure leads, and procurement teams 15 questions to ask every provider, the evidence to request for each answer, and the contract terms that protect the organization once the work begins. If you are still building a shortlist, start with our guide to choosing the right AWS partner or our list of AWS partners in India for cloud migration, then return here before you sign.
What Does an AWS Migration Partner Actually Deliver?
An AWS migration partner is a consulting or managed services provider that moves applications, databases, infrastructure and data from on-premises environments or another cloud into Amazon Web Services. A full engagement typically covers discovery, migration planning, target architecture, workload migration, testing, cutover and, in many cases, ongoing AWS operations after go-live.
The scope varies widely between providers. One partner may focus on rehosting servers onto Amazon EC2, while another concentrates on database migration, application modernization, DevOps or managed AWS operations. That variation is why the contract matters: two proposals with similar prices can describe very different amounts of work.
An AWS migration is also more than copying servers into the cloud. A production environment contains applications, databases, storage, identity platforms, network connections, APIs, third-party integrations, backup systems, monitoring tools and licensing dependencies that all need to work together after the move. The questions below are designed to test whether a partner has accounted for all of it.
Throughout this checklist, the AWS Well-Architected Framework is a useful reference. It reviews workloads against six pillars, namely operational excellence, security, reliability, performance efficiency, cost optimization and sustainability, which keeps the evaluation focused on how the environment will run long after migration rather than on the migration date alone.
The 15 Questions to Ask Before Signing an AWS Migration Contract
1. What AWS migration experience do you have with workloads like ours?
Ask for experience that matches your environment, not general AWS experience. A credible partner should describe comparable migrations covering the source environment, target architecture, migration strategy, dependencies, downtime window, testing approach and cutover, without sharing confidential customer details. A list of logos is not evidence of capability.
Migrating a brochure website is very different from migrating an ERP system, a Microsoft SQL Server estate, an Oracle database, a customer-facing SaaS platform or a regulated financial application. Ask the partner to walk through technical decisions on similar projects, including what went wrong and how you handled it.
| Evaluation Area | Question to Ask | Evidence to Request |
|---|---|---|
| AWS experience | How many comparable migrations have you completed? | Relevant project history |
| Workload experience | Have you migrated similar applications or databases? | Case studies or references |
| Scale | What workload sizes have you handled? | Architecture examples |
| Complexity | How were dependencies managed? | Discovery methodology |
| Results | What changed after migration? | Measurable outcomes |
A partner that has only rehosted web servers may still be the wrong fit for a database-heavy or integration-heavy estate, however strong its general AWS credentials are.
2. What AWS partner status, certifications and specializations do you hold?
While AWS credentials may be helpful evidence, it should be considered in conjunction with the delivery experience. Have the provider provide a description of its current AWS Partner Network status, all relevant AWS competencies and AWS validated capabilities, and certifications of the engineers who will be working on your project.
Company credentials differ from personal skills. A company might have certified professionals who never work on your migration, and an experienced engineer might have a solid migration track record without certification as the primary evidence. Question who are the named architects, engineers, database experts, security experts and project managers. Pay special attention to the project managers’ credentials.
3. How will you assess our current environment before recommending a strategy?
Discovery is the first step in a serious AWS migration. The partner should be knowledgeable about your servers, applications, databases, storage, network design, identity systems, integrations, usage, business criticality, licensing, security, recovery objectives and operating processes, before making a recommendation for an architecture.
AWS Prescriptive Guidance assumes that collecting application portfolio data, identifying application interdependencies, and analyzing application technical complexity is the groundwork for migration planning and workload grouping within migration waves. The assessment should answer practical questions: What workloads exist, which are business critical, what depends on what, which systems need to move together, what can be modernized, and what can be retired.
The goal is to generate a roadmap to migration that is actionable rather than a one-size-fits-all declaration that the organisation is “cloud ready”. If a provider suggests an architecture objective before there is any real discovery, then it’s making assumptions, and that’s where budgets often go down the toilet.
4. Which migration strategy will you use for each workload, and why?
AWS outlines seven different strategies they call the 7 Rs: retire, retain, rehost, relocate, repurchase, replatform and refactor or re-architect. A viable partner assigns a strategy to each workload, taking business value, technical complexity, dependability, risk and cost into consideration, and provides a justification for each strategy.
