Project Management migration

Migrate from awork to Microsoft Project

Field-level mapping, validation, and rollback between awork and Microsoft Project. We move data and schema; workflows are rebuilt natively in Microsoft Project.

awork logo

awork

Source

Microsoft Project

Destination

Microsoft Project logo

Compatibility

40%

4 of 10

objects map 1:1 between awork and Microsoft Project.

Complexity

BStandard

Timeline

1-2 weeks

Rollback included Accuracy guarantee Field-level validation

Overview

What this migration involves

Migrating from awork to Microsoft Project is a structural re-platforming, not a simple record copy. awork's flat, agency-oriented data model (Projects with task lists and billable time entries) has no native equivalent for the predecessor-successor dependency chains, baselines, and resource leveling that define a Microsoft Project schedule. We must reconstruct dependency logic from awork's implicit task ordering, check every custom field's per-project activation status before export, and map awork's time entries against Microsoft Project's resource assignment fields since Project Online has no native billable time tracking object. Automations built in awork's workflow builder do not transfer to Microsoft Project, and we deliver a written inventory of every automation requiring rebuild in the destination. awork's November 2025 product direction uncertainty has accelerated migration interest among teams that need long-term enterprise scheduling guarantees.

Field-level fidelity

Every standard and custom field arrives verified.

Schema-aware mapping

AI proposes the map; you confirm before any record moves.

Relationships preserved

Parent–child, lookups, and ownership stay linked.

Full activity history

Calls, emails, meetings — with original timestamps.

Attachments & notes

Documents, uploads, and inline notes move with the record.

Why teams make this switch

Two sides of the same decision

Leaving

awork logo

awork

What's pushing teams away

  • Time tracking cannot be logged directly against a Client record, only against Projects and Tasks, forcing teams that bill by client to create wrapper projects or lose billing granularity.
  • Small, ad-hoc tasks require a full Project to be created before they can be tracked, pushing teams toward either over-engineering their project structure or skipping time logging entirely.
  • Sortable priority tags are absent from the task interface, leaving teams without a native way to sequence or filter work by urgency across the project board.
  • A November 2025 review noted that despite being described as the best on the market, the platform fell short on core feature expectations and felt limiting for growing teams.

Choosing

Microsoft Project logo

Microsoft Project

What's pulling them in

  • Organizations already running Microsoft 365 and Azure AD adopt Microsoft PPM because it slots into existing identity, Teams, and SharePoint infrastructure without requiring a separate identity provider or SSO vendor.
  • Enterprise PMOs choose it for critical-path scheduling, baseline comparison, cross-project dependencies, and resource utilization reporting that standalone PM tools cannot replicate at this depth.
  • Project Online's integration with Power BI gives portfolio-level dashboards and cost-rollup reporting that satisfies executive governance requirements without third-party BI tooling.
  • Government, financial services, and healthcare organizations select it because FedRAMP, ISO 27001, and SOC 2 compliance certifications meet enterprise procurement requirements out of the box.
  • Large IT departments default to it as the market-leader in project portfolio management software, often driven by corporate licensing agreements that bundle it with other Microsoft 365 seats.

Object mapping

How awork objects map to Microsoft Project

Each row shows how a awork object lands in Microsoft Project, including any object-level transformations, lookup resolution, or schema-design dependencies.

Typical mapping — final map is confirmed during the sample migration step.

awork

Project

maps to

Microsoft Project

Project

1:1
Fully supported

awork Projects map directly to Microsoft Project projects. Project name, description, start and end dates, assigned users, and budget fields transfer 1:1. awork's workspace scoping maps to the SharePoint site collection or Project Web App (PWA) site that hosts the destination project. We preserve awork's project-level budget as a custom number field in Microsoft Project since native budget tracking requires PWA and Enterprise Project Type configuration. Project status from awork (per-workspace vocabulary) requires explicit mapping to Microsoft Project custom status fields or Project Task Status values.

