Project Management migration

Migrate from Planview AgilePlace to Asana

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

Planview AgilePlace logo

Planview AgilePlace

Source

Asana

Destination

Asana logo

Compatibility

83%

10 of 12

objects map 1:1 between Planview AgilePlace and Asana.

Complexity

BStandard

Timeline

3-5 weeks

Rollback included Accuracy guarantee Field-level validation

Overview

What this migration involves

Moving from Planview AgilePlace to Asana is primarily a structural simplification. AgilePlace organizes work on Kanban boards with hierarchical Lanes and Swimlanes; Asana uses Projects with Lists, Boards, and Sections. We map each Board to a Project, preserve the Lane hierarchy as Section nesting or flat Sections, and carry WIP limit values as custom numeric fields since Asana does not enforce WIP limits natively. Card Dependencies require a separate pass after all cards are loaded because parent-card IDs are unknown until the first-pass import completes. We do not migrate Card Automation, Board Automation, or Card Relations Summary computed fields. We flag Card Relations Summary ERROR states from AgilePlace and recompute relationship counts in Asana to avoid propagating stale data. Automations, Workflows, and reporting dashboards require manual reconstruction in Asana; we deliver a written inventory of every board automation and dashboard for the customer's admin to reference.

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

Planview AgilePlace logo

Planview AgilePlace

What's pushing teams away

  • The interface and visual design feel dated compared to modern alternatives, with users noting that newer competitors offer a more contemporary experience for day-to-day team members.
  • Kanban-only view limits adoption for teams that need Gantt charts, calendar views, or structured task lists — organizations with mixed methodology needs often must supplement AgilePlace with another tool.
  • Reporting requires the Advanced or Enterprise tier via a separate Reporting API, adding cost for organizations that need cross-board analytics rather than board-local charts.
  • Performance degrades when organizations run large numbers of boards or high card volumes, with community posts and reviews noting sluggish load times under heavy data conditions.
  • Portfolios integration depends on Planview Hub, a separate licensed product, meaning portfolio-level visibility is not included in AgilePlace pricing and adds a second procurement conversation.

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 Planview AgilePlace objects map to Asana

Each row shows how a Planview AgilePlace 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.

Planview AgilePlace

Board

maps to

Asana

Project

1:1
Fully supported

Each AgilePlace Board maps to one Asana Project. We export the board name, description, and lane structure as a first-pass import, then map each Lane to either a Section or a nested Section within the Asana project. Swimlanes, which represent a second hierarchy level in AgilePlace, require a flattening decision during scoping: either promoted to top-level Asana Projects within a Portfolio or stored as a custom field value on cards. The customer confirms the preferred approach before migration begins. Board archive status migrates as a custom field or project status note.

Planview AgilePlace

Card

maps to

Asana

Task

1:1
Fully supported

Cards represent work items and map directly to Asana Tasks. We migrate title, description (rich text preserved), Card Type, priority, WIP status, due date, created and modified timestamps, and card position within the lane. The Asana project membership and section placement are resolved from the Lane assignment at import time. Historical timestamps are stored as custom fields so that cycle-time reporting tools can still reference the original created date.

Planview AgilePlace

Custom Field

maps to

Asana

Custom Field

1:1
Fully supported

AgilePlace custom fields are defined at the board level with role-gated write access, meaning a user without project-level write access cannot edit certain fields even if assigned across all records. We export the field definitions alongside card values, map field types to Asana equivalents (text to Text, single-choice to Single-Select, multi-choice to Multi-Select, number to Number, date to Date), and create matching fields in the Asana project. Any Relations Summary fields showing ERROR in AgilePlace are excluded from migration and recomputed in Asana. Role-based write restrictions in AgilePlace do not have a direct Asana equivalent; we document the original restriction so the admin can configure Asana project-level field editing permissions post-migration.

Planview AgilePlace

Card Type

maps to

Asana

Label

lossy
Fully supported

Card Types are a board-level taxonomy in AgilePlace used for filtering and card styling. Asana uses Labels for a similar categorization purpose. We map each distinct Card Type to an Asana Label on the corresponding project. If the customer uses Card Types as workflow states rather than categories, we map them to Asana Sections instead. The customer confirms the intended use of Card Types during discovery to select the correct destination representation.

