Cloud Migration & Modernization

The duration varies based on the size of your infrastructure estate, the complexity of your application portfolio, and how many cloud accounts or data centres are involved. Most engagements conclude within 2 to 5 weeks. Larger organizations with extensive on-premise infrastructure, multiple business units, or complex regulatory requirements may require additional time to ensure complete coverage. We scope the engagement timeline precisely during the initial discovery session so you always know what to expect before work begins.

Minimal disruption is a core principle of how we run assessments. We typically schedule 3 to 4 focused working sessions with key engineers, architects, and operations leads across the engagement period. Outside of those sessions, your teams continue their normal delivery commitments. Most engineering organizations we work with report spending fewer than 5 hours total in active participation across the full engagement.

These three patterns represent meaningfully different levels of investment and outcome. Rehosting — often called lift-and-shift — moves workloads to cloud infrastructure with minimal changes, delivering speed but limited long-term benefit. Replatforming introduces targeted optimizations such as moving to managed databases or containerizing applications without rewriting core logic, striking a balance between speed and modernization value. Refactoring involves redesigning applications to take full advantage of cloud-native capabilities, delivering the greatest long-term benefit at the highest short-term investment. Our assessment classifies every workload by the pattern that best balances your timeline, budget, and target outcomes.

You receive a complete infrastructure and application discovery report, a workload classification matrix covering every significant system in scope, a phased migration roadmap broken into sequenced tranches with dependency-aware ordering, a risk register documenting every identified concern alongside recommended mitigations, and a modernization opportunity summary identifying where cloud-native services can replace legacy components during the migration itself. We conclude every engagement with a live readout session where our engineers walk your leadership and technical teams through every finding, recommendation, and decision rationale.

We are fully platform-agnostic and have delivered migration assessments targeting AWS, Google Cloud Platform, Microsoft Azure, and hybrid multi-cloud architectures. Our recommendations are driven entirely by your workload characteristics, geographic requirements, existing licensing agreements, and long-term architectural goals. We carry no platform partnership obligations that could influence the objectivity of our recommendations.

The assessment is designed as a standalone, fully self-sufficient engagement that equips your team to execute independently if that is your preference. Many clients take the migration roadmap forward with their internal engineering teams, using our documentation as the authoritative reference throughout execution. Others bring us in to lead or support specific migration tranches, particularly for high-complexity or high-risk workloads. Either path works and we make that decision straightforward by ensuring the assessment output requires no interpretation to act upon.

This is one of the most important questions in any migration programme and one we address explicitly during the assessment. Our evaluation deliberately distinguishes between what your current architecture does and what it was designed to do — because migrating a poorly structured system without modernization just relocates your technical debt to a more expensive postcode. Where we identify structural problems in the source environment, we flag them as modernization candidates rather than migration candidates, and we present the cost and benefit trade-off of addressing them during migration versus deferring them to a later programme.

A pre-migration assessment typically costs a fraction of what undiscovered dependencies, failed cutovers, and extended migration timelines cost when they surface mid-programme. Our assessments routinely identify sequencing constraints that, if discovered during execution rather than planning, would have extended migration timelines by months and significantly inflated programme budgets. Beyond risk avoidance, the assessment gives your leadership team the credible, evidence-based business case needed to secure migration investment with confidence — because the scope, sequencing, risks, and expected outcomes are documented rather than estimated.