awork

Task

maps to

Microsoft Project

Task

1:1
Fully supported

awork Tasks map to Microsoft Project Task records. Assignee, due date, description, and priority transfer. awork has no predecessor-successor dependency model; task ordering in awork's list or board view is implicit but not structurally defined as dependencies. We reconstruct dependencies during migration by analyzing task start/end date proximity, checklist-style ordering in awork's subtask hierarchy, and any date-based handoff logic the customer documents during scoping. Milestone tasks in awork (tasks with no duration) map to Microsoft Project milestones (Duration = 0). A customer-provided or reconstructed dependency map is required input for this step.

awork

Subtask

maps to

Microsoft Project

Summary Task

1:many
Fully supported

awork Subtasks are structured children of tasks. In Microsoft Project, the parent task becomes a Summary Task with the child rows collapsed beneath it in the WBS hierarchy. We preserve the parent-child relationship and transfer any subtask-level assignee, due date, and description. If the destination Microsoft Project instance uses outline numbering or WBS codes, we regenerate the WBS hierarchy post-migration. Subtask ordering is preserved by sequence within the parent task.

awork

User (Team Member)

maps to

Microsoft Project

Resource

1:1
Fully supported

awork Users map to Microsoft Project Resources. awork stores name, email, and avatar. Microsoft Project Resources carry name, email (for Project Online), type (Work vs Material), and Max Units. We map awork project assignees to Resource Assignments in Microsoft Project. If awork user roles differentiate between project managers and generic team members, we map those to the Resource's Max Units and possibly a custom Resource Type field. Users without a corresponding destination resource go to a reconciliation queue.

awork

Time Entry

maps to

Microsoft Project

Resource Assignment (Hours)

1:1
Fully supported

awork Time Entries are a core native object with start/end timestamps, user attribution, billable/non-billable flags, and task association. Microsoft Project Online has no native timesheet or billable time object; time entry data must be mapped to the Assignment Work field on Task, or stored in a custom PWA enterprise custom field if the destination is Project Online and the PWA timesheet feature is active. We map hours from awork time entries to Assignment Actual Work on the corresponding task-resource assignment. The billable flag becomes a custom yes/no field on the assignment or a separate custom timesheet entry object. PWA timesheet configuration is required before this mapping if the customer wants a native timesheet experience post-migration.

awork

Project Status

maps to

Microsoft Project

Custom Field or Project Task Status

lossy
Fully supported

awork Project Statuses are defined per workspace with custom names, colors, and ordering. Microsoft Project does not have a native project-level status field; status is typically communicated via the project schedule health (on track, at risk, delayed) or a custom field. We collect the full awork status vocabulary during scoping and build a mapping table to either a PWA custom enterprise field or a SharePoint list column that feeds a Power BI status dashboard. This mapping is customer-specific and must be validated during sandbox migration.

awork

Custom Field

maps to

Microsoft Project

Enterprise Custom Field

lossy
Fully supported

awork custom fields are created at the workspace level but require per-project activation before they appear at the task level. We audit every awork custom field during scoping and check its activation status per project. Only fields with activation confirmed across the relevant projects migrate. Microsoft Project Online requires custom fields to be defined as PWA Enterprise Custom Fields before they accept data; we configure the destination field definition (type, lookup table, formula) before loading any records. Text, number, date, and choice field types map to their Microsoft Project equivalents.

awork

Tag

maps to

Microsoft Project

Outline Code or Custom Text Field

lossy
Fully supported

awork Tags are key-value labels applied to tasks for cross-project categorization. Microsoft Project does not have a native tag object; tags are typically implemented as Outline Codes, custom text fields, or Enterprise Custom Fields. We map tag names 1:1 to a destination custom field of the customer's choosing. If the destination is Project Online, we recommend an Enterprise Outline Code with the same structure as the source tag taxonomy. Tag normalization (removing spaces, enforcing lowercase) happens during the transform step if the destination enforces format restrictions.