Planview AgilePlace

Card Dependency

maps to

Asana

Dependency

1:1
Fully supported

Parent-child card links in AgilePlace are stored as a separate API relationship, not embedded in the card record. We export these as a dependency table during the first card pass and resolve them in a second pass after all cards have received their Asana GIDs. The second pass creates dependency records in Asana using the Asana API, matching each child task to its parent task via the temporary AgilePlace card ID mapping table. Cross-board dependencies require the customer to confirm whether the parent and child boards map to the same Asana project or separate projects, which affects how the dependency is created in Asana.

Planview AgilePlace

Comment

maps to

Asana

Subtask or Comment

1:1
Fully supported

Card comments migrate as Asana subtasks (if they represent action items) or as comments on the task (if they are discussion notes). Author attribution is preserved via email-to-user matching against the Asana workspace members. Rich text formatting in comments is preserved as-is. Threaded comment structures in AgilePlace become flat comments in Asana since Asana does not support nested comment threads natively.

Planview AgilePlace

Task (Sub-task)

maps to

Asana

Subtask

1:1
Fully supported

AgilePlace Tasks are child items within a Card. These map to Asana Subtasks, preserving title, completion status (mapped to subtask completion in Asana), assignee, and due date. Subtask order within the parent card is preserved by setting the Asana subtask creation sequence.

Planview AgilePlace

Tag

maps to

Asana

Tag

1:1
Fully supported

Tags in AgilePlace are flat string labels on cards. These map directly to Asana Tags within the workspace. Asana Tags are workspace-level and can be applied to any task across any project. We preserve the tag string values and create matching tags in the destination workspace before the card import phase.

Planview AgilePlace

User / Assignee

maps to

Asana

User

1:1
Fully supported

Card assignees are resolved by email address match against the Asana workspace user list. A user in AgilePlace with no matching Asana account is flagged in a reconciliation report for the customer's admin to provision before record import continues. Archived or inactive AgilePlace users are flagged with a status note in the Asana assignee field so that the admin can decide whether to reassign or leave them as orphaned assignees.

Planview AgilePlace

WIP Limit

maps to

Asana

Custom Field

lossy
Fully supported

WIP limits in AgilePlace are defined per Lane and enforced visually when the lane is full. Asana has no native WIP limit enforcement. We migrate the WIP limit values as custom Number fields on each card (populated with the lane-level limit value), or as a project-level custom field if all cards in the project share the same limit. Post-migration, the admin can use Asana Rules or a third-party WIP enforcement app to alert when column limits are exceeded, but native enforcement requires a separate rebuild.

Planview AgilePlace

Card Attachment

maps to

Asana

Attachment

1:1
Fully supported

File attachments on cards are downloaded from AgilePlace and re-uploaded to Asana as task attachments. Large attachment volumes (over 500 attachments per 1,000 cards) increase migration duration and require storage capacity planning in the Asana workspace. We handle attachments after card creation so that each attachment is linked to the correct task by its Asana GID.

Planview AgilePlace

Integration Metadata

maps to

Asana

Note

1:1
Fully supported

Integration references stored as card metadata in AgilePlace such as Jira issue IDs, GitHub commit hashes, Azure DevOps work item URLs, and external hyperlinks do not migrate as live links. We log these references as Notes on the corresponding Asana task so that the admin has a record of the external reference without the link itself functioning in Asana.

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.

Planview AgilePlace logo

Planview AgilePlace gotchas

Medium

Card Automation cannot mirror or copy cards between boards natively

Medium

Custom field permissions are role-gated, not globally editable

Low

Relations Summary fields can display ERROR for large record sets

High

Reporting API is tier-gated to Advanced and Enterprise editions

Medium

Portfolios integration requires Planview Hub as a separate license

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

  • Lane and Swimlane hierarchies must be flattened to Sections

    AgilePlace boards use a two-level Lane hierarchy where Lanes contain Swimlanes representing different dimensions of the same work (for example, Lanes for development stages and Swimlanes for team assignments). Asana has no equivalent Swimlane concept; Projects use a flat list of Sections or Columns. During scoping, we identify boards with active Swimlane usage and ask the customer to choose between promoting Swimlanes to top-level Asana Projects within a shared Portfolio, converting them to a custom field value on each card, or flattening them entirely into standard Sections. Skipping this decision results in ambiguous card placement in the destination.

