Project Management migration

Migrate from Conceptboard to Asana

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

Conceptboard logo

Conceptboard

Source

Asana

Destination

Asana logo

Compatibility

92%

11 of 12

objects map 1:1 between Conceptboard and Asana.

Complexity

CModerate

Timeline

3-5 weeks

Rollback included Accuracy guarantee Field-level validation

Overview

What this migration involves

Conceptboard is a GDPR-compliant visual collaboration whiteboard designed for EU enterprises and government agencies; Asana is a structured project and task management platform used by operations and product teams globally. The two platforms share no common API standard, no automated export path, and fundamentally different data models: Conceptboard organises work as freeform canvases with sticky notes and embedded files, while Asana organises work as hierarchical Projects containing Tasks and Sections. We handle this mismatch by performing guided board export sessions with the customer, downloading each board as PDF and PNG, extracting text and attachment references from the export, then reconstructing the board structure as Projects and Tasks in Asana with sections representing board regions and sticky-note clusters represented as individual tasks. Board history, approval workflows, and audit logs are platform-specific governance artifacts with no destination equivalent; we document their presence and flag what is lost. We do not migrate facilitator tools, voting sessions, or structured meeting modes as these are process artefacts rather than data records. Asana automations, Forms, and custom fields require manual rebuild post-migration.

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

Conceptboard logo

Conceptboard

What's pushing teams away

  • Interface feels dated and unintuitive compared to Miro or Mural; several G2 reviewers specifically cite slow UX and steep learning curve as friction points.
  • Limited third-party integrations and some integration features that failed during PCMag testing; customers needing ecosystem connectivity look elsewhere.
  • No public API means automation-heavy teams cannot embed Conceptboard into CI/CD or documentation pipelines, pushing them toward API-first alternatives.

Choosing

Asana logo

Asana

What's pulling them in

  • Organizations with distributed teams cite Asana's multiple project views (List, Board, Calendar, Timeline) as the primary reason for adoption, allowing each team member to work in their preferred interface without changing the underlying data.
  • The platform's 100+ native integrations with tools like Slack, Google Drive, Salesforce, and Microsoft Teams reduce context-switching and keep work synchronized across the stack.
  • Small teams and non-profits value the free plan's generous limits: unlimited projects and tasks for up to 15 team members with basic views, enabling teams to validate fit before committing to a paid tier.
  • Marketing and creative teams specifically praise Asana's visual project organization, reporting dashboards, and timeline views for managing cross-functional campaign workflows.
  • Project managers report that Asana's dependency management and workload views help surface bottlenecks before they derail deadlines.

Object mapping

How Conceptboard objects map to Asana

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

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

Conceptboard

Project

maps to

Asana

Workspace or Team

1:1
Fully supported

Each Conceptboard Project becomes an Asana Team (if multi-team governance is needed) or a top-level Project within an existing Asana Team. We extract project name, creation date, and member list during scoping. Starter-tier customers are limited to 5 active projects; archived projects must be accessed separately in Conceptboard's UI. We query the full project list during discovery including archived projects to ensure no boards are missed before migration begins.

Conceptboard

Board

maps to

Asana

Project

1:1
Fully supported

Each Conceptboard Board maps to an Asana Project. We export the board via PDF and PNG, extract the board title and any section labels visible in the export, and create an Asana Project with the same name. The PDF and PNG exports are stored as file attachments on the Asana Project description or as pinned attachments for reference. Sections within the board map to Asana Sections in the corresponding project.

Conceptboard

Section

maps to

Asana

Section

1:1
Fully supported

Conceptboard Sections subdivide a board and can be exported individually. We create corresponding Asana Sections within the target Project, preserving the section outline hierarchy when visible in the export. Section-level per-export captures are stored as section-level PDF attachments in the corresponding Asana Section.