Rehosting moves a workload with minimal change. Replatforming incorporates additional changes that leverage managed cloud service features, such as converting a self-managed database to a managed database service. Refactoring requires more architectural changes. No need to retire workloads that are not providing value, infrastructure remains at its current location with little application change, and infrastructure changes to a different commercial product.
What is the rationale for selecting each strategy? For a partner, it is not a good idea to suggest rehost as a quick solution and refactor as a cool solution. AWS guidance for large migrations states that lots of refactoring during the migration can introduce complexity, so many organizations rehost or replatform their workloads first and gradually modernise selected workloads when they’re stable.
For instance, it could move several well-established internal applications to the cloud, replatform its database, and schedule a customer-facing application for modernization at a later date and remove two legacy systems entirely. In general, that workload-by-workload plan is going to be more manageable than a one-size-fits-all plan.
5. What will our AWS target architecture look like?
A migration proposal should describe the target environment, not list AWS services. Request architecture including AWS accounts, networking, compute, storage, databases, identity and access management, security controls, backup, monitoring / logging, disaster recovery, connectivity and operating responsibilities.
If some systems will stay on-premises during a phased move, the architecture should also show how AWS workloads will communicate with them, which is central to any hybrid cloud design. The design should be clear enough for technical teams to validate and for executives to understand its implications for security, reliability, cost and operations.
Discuss the architecture of the proposed solution with the 6 “Well-Architected” pillars. The application won’t only run in AWS; is it a suitable production environment?
6. How will you minimize downtime during migration?
Have the partner explain the expected downtime for each production workload and the technical solution they will use. This can be achieved by data replication, staged migration, parallel environments, database replication, or controlled DNS changes or blue-green cutover, depending on the workload. “Minimal downtime” isn’t an answer without specifying the hours and the method.
Solutions vary by application. A system scheduled for weekend use might survive a reporting tool, but a customer-facing or production-critical system can’t afford to stop. The contract should differentiate between planned downtime, testing windows, maintenance windows and unplanned interruption; and the migration schedule should not coincide with business-critical times like month end close or peak production cycle etc.
7. How will you identify and manage application dependencies?
One of the most frequent causes of migrations going over budget and over time is hidden dependencies. An application might depend on a database, file server, directory service, API, DNS, licensing server, a backup platform, reporting tools or any other third-party system not identified in the planning phase, and removing a component without removing its dependencies can cause production to fail.
Inquire about the partner’s approach to dependency discovery: agent-based discovery, network flow, reviewing configurations and/or interviews with stakeholders. After that, ask about migration waves: which parts will move, which will remain on-premises for a while, and how they will communicate during the migration.
8. How will you protect our data and AWS environment during migration?
Build security into the migration architecture rather than checking it only before go-live. Ask how the partner will handle identity and access management, privileged access, network segmentation, encryption, logging, monitoring, vulnerability management, backup, secrets management and incident response for the new environment. Our cloud security services page outlines the controls that typically apply.
Repeat the questions asked about partner’s access. You should know which engineers are being granted administrative rights, what those rights are, how they’re monitored, how temporary access is controlled, and how it is removed at the end of the project.
The contract should specify the security requirements. If the partner implements AWS security controls but your internal team will continue to monitor them, both teams need to know exactly where the handoff occurs. If there are compliance requirements, then the migration plan should list them and indicate how the target architecture meets each requirement.
9. How will you estimate and control AWS costs?
An AWS migration has two cost layers that you should estimate separately. One-time project costs cover discovery, architecture, engineering, testing, remediation, documentation, project management and cutover. Recurring AWS costs cover compute, storage, databases, networking, data transfer, backup, monitoring, security services, licensing, support and managed services.