  • Asana has no native WIP limit enforcement

    AgilePlace enforces WIP limits visually and blocks card moves when a Lane reaches its configured limit. Asana does not have a comparable enforcement mechanism. We migrate the WIP limit values as custom numeric fields on cards, which preserves the data for reporting but requires a separate workflow rebuild in Asana if the team wants enforcement. The customer should plan for Asana Rules or a third-party WIP management app to handle blocking behavior post-migration.

  • Custom field scope and permission models differ

    AgilePlace defines custom fields at the board level with role-based write access that is independent of project-level permissions. A financial reviewer who is assigned to all boards cannot edit an Invoice Number custom field unless they are a project manager in AgilePlace. Asana custom fields are either project-level or org-wide library fields with different permission controls. We detect permission-sensitive custom fields during discovery and document the original restriction so the admin can configure equivalent field-level editing permissions in the destination. Inherited field visibility is not automatically migrated.

  • Card Dependencies require a separate import pass after cards load

    Parent-child card links in AgilePlace are stored as a separate API relationship distinct from the card record itself. We export this relationship data during the first card pass but cannot create the dependency records in Asana until all parent and child cards have Asana GIDs. This means Card Dependencies are migrated in a second pass that runs after the card import is complete. Cross-board dependencies add complexity: if the parent and child cards are on boards that map to different Asana Projects, we must confirm that both projects exist before creating the dependency, which can require a third pass or manual confirmation from the customer.

  • Card Automation does not migrate and requires manual rebuild

    AgilePlace Card Automation is scoped to a single board and triggers actions based on card events such as card moves, field changes, or time triggers. There is no API endpoint to export Card Automation rules, and Asana Rules are a different trigger-action model. We do not migrate Card Automation as code. We deliver a written inventory of every active board automation including its trigger conditions, actions, and frequency so that the customer's admin can rebuild equivalent Asana Rules post-migration. Cross-board automation dependencies (automations that mirror cards between boards) are flagged specifically because no equivalent cross-project automation exists in Asana.

Migration approach

Six steps for a successful Planview AgilePlace to Asana data migration

  1. Discovery and tier audit

    We audit the source AgilePlace account across tier (Teams, Scaled Teams, or Custom), board count, card volume, custom field definitions per board, Card Type taxonomy, active Swimlane usage, Card Dependencies across boards, WIP limit configuration per Lane, and attachment volume. We pair this with an Asana workspace audit to confirm the destination project structure, existing custom field library, and label taxonomy. The discovery output is a written migration scope document that includes the Lane flattening decision, custom field scope mapping, and the dependency pass sequencing plan.

  2. Schema design and custom field preparation

    We design the Asana destination schema. This includes creating Asana Projects to match AgilePlace Boards, defining Section structures (flattened from Lane and Swimlane hierarchy per the scoping decision), creating custom fields that match AgilePlace field definitions with correct Asana types (Text, Single-Select, Multi-Select, Number, Date, People), and creating Labels to match Card Types. We exclude any Relations Summary custom fields showing ERROR in AgilePlace and document them as fields to be recomputed manually or via an Asana Formula field post-migration.

  3. User and assignee reconciliation

    We extract every distinct assignee and watcher from AgilePlace cards and match by email address against the Asana workspace member list. Any AgilePlace user without a matching Asana account is held in a reconciliation report for the customer to provision before record import continues. Archived AgilePlace users are flagged with a status note so the admin can decide whether to reassign or retain their historical attribution.

  4. Card and attachment import in dependency order

    We run the migration in this order: Projects and Sections (first), Tasks with all standard fields and custom field values (second), Tags applied per card (third), Card Attachments re-uploaded by Asana GID (fourth), and Comments mapped to task comments or subtasks (fifth). Card Dependencies run as a separate pass after all cards have GIDs so that parent-child links resolve correctly. WIP limit values are populated as custom Number fields during the card import phase.

  5. Automation and integration