Conceptboard

Board Element (sticky note, shape, text, connector)

maps to

Asana

Task

1:many
Fully supported

Canvas elements do not have a structured export path. We parse the PDF export for text content and approximate layout positions, then create individual Asana Tasks representing each sticky note or text block cluster. The task name carries the extracted text. Sticky notes that were spatially grouped are sometimes represented as subtasks under a parent task representing the group. This is lossy by necessity: connectors, arrows, and spatial relationships are not structurally preserved.

Conceptboard

Task

maps to

Asana

Task

1:1
Fully supported

Conceptboard Tasks (milestones, deadlines, and assignees within boards) map to Asana Tasks. We extract task name, due date, assignee (by email lookup), and any subtask structure from the board export and create matching Asana Tasks with the same due date and assignee. Custom fields on Conceptboard tasks require manual field mapping during scoping.

Conceptboard

Attachment

maps to

Asana

Attachment

1:1
Fully supported

Conceptboard file attachments are downloaded individually from the Attachments dialog and re-attached to the equivalent Asana Project or Task. We preserve original filenames and upload them via the Asana API with the appropriate workspace and target gid. Asana API enforces a 100 MB per-file attachment limit; files exceeding this threshold are flagged for manual handling.

Conceptboard

User (licensed)

maps to

Asana

User

1:1
Fully supported

Conceptboard licensed users are mapped to Asana Users by email address. We separate licensed users (per-seat billing) from guest accounts (free in Conceptboard). Guest users without Conceptboard accounts are invited to the Asana workspace as Guests or Members depending on their intended role. User mapping is validated before record migration to avoid orphaned assignments.

Conceptboard

Template

maps to

Asana

Project Template

1:1
Fully supported

Conceptboard personal and team templates are exported as boards and migrated as Asana Projects. Template organisation (personal vs team-shared) is preserved in Asana as private vs team projects. If the customer uses Advanced tier template features, we note template groupings for the customer to rebuild as Asana project templates manually.

Conceptboard

Board History

maps to

Asana

None

1:1
Not supported

Board history (Advanced+ feature) tracks version snapshots of board changes over time. This is an audit artifact with no structurally equivalent schema in Asana's activity log. We do not migrate version history. We document whether boards had active history so the customer understands what governance capability is not preserved.

Conceptboard

Approval Workflow

maps to

Asana

None

1:1
Fully supported

Approval workflows (Corporate and Government tier) represent process state rather than content data. There is no Asana equivalent for board-level approval workflows. We flag whether any boards had active approval states at migration time and document the review cycle for the customer's admin to re-implement manually in Asana if required.

Conceptboard

Audit Log

maps to

Asana

None

1:1
Fully supported

Audit logs are a Corporate and Government tier feature recording administrative actions. These are not user content and are not migratable. We note their presence as a data governance indicator and recommend the customer exports audit logs from Conceptboard before decommissioning.

Conceptboard

Comment

maps to

Asana

Task Comment

1:1
Fully supported

Conceptboard comments on board elements are captured in the board-level PDF export but are not available as structured data. We note the comment count per board as a quality indicator and, where comments were exported as visible text in the PDF, add them as Asana Task comments on the corresponding reconstructed task. This is lossy: author attribution and thread context are not preserved.

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.

Conceptboard logo

Conceptboard gotchas

High

No public API means migration relies entirely on PDF/PNG export

Medium

One-way import to Miro is PDF-only and non-editable

Medium

Starter plan limits active projects to 5, blocking full workspace migration

Low

Board history and approval workflows are tier-gated and not migratable

Asana logo

Asana gotchas

High

Automation rules have no export representation

High

API rate limits cap bulk migration throughput

Medium

Portfolios are view-only objects that do not hold data

Medium

Custom field enum options cannot be updated via API

Low

Subtasks do not appear in project views by default

Pair-specific challenges

  • Conceptboard has no public API — migration is PDF-only and lossy

    Conceptboard does not expose a public REST or GraphQL API. All data extraction relies on the manual Export Board feature producing PDF and PNG files. Sticky notes, shapes, connectors, and comments become flattened images rather than live structured objects in Asana. We handle this by performing guided export sessions with the customer, exporting boards and their attachments in batches, then reconstructing boards as Projects and Tasks. We flag upfront that fidelity depends on how well the PDF captures the original layout, and we discuss with customers whether partial board reconstruction or manual rebuild of key boards is the preferred path.