Ask for the assumptions behind the estimate. If the cost model assumes a specific EC2 instance type, storage volume, database configuration, utilization level, traffic volume or backup retention period, those assumptions should be documented and tested against your real usage data, including seasonal peaks and expected growth.
| AWS Cost Area | What to Evaluate | Why It Matters |
|---|---|---|
| Compute | Instance or service sizing | Direct recurring expense |
| Storage | Capacity and performance | Can grow continuously |
| Database | Engine and utilization | Can materially affect costs |
| Network | Connectivity and data transfer | Architecture-dependent expense |
| Backup | Retention and storage | Required for recovery |
| Monitoring | Logs and metrics | Operational requirement |
| Security | Security services and tooling | Required for protection |
| Support | AWS and managed support | Affects total operating cost |
An oversized environment creates unnecessary recurring spend, while aggressive cost cutting can create performance or availability problems. A credible partner explains how it balances the two, and avoids promising a fixed percentage of savings without evidence. For practical post-go-live techniques, see our guide on reducing AWS bills without affecting performance; for partner fee structures, see our breakdown of AWS partner costs.
10. What exactly is included in the contract, and what are the exit terms?
Discovery, assessment, architecture, migration, testing, remediation, cutover, rollback, documentation, training, optimization and post-migration support should be included in the contract and documented in writing. It should also include assumptions, exclusions, dependencies and the change-control process for work that is found during the project.
The most common gap is application remediation. Suppose you have a proposal that includes 40 servers and that does not include remediation. If 5 legacy apps must be upgraded to the OS or made compatible before running on AWS, additional fees will be incurred during implementation unless the contract specifies who is responsible, how, when, and what the cost is to perform this task. Procurement should also ensure the technical assumptions in the proposal align with the commercial assumptions, as a low migration fee may mask a higher total cost if significant work is not included in the scope.
Exit terms and ownership
Exiting clauses determine the level of dependency with the partner at the end of the project. Ensure AWS accounts are established under your organization, and you are the root user and bill owner, before you sign. Ensure infrastructure-as-code templates, scripts, architecture diagrams and runbooks are yours to keep, all credentials and access keys are handed over and swapped out at the end of the engagement, and the notice period, transition assistance and data return obligations are specified if you end any ongoing support agreement.
The basic question to ask when considering the practical test is whether the team (or other provider) could run the environment if your partner left today. If it’s no, then there is more work to do on the contract.
11. What testing process will you use before production cutover?
Perform tests to ensure not only that servers start, but that the business runs in AWS. Validate application functionality, database integrity, integrations, authentication, network connectivity, performance, backup and restore, monitoring, security controls, and real business workflows people rely on with the partner.
Acceptance criteria must be documented and agreed prior to production cutover and business-critical systems should feature user acceptance testing with the daily users of the system. Being able to log-in is not successful ERP migration. All inventory transactions, approvals, reports, integrations and financial processes have to yield accurate results.
12. What is the rollback plan if the migration does not go as expected?
For every production cutover, a rollback plan should be established with decision criteria, decision makers, technical steps to be taken, a communication plan and a time frame for decision. “If necessary, we can roll back” is NOT a plan. What would happen if validation fails, performance is too poor, data synchronization fails, or an integration fails to work following cutover?
The partner needs to be able to explain how data consistency is ensured during the cutover window for workloads that require on-prem to AWS database replication, and how the organization will return to the original environment should it not be able to go-live. The rollback should be “dry run” wherever possible, rather than being a paper exercise.
13. Who will actually perform the migration?
Often the people who propose the idea aren’t the ones who are actually doing the work. Request the suggested delivery team by role – Architecture, Networking, Security, Application, DevOps, Project Management, Testing and Cutover.
Inquire if the provider will use their staff, contractors, subcontractors or a combination of the three to deliver the service, and who will have the authority to make technical decisions in the event of an incident, and who will be available during critical cutover windows. Consider naming individuals in the contract and having a plan for their replacement. The provider’s size matters less than whether the assigned team has the relevant experience.
14. What happens after the AWS migration is complete?
Migration ends one phase and cloud operations begin another. Once workloads run in AWS, someone still has to handle monitoring, patching, backup testing, security monitoring, incident response, performance tuning, cost management and architecture improvements. Ask whether the partner offers post-migration managed services, what they cover and, most importantly, who owns each responsibility.
| Area | During Migration | After Migration |
|---|---|---|
| Infrastructure | Build and migrate | Monitor and maintain |
| Security | Configure controls | Monitor and remediate |
| Backup | Establish strategy | Maintain and test |
| Cost | Estimate | Continuously optimize |
| Performance | Validate | Monitor and tune |
| Incidents | Migration support | Operational response |
| Documentation | Create baseline | Keep updated |
| Access | Configure permissions | Govern and review |
Cost ownership deserves special attention because engineering decisions drive cloud spend. Compute sizing, storage design, data transfer, logging volume, backup retention and environment scheduling all affect the monthly bill, which is why the FinOps approach brings engineering, finance and business teams together around cloud economics. Ask how the partner will monitor and right-size costs after go-live.
