Transitioning from Dynamics GP to Business Central: Key Considerations

Navigating your ERP Future

As organizations using Microsoft Dynamics GP face the reality of its planned end-of-life and reduced mainstream support, the need to evaluate their Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) future has become urgent. Continuing to operate on an unsupported platform poses significant risks, including exposure to security vulnerabilities and a lack of critical updates.

For many, the logical next step is Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central (D365 BC), a modern, cloud-native ERP solution.

This article is penned from the perspective of an expert who has guided numerous clients through this pivotal transition. In the past 2.5 years alone, I have completed over 25 successful Dynamics GP to Business Central migrations, many of which are now referenceable success stories.

The transition, however, requires careful planning and a clear understanding of the differences between the two platforms.

A critical misconception: BC is not “GP in the Cloud”

A common misunderstanding, sometimes reinforced by marketing materials, is that Business Central is simply a cloud version of Dynamics GP. This is fundamentally incorrect. Business Central is built on a completely different technological architecture (specifically the C/AL and AL programming languages versus GP’s Dexterity) and operates with distinct business logic.

This fundamental difference is also why Business Central can benefit from two major feature updates per year from Microsoft. This continuous improvement cycle rapidly addresses user needs. For instance, features like Statistical Accounts, initially absent in BC, were quickly added based on user feedback to align more closely with the advanced reporting needs familiar to GP users.

Key architectural and feature differences to address

As you plan your transition, be aware of the core differences that will impact your processes:

1. Fundamental accounting and sub-ledger structure

• Dimensional vs. Segmented Chart of Accounts: This is perhaps the most significant architectural difference.
  • Dynamics GP utilizes account segments, which can result in a complex and rigid General Ledger (GL) structure with numerous permutations.
  • Business Central utilizes a dimensional accounting model. This allows for a streamlined Chart of Accounts combined with an unlimited number of analytical dimensions (e.g., Department, Project, Region). This is an ideal opportunity to reimagine and optimize your entire Chart of Accounts for superior analytical capabilities.
• Transaction Grouping (Batches): While Batches are a primary organizational component across nearly all modules in Dynamics GP, they are used more selectively in Business Central. BC focuses on real-time posting with robust audit trails, meaning “grouping of transactions” (batches) is only available in a limited number of functional windows.

2. Missing core modules: Leveraging third-party solutions

Business Central is designed to be highly extensible, relying on Microsoft AppSource partners for specific vertical or deep-feature solutions. Be prepared to implement third-party solutions for the following:

• Fund Accounting: BC’s base environment does not natively support the requirements of fund accounting. We highly recommend adopting a dedicated third-party AppSource solution built for this purpose, rather than attempting a complex, costly, and difficult-to-maintain customization.
• Payroll: Business Central does not contain a native payroll module. Fortunately, there are several robust, integrated third-party payroll vendors (often with regional expertise) that we have successfully implemented.
• Field Service: Dedicated Field Service functionality is not included in the standard BC application and requires a suitable third-party extension.

3. Licensing model shift

Dynamics GP uses a concurrent user licensing model (a set number of users can be logged in at the same time). Business Central uses a modern named user licensing model, where each active user requires a dedicated license. This shift is essential for budgeting and user management planning.

Data migration and cleansing: the clean slate approach

Microsoft provides tools to migrate GP data to Business Central. While these tools are valuable, a strategic approach is necessary:

• Historical Data Strategy: It is often best practice to migrate historical GP data into a separate, non-production “Historical Company” within Business Central. This keeps your new production company clean, fast, and optimized.
• Data Integrity: You are likely aware that legacy GP systems can accumulate messy data, where sub-ledgers may not perfectly reconcile with GL control accounts. The migration is the perfect time to enforce a clean slate policy. Do not migrate uncleaned data. Re-design and import only clean, verified master records for:
  • Chart of Accounts (Dimensional)
  • Vendors
  • Customers
  • Items
• Accessing Legacy Data: For seamless access to historical data outside of the new production environment, consider tools like POPDOCS by eOne Solutions. These products can securely store your GP data in an Azure Data Lake and allow users to query it, either standalone or embedded within the BC interface.

User experience and reporting improvements

• Modern User Interface (UI): Business Central boasts an intuitive, modern, web-based user interface. While a new system always requires a learning curve, users typically find the BC interface easy to use and navigate once they become familiar with the concept of the Role Center.
• Process Efficiency: Take this opportunity to map out legacy processes and pain points in GP. BC’s modern workflow engine and native integration capabilities allow for significant improvements and efficiencies across all departments.
• Financial Reporting (Management Reporter vs. BC): Dynamics GP users accustomed to the flexibility of Management Reporter may find BC’s standard account schedules and financial reports less versatile for highly complex designs. For advanced, highly formatted financial reporting, you should factor in the cost and effort of implementing an external reporting tool, such as Power BI.

Database access and reporting

GP users are accustomed to direct access to the SQL Server database for custom reports (e.g., using SSRS or Crystal Reports). BC (Cloud) is a multi-tenant environment, meaning direct database access is restricted. Reporting must be done using OData, APIs, Power BI, or through third-party reporting tools that connect via APIs. This requires a shift in reporting skillset.

Workflow

GP uses its own built-in Approval Workflow (often for Sales and Purchase Orders). BC uses a more powerful, flow-based Workflow engine that is often managed through Power Automate (part of the Power Platform). Mapping the old GP workflows to the new Power Automate/BC system is a critical project step.

Choosing the right partner

Finally, the success of your migration hinges on your implementation partner. When selecting a vendor to manage your GP to BC transition, it is imperative to:

• Verify Experience: Insist on choosing a partner with proven, actual, successful GP to BC transition experience.
• Ask for References: Always request and speak with references from companies that have recently completed this specific migration type.

To learn how we can help with our Dynamics GP to Business Central migration services, speak to one of our experts today.

Trending Posts