  • Miro's official Conceptboard import is PDF-only and non-editable — the same limitation applies to Asana

    The migration path from Conceptboard to any structured tool is inherently lossy because Conceptboard exports are image-based. Board elements cannot be re-created as typed objects in Asana (Tasks, Subtasks, Sections) without manual parsing of the export. We cannot automate element-level extraction with confidence because Conceptboard provides no element-level structured export. We parse PDF text content and approximate board structure but accept that connectors, spatial relationships, and nested grouping will not map cleanly. Customers should budget for post-migration cleanup of the Asana project structure.

  • Facilitator tools, voting sessions, and structured meeting modes have no Asana equivalent

    Conceptboard's facilitator features (freeze frame, voting, structured agenda modes) are process artefacts rather than content data. They represent how a session was run, not what decisions were made. Asana has no native equivalent. We document whether these features were in active use so the customer can assess whether meeting facilitation needs a separate tool post-migration or whether Asana's built-in meeting agenda templates serve as a lightweight replacement.

  • Asana Personal Projects spaces are being discontinued in December 2025

    Asana is discontinuing Personal Projects spaces, with all data to be migrated to a workspace or organisation by December 15, 2025. If the destination Asana account is a Personal Projects space, it cannot be used as a migration destination. We verify the Asana destination account type during discovery and recommend converting to a supported workspace or organisation before migration begins if needed.

  • Asana attachments exceed 100 MB are ignored by the API

    Asana's API does not support file attachments larger than 100 MB. During attachment extraction from Conceptboard, we identify files exceeding this threshold and flag them for manual handling. Customers can upload oversized files directly to Asana post-migration, link them via URL attachment, or store them in a connected cloud storage service (Google Drive, Dropbox, SharePoint) and reference them in Asana via link attachment.

Migration approach

Six steps for a successful Conceptboard to Asana data migration

  1. Discovery and export scoping

    We audit the Conceptboard account for project count (active and archived), board count, section count, attachment volume, and user population. Starter-tier accounts are checked for the 5-active-project limit. We identify which boards used Advanced+ features (board history, team templates, facilitator tools) and flag these during discovery. We confirm the destination Asana account type (workspace or organisation) and verify it is not a Personal Projects space. The discovery output is a written migration scope including board inventory, export checklist, and attachment count.

  2. Guided export sessions

    Conceptboard requires manual UI interaction to trigger PDF and PNG exports. We schedule guided export sessions with the customer to export boards in batches, covering all active and archived projects. Each board export produces a PDF (full board capture) and per-section PNG exports where selected. Attachment files are downloaded from the Attachments dialog simultaneously. We provide an export checklist so that no boards are missed and archived projects are accessed before session completion.

  3. Board parsing and Asana workspace structuring

    We parse the exported PDFs and PNGs to extract text content, approximate spatial groupings, and section labels. Sticky notes and text blocks are mapped to Asana Tasks within the corresponding Project. Groups of related sticky notes are represented as subtasks under a parent task. Section labels become Asana Section headers. Attachment files are associated with the correct Project or Task via the Asana API upload endpoint, with files over 100 MB flagged for manual post-migration handling.

  4. Asana workspace and project setup

    Before data migration, we configure the Asana workspace: Teams (mapped from Conceptboard Projects), Projects (mapped from Conceptboard Boards), Sections (mapped from Conceptboard Sections), and custom fields (where Conceptboard task custom fields require mapping). User accounts are provisioned or invited so that OwnerId references are satisfied at migration time. We validate the workspace structure in an Asana sandbox or test project before moving to production migration.