If your team will operate AWS internally, include knowledge transfer and documentation in your answer. Architecture diagrams, network documentation, workload inventories, security configurations, backup and recovery procedures, monitoring setup and operational runbooks should be delivered and walked through, and internal staff should be involved during the project rather than receiving documents only at the end. If you plan to outsource operations, compare options in our guide to AWS managed services providers in India.
15. How will we measure whether the migration was successful?
AWS migration success should be measured against objectives agreed before work begins, such as application availability, performance, recovery capability, security posture, monthly cloud spend, reduced data center dependency and operational effort. Finishing the migration is only one metric, and agreeing on the rest in advance prevents the definition of success from shifting after the project ends.
A useful executive question is: what measurable business and technical outcomes will this migration achieve, and how will we verify them? The partner should be able to connect each technical decision to an objective such as better disaster recovery, scalability, cost visibility or readiness for later modernization.
The PROVE Framework for Evaluating AWS Migration Partners
The PROVE framework groups the 15 questions into five areas: Proven capability, Readiness assessment, Operating model after migration, Value and economics, and Execution plan. Scoring every provider against the same five areas, using documented evidence rather than sales claims, makes proposals directly comparable and exposes gaps before you sign the contract.
Proven capability covers comparable migrations, credentials and the named delivery team (questions 1, 2 and 13). Readiness assessment covers discovery, dependency mapping and workload strategy (questions 3, 4 and 7). Operating model covers post-migration ownership, documentation and security operations (questions 8 and 14). Value and economics covers cost assumptions, contract scope and exit terms (questions 9 and 10). Execution plan covers architecture, downtime, testing, rollback and success metrics (questions 5, 6, 11, 12 and 15).
The principle behind it is that an AWS migration partner should be judged on the full journey from current-state discovery to measurable post-migration outcomes, not on AWS certifications, team size or the lowest quotation.
How to Compare AWS Migration Partners Side by Side
When several providers are in contention, ask the same questions and require the same evidence from each, and record what each provides.
| Evaluation Dimension | Provider A | Provider B | Provider C |
|---|---|---|---|
| Comparable AWS experience | Review | Review | Review |
| Discovery methodology | Review | Review | Review |
| Application dependency analysis | Review | Review | Review |
| Target architecture | Review | Review | Review |
| Security approach | Review | Review | Review |
| Migration methodology | Review | Review | Review |
| Downtime strategy | Review | Review | Review |
| Cost transparency | Review | Review | Review |
| Testing methodology | Review | Review | Review |
| Rollback planning | Review | Review | Review |
| Post-migration support | Review | Review | Review |
| Documentation | Review | Review | Review |
| Success metrics | Review | Review | Review |
The grid deliberately avoids an arbitrary numeric score. Each provider is assessed on documented evidence from technical workshops, architecture reviews, references, proposals and draft contract terms.
AWS Partner Evaluation Stages: What Each Stage Should Produce
A structured evaluation moves through stages, and each stage should leave you with something concrete. If a stage produces nothing you can review, that signals how the migration itself will be run.
| Evaluation Stage | What You Should Receive | What It Reveals |
|---|---|---|
| First conversation | Clarifying questions about your environment and goals | Whether the partner listens before pitching |
| Discovery workshop | Draft workload inventory and known dependencies | Depth of technical understanding |
| Assessment | Migration strategy per workload and wave plan | Planning discipline |
| Proposal | Scope, assumptions, exclusions and cost model | Commercial transparency |
| Contract | SLAs, change control, ownership and exit terms | Accountability |
| Migration and handover | Test evidence, documentation and runbooks | Delivery effectiveness |
Proposal Quality Comparison: How to Read What You Receive
Not every proposal carries the same level of risk. The more a proposal rests on documented discovery and stated assumptions, the fewer surprises appear during delivery.