awork

Project Template

maps to

Microsoft Project

Project Template (MPP or Project Plan)

lossy
Fully supported

awork Project Templates define reusable project structures including default tasks, statuses, and custom field configurations. Microsoft Project has no direct template sharing between awork and Project. We extract the template definition as structured data (task list, default durations, custom field defaults, status assignments) and document it in a written template reconstruction guide. The customer's project manager uses this guide to recreate the template in Microsoft Project using the desktop client or Project Online's template save feature. Template migration is a documentation handoff, not an automated data load.

awork

Client

maps to

Microsoft Project

Custom Project Property or SharePoint List

lossy
Fully supported

awork Clients are top-level entities that Projects are associated with but time cannot be logged directly against. Microsoft Project Online has no native client object. We map awork Client records to a SharePoint list (if using PWA on SharePoint) or to a custom Project Online enterprise custom field on the Project entity. The customer chooses whether to manage client data as a dropdown custom field or as a linked SharePoint list with lookup.

Gotchas + challenges

What specifically takes care here

Platform-specific issues from each side, plus the pair-specific challenges that don't show up on either platform's page on its own.

awork logo

awork gotchas

Medium

Custom fields must be activated per project

Medium

Project statuses are per-workspace, not global

Low

Timeline export is an image, not structured data

Microsoft Project logo

Microsoft Project gotchas

High

Project for the web is being retired and merged into Microsoft Planner

Medium

Planner-tier portfolio features are incomplete despite Plan 5 labeling

Medium

Web app constraint controls are weaker than the Windows desktop client

High

Project requires a separate license not bundled with standard Microsoft 365

Medium

Project Online API is edition-gated and inconsistently documented

Pair-specific challenges

  • awork has no documented REST API for structured data export

    awork does not publish a publicly accessible REST API with confirmed authentication specifications or rate limits. This fundamentally changes how we approach the export phase of any migration. We use awork's list view and board view exports, supplemented by direct database read access where available on Professional and Enterprise tiers, and structured Excel exports of time entries. If the customer's awork account is on the Starter tier, feature gating may limit export depth. We confirm the export method during discovery and flag any gaps before migration begins. Teams relying on awork's workflow builder for data export automation must rebuild those exports manually or via a documented export procedure.

  • Task dependencies must be reconstructed from implicit ordering

    awork does not model task dependencies as a first-class relationship. Tasks exist in a flat list or board with assignees, due dates, and ordering, but there is no predecessor-successor link in awork's data model. When migrating into Microsoft Project, we cannot import dependencies from any awork export because they do not exist. We must reconstruct them during scoping by analyzing task date proximity, checklist-style ordering in awork's subtask hierarchy, and any handoff-related notes the customer documents. A dependency map provided by the customer's project manager is the most reliable input for this step. Without it, we build a best-effort reconstruction from date and ordering data, which requires manual review before finalization.

  • Time entries map to assignments, not a native timesheet object

    awork's native time tracking model (start/end timestamps, billable flags, user attribution per task) has no direct Microsoft Project Online equivalent. Project Online does not have a billable time entry object as a standard feature. We map time entry hours to the Assignment Actual Work field on the corresponding task-resource pair, which represents effort but not the richer billing metadata from awork. If the customer needs billable tracking, we implement it as a PWA Timesheet custom field or a SharePoint-integrated timesheet list. This architectural difference means the billing data arrives in Microsoft Project in a different form than it left awork, and the customer's finance team should validate the mapping before go-live.

  • Custom fields must be audited per project for activation gaps

    awork's custom fields are created at the workspace level but do not automatically appear at the task level. Each project must explicitly activate a custom field before it surfaces on tasks within that project. During scoping, we check every custom field's activation status across every project. Fields that are not activated for a given project will not appear in any awork export for tasks in that project, which means migrated data will arrive in Microsoft Project without those fields for affected tasks. We flag all activation gaps before export and, where feasible, activate missing fields in awork before export runs to ensure complete data capture.