  5. Production migration in dependency order

    We run production migration in order: Asana workspace configuration first, then Projects from Conceptboard Boards, then Tasks parsed from board exports, then Section headers, then Attachments. Each phase emits a row-count reconciliation report. Any board exports that were not completed during guided sessions are flagged and scheduled for follow-up export before the migration window closes. We do not migrate facilitator tool state, approval workflow state, or board history as these are platform-specific artefacts with no Asana equivalent.

  6. Cutover, validation, and rebuild handoff

    We freeze Conceptboard write access during cutover and run a final delta check for any boards modified after the guided export sessions. We deliver a written inventory of Asana automations, Forms, and custom fields requiring rebuild, along with documentation of any Conceptboard features (facilitator tools, approval workflows, board history) that were not migratable. We support a one-week post-migration window to resolve reconciliation issues raised by the customer's team. We do not rebuild Asana automations or Forms as part of the standard migration scope; that is a separate engagement or internal admin task.

Platform deep dives

Context on both ends of the pair

Conceptboard logo

Conceptboard

Source

Strengths

  • German data centers with GDPR compliance, ISO-certified processes, and EU data sovereignty for regulated industry customers.
  • Built-in facilitator tools including freeze frame, voting, and structured agenda modes reduce external meeting overhead.
  • Board history and approval workflows provide governance and traceability on higher tiers.
  • Custom branding on Advanced+ plans enables white-label client delivery.
  • Guest accounts are free and do not consume paid seats, making external workshops cost-effective.

Weaknesses

  • No public REST API — all data export relies on manual PDF and PNG output, limiting automation options.
  • Interface and UX perceived as dated compared to Miro, Mural, and FigJam by multiple G2 reviewers.
  • Limited integrations with third-party tools; PCMag testing noted some integrations failed to work.
  • Starter plan caps active boards at 3, restricting functionality for small teams evaluating the tool seriously.
Asana logo

Asana

Destination

Strengths

  • Unlimited projects and tasks on the free plan for teams up to 15 members.
  • 100+ native integrations including Salesforce, Slack, Google Drive, and Microsoft Teams.
  • Four distinct project views (List, Board, Calendar, Timeline) in a single interface.
  • Dependency management with start/end dates and predecessor links for critical path tracking.
  • Portfolio dashboards for executives to track cross-project status and workload.

Weaknesses

  • Per-seat pricing scales expensively: Advanced tier costs nearly double Starter for a 50-seat team.
  • API does not expose all UI-accessible data; some fields require screen-scraping for full fidelity.
  • Automation rule limits on lower tiers are restrictive, causing power users to upgrade or leave.
  • No native document/wiki capability forces teams to use external tools for knowledge management.
  • Rate limits (150 req/min on free, 1,500 req/min on paid) constrain bulk migration throughput.

Complexity grading

How hard is this migration?

Moderate Project Management migration. 4 of 8 objects need a mapping; the rest are 1:1.

C

Overall complexity

Moderate migration

Derived from compatibility, mapping clarity, API constraints, and data volume across Conceptboard and Asana.

  • Object compatibility

    C

    4 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

    Conceptboard: Not publicly documented.

  • Data volume sensitivity

    B

    Conceptboard doesn't expose a bulk API — REST + parallelization used for high-volume runs.

Estimator

Estimate your Conceptboard to Asana 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 Conceptboard to Asana data migrations

Answers to the questions buyers ask most during Conceptboard to Asana migration scoping. Not seeing yours? Book a call.

Can't find your answer?

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

Book a free 30 minute consultation

Most migrations land between three and five weeks for accounts with up to 20 boards and fewer than 2,000 attachments. Migrations with 50+ boards, complex section hierarchies, large attachment libraries, or multi-team Asana destinations requiring parallel workspace setup move to eight to fourteen weeks because of guided export session overhead, manual board parsing, and Asana workspace structuring time. The guided export sessions with the customer are the primary schedule driver.

Adjacent paths

Related migrations to explore

Ready when you are

Move from Conceptboard.
Land in Asana, 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