| Proposal Type | What It Typically Contains | Risk Level |
|---|---|---|
| Server-count quote | Price per server with little discovery | High |
| Fixed-price rehost offer | Lift-and-shift scope, remediation often excluded | Medium to high |
| Assessment-first proposal | Paid discovery followed by a priced migration plan | Lower |
| Wave-based migration plan | Workload strategies, waves, assumptions and exclusions | Lower |
| Migration plus managed operations | Migration scope with defined post-go-live ownership | Lower, if SLAs are clear |
| Open-ended time and materials | Effort estimate without fixed deliverables | Variable |
These categories are directional. The right choice depends on how well your environment is already documented, your risk tolerance and your internal capacity to manage the project.
AWS Partner vs In-House Team: Engagement Models Compared
The decision is rarely partner or no partner. Most organizations choose between several engagement models, and the right one depends on internal skills, timelines and who will run the environment afterwards. When comparing total cost of ownership, include internal staff time, hiring or training costs and the cost of delays, not only the partner’s fee.
| Engagement Model | Primary Strength | Important Measurement |
|---|---|---|
| In-house team only | Full internal control and knowledge retention | Skills coverage and delivery time |
| Advisory partner with in-house delivery | Expert design with internal execution | Quality of design and handover |
| Fixed-scope migration partner | Predictable project cost | Exclusions and change requests |
| Time-and-materials partner | Flexibility for unclear scope | Cost per delivered workload |
| Migration plus managed services | Single accountable owner across phases | SLA performance after go-live |
| Phased, assessment-first engagement | Lower risk on complex estates | Accuracy of the assessment plan |
A lower partner fee is not automatically better value, and a higher fee can be justified when it covers discovery, remediation and post-migration ownership that would otherwise fall on your team.
Example Scenario: Applying the Checklist to a Manufacturing ERP Migration
Consider an illustrative manufacturer running its ERP platform in an on-premises data center. The ERP depends on application servers, a SQL Server database, file storage, Active Directory, backup systems, reporting services and integrations with inventory and production systems.
A weak proposal recommends moving the application server to Amazon EC2 and quotes per server. A proposal that passes this checklist starts with discovery (question 3) and maps the dependency chain (question 7). It concludes that the ERP application and database must move in the same wave, while some production integrations stay on-premises temporarily, which means the target architecture (question 5) must include secure connectivity between AWS and the plant network.
The stronger proposal then defines a cutover window outside the production peak (question 6), a test plan that checks inventory transactions, approvals and financial reports rather than log-ins alone (question 11), and a rollback point if data validation fails (question 12). It also states who will monitor, patch and back up the environment after go-live (question 14).
The difference between the two proposals is not the AWS services they mention. It is whether the migration is treated as an architecture and business-continuity project or as server relocation. Organizations with similar operational estates can see related planning considerations in our article on cloud infrastructure for logistics companies.
Why a Phased AWS Migration Usually Reduces Risk
A phased migration involves migrating workloads in waves, beginning with less critical systems to test connectivity, security, monitoring, backups and operating processes before critical ones are moved. Early waves reveal unanticipated dependencies and incorrect assumptions at relatively low cost, and teams learn from them as they move to higher-impact waves later.
A phased approach also keeps migration separate from modernization. To modernize targeted applications, many organizations first build a sustainable AWS foundation by rehosting or replatforming applications to AWS, then use real usage data in AWS to modernize selected applications. This approach follows AWS recommendations to keep the code intact during a large migration. Depending on the business’s specific needs, application architecture, available skills, risk appetite, and timeframe, the right balance may vary: ask each partner to explain their proposed wave plan and modernization sequence.
Ownership Decides Whether the Migration Holds Up
Architecture is just one component of a successful migration. The environment’s stability after the partner’s departure is determined by governance, documentation, training, communication and clear operational ownership.
If you’re about to sign, check that the contract resolves the following six ownership questions: Who owns the AWS accounts? Who will operate the workloads? Who will respond to incidents? Who will approve architectural changes? Who will manage privileged access? Who will monitor cloud spend? The key is that these areas must be technically sound but have someone specifically responsible for them, or it may never work operationally; otherwise, a lower migration fee may be worth more than continuity of ownership.
Which Questions Matter Most to Each Stakeholder?
Each stakeholder should look at the entire checklist; each has a different piece of the answer.