  • Project Online custom fields require PWA field definition before import

    Microsoft Project Online requires every custom field to be defined as an Enterprise Custom Field in PWA before any data loads can populate it. The field name, type, and lookup table must be configured in the PWA Administration settings. Importing into a field that does not exist in PWA results in silent data loss. We configure all required PWA Enterprise Custom Fields before any data migration phase begins, matching each field's type (text, number, date, choice) to the destination field definition. This step requires PWA site administrator access and must be completed in the staging environment before production migration.

Migration approach

Six steps for a successful awork to Microsoft Project data migration

  1. Discovery and dependency mapping

    We audit the source awork account for project count, task hierarchy depth, user count, time entry volume, custom field inventory, and project template definitions. We confirm the export method available for the customer's awork tier and check every custom field's per-project activation status. We collect the full workspace status vocabulary for value mapping. The customer provides a dependency map documenting any predecessor-successor task relationships that cannot be reconstructed from date and ordering data alone. The discovery output is a written migration scope, a dependency reconstruction plan, and a PWA configuration checklist for the destination environment.

  2. Destination environment configuration

    We configure Microsoft Project Online or Project Professional destination fields. In Project Online, this means creating PWA Enterprise Custom Fields for every awork custom field and project status value, defining the Enterprise Resource Pool, and configuring the Project Site or PWA site collection structure to receive the migrated data. In Project Professional (desktop), we configure the destination MPP template with the required custom fields and resource definitions. All destination configuration is validated in a staging environment before production migration begins.

  3. Data extraction and transformation

    We extract project and task data from awork via list view exports and direct data access where available. Time entries export from the time tracking module. We transform the data to match the destination schema: task ordering becomes WBS hierarchy in Microsoft Project, awork's per-workspace statuses map to the configured custom status field, and time entry hours map to task-resource assignment fields. The dependency reconstruction step converts the customer's dependency map into predecessor-successor relationships in the Microsoft Project format (Finish-to-Start, Start-to-Start, etc.). We flag any custom fields that could not be activated per-project and either activate them in awork or document the gap for the customer's admin.

  4. Staged migration and reconciliation

    We run a full migration into the staging destination environment using production-equivalent data volume. The customer's project management lead reconciles a sample of migrated projects against the source awork data: task counts, task hierarchy, assignee assignments, time entry hours, custom field values, and dependency chains. We verify that PWA custom fields accept the mapped values without validation errors and that task dates are scheduled correctly in Microsoft Project's calculation engine. Any mapping corrections, missing dependencies, or data gaps are resolved in the staging phase before production migration begins.

  5. Production migration and cutover

    We run the production migration in dependency order: resource pool first (Users from awork to Resources in Microsoft Project), then projects, then tasks with dependency relationships, then time data mapped to assignments. Each phase emits a reconciliation row-count report. We freeze awork writes during the cutover window and run a final delta migration of any records modified during the migration. We deliver the project template reconstruction guide documenting every awork Project Template as a Microsoft Project template for the customer's PMO to rebuild. We do not migrate awork workflow automations; that inventory is delivered as a written document for the customer's admin to rebuild in Power Automate or the Project Online workflow engine.

  6. Validation and handoff

    We validate the production migration with spot-checks on five to ten representative projects across the portfolio, verifying task counts, WBS hierarchy, dependency chains, resource assignments, and time data. We deliver the migration validation report, the awork automation inventory document, and the project template reconstruction guide. We support a five-business-day post-migration window to resolve any record-level issues raised by the customer's project team. Post-migration admin support, training, and Power Automate workflow rebuild are outside standard scope and are available as separate engagements.

Platform deep dives

Context on both ends of the pair

awork logo

awork

Source

Strengths

  • Built-in time tracking keeps billable data linked directly to tasks without a separate tool.
  • Clean, accessible interface reduces onboarding time for non-technical team members.
  • Workflow customization requires far less configuration overhead than comparable tools like Jira.
  • Automation capabilities and Lexoffice integration support end-to-end agency billing workflows.
  • GDPR and ISO 27001 compliance with European-hosted data addresses regulatory requirements.

Weaknesses

  • Time cannot be logged against a Client record directly, only against Projects or Tasks.
  • Small, ad-hoc work items still require a full project to be created before they can be tracked.
  • Native sortable priority tagging is absent from the task interface.
  • No publicly documented API with confirmed authentication or rate limit specifications.
  • The feature set is optimized for agencies and may be limiting for non-agency project teams.
Microsoft Project logo

Microsoft Project

Destination

Strengths

  • Deep critical-path scheduling with baseline comparison and cross-project dependency tracking unmatched by lighter PM tools.
  • Native Azure AD authentication, Teams integration, and Power BI reporting sit on infrastructure enterprises already license and manage.
  • Enterprise governance controls including demand intake workflows, resource request approval, and portfolio-level capacity analysis.
  • Supports both Waterfall and Agile methodologies within the same project, accommodating hybrid delivery teams.
  • Scalable from Project Plan 1 for small teams to Project Server on-premises for regulated industries with strict data-sovereignty requirements.

Weaknesses

  • Ease-of-use scores trail the category average by a wide margin; onboarding friction frustrates new users consistently across G2 and Capterra reviews.
  • Pricing ranks 42nd of 49 tools in its category — the total cost of ownership including IT administration and training is rarely recovered for small or mid-market teams.
  • No built-in client portal, external stakeholder sharing, or proofing workflow, limiting use cases to internal PMO environments only.
  • The web interface (Project for the web / Planner Premium) has materially weaker constraint controls and resource auto-leveling than the Windows desktop client.
  • Project for the web is being consolidated into Microsoft Planner, creating uncertainty about which product tier will host project portfolio data long-term.

Complexity grading

How hard is this migration?

Standard Project Management migration. 2 of 8 objects need a mapping; the rest are 1:1.

B

Overall complexity

Standard migration

Derived from compatibility, mapping clarity, API constraints, and data volume across awork and Microsoft Project.

  • Object compatibility

    B

    2 of 8 objects need a mapping; the rest are 1:1.

  • Field mapping clarity

    C

    Field mapping is derived from defaults — final spec confirmed during the sample migration.

  • Timeline complexity

    B

    8-object category — typical timelines run 2–7 days end-to-end.

  • API constraints

    B

    awork: Rate-limited per client; 429 Too Many Requests response includes RateLimit-Reset header indicating seconds until reset.

  • Data volume sensitivity

    A

    awork exposes a bulk API — large-volume migrations stream efficiently.

Estimator

Estimate your awork to Microsoft Project migration cost

Rule-based pricing — no per-record fees, no manual quotes. Migrations over 2M records are scoped individually.

Step 1

What are you migrating?

Pick a category, then your source and destination platforms.

Category

FAQ

Frequently asked questions about awork to Microsoft Project data migrations

Answers to the questions buyers ask most during awork to Microsoft Project migration scoping. Not seeing yours? Book a call.

Can't find your answer?

Walk through your awork to Microsoft Project migration with a real engineer — 30 minutes, free, written quote within 24 hours.

Book a free 30 minute consultation

Most migrations complete in one to two weeks for accounts with fewer than 30 projects and straightforward task hierarchies. Accounts with complex dependency chains, extensive time entry histories, active project templates, or multiple awork workspaces requiring separate status mapping move to four to six weeks. The dependency reconstruction step is the primary variable; accounts where the customer provides a complete dependency map migrate faster than those requiring best-effort reconstruction from date and ordering data.

Adjacent paths

Related migrations to explore

Ready when you are

Move from awork.
Land in Microsoft Project, intact.

Tell us record counts and timeline. We'll come back with a written quote inside 1 business day — no commitment, no sales pitch.

Accuracy guarantee Rollback included Quote in 1 business day