Questions 4, 5, and 15 are the ones CIOs/CTOs most commonly need to consider as they begin tying the migration strategy and target architecture to measurable outcomes like availability, disaster recovery, scalability, and cost visibility. Questions 3, 6, 7, 11, 12, and 14 (discovery, dependencies, cutover, testing, rollback, and operations handoff) should be owned by the IT manager, addressed during the project (not at handoff), and involve their own engineers.
Procurement teams should be the lead teams on questions 9, 10, and 13, ensuring the migration fee, AWS consumption, licensing, third-party services, managed services, optional work, and change requests are broken down, and exit terms are clearly defined. Business owners need to pay attention to questions 6 and 11: How does migration timing fit with business cycles, and how will critical processes be validated before go-live?
Final AWS Migration Partner Checklist
Before signing an AWS migration contract, each shortlisted provider must respond to all 15 questions with evidence. They should have similar AWS experience, list the personnel involved in the work, perform a meaningful current state assessment, assign a rationale to each workload, present a target architecture, establish downtime per workload, list dependencies, start designing security up front, document cost assumptions, define scope/exit terms, agree acceptance tests, plan rollback, and clarify post-migration ownership and agree on metrics to meet upon successful completion.
The objective is not to identify the service provider offering the largest number of AWS services. The challenge is to discover which one will get your organization from where it is today to a secure, reliable and cost-conscious AWS environment that your team can operate with confidence.
Frequently Asked Questions About Choosing an AWS Migration Partner
What questions should I ask an AWS migration partner before signing a contract?
Discuss similar migration experience, the named team to be involved in the delivery, discovery process, migration strategy for each workload, target architecture, downtime required per workload, dependency mapping, security responsibilities, cost assumptions, scope and exclusions of the contract, exit terms, testing and acceptance criteria, rollback, post-migration ownership, and how success will be measured.
Should we use an AWS migration partner or an in-house team?
It’s based on internal expertise, timelines and who will be running AWS after that. An in-house team retains knowledge within the organization but may lack migration experience, whereas a partner brings proven methods and capacity. There are many organisations that have a blended model, where a partner is in charge of design and complex waves, then there is a handover to the internal team who participate and are responsible for their own operations.
What should an AWS migration contract include?
It should include scope, deliverables, responsibility, assumptions, exclusions, timelines, acceptance criteria, security responsibilities, migration windows, roll back conditions, change control, documentation, support and commercial terms. It should also clarify ownership of AWS accounts, code and documentation and what transition support is available in the case of a break in the relationship.
What are the 7 Rs of AWS migration?
The 7 Rs are retiring, retaining, re-hosting, relocating, re-purchasing, re-platforming and re-factoring/re-architecting. They outline the primary approaches to managing a workload during a move to AWS and choose one approach for each workload based on business value, dependencies, complexity, risk and cost—not all approaches to everything.
What is the difference between an AWS migration partner and an AWS managed services provider?
A migration partner is responsible for moving the workloads to AWS, while a managed services provider is responsible for running the environment after the move, performing monitoring, patching, backup, security operations and cost management. A few providers offer both. If one company handles both phases, the contract should specify SLAs and asset ownership for each phase individually.
How do I avoid hidden costs in an AWS migration?
Request the assumptions that underlie the project fee and the AWS estimate, verify if application remediation is part of the estimate, and review the change-control process, as well as costs such as data transfer, backup, monitoring, licensing and support, which are typically included in the cost model. Then compare your estimate with your real utilization figures.
Talk to Our Team Before You Sign
In most migration issues, problems begin before the first server moves: a scope that lacked dependencies, an estimate based on assumptions, or a contract that didn’t specify who was responsible for the environment after the move. Cloud Secure Group is an embedded partner when moving to AWS and we are part of your existing escalation and reporting structure and will remain accountable for the environment after go-live instead of turning it over at cutover.
If you are comparing proposals now, we can review your current environment, map application dependencies, build a wave-based migration plan with documented cost assumptions, and define post-migration ownership before you commit. Learn more about our cloud migration services and AWS migration services, or read our complete guide to cloud migration services.
Schedule a discussion with our team to review your AWS migration plan, or explore our support model for running AWS after go-live.
Share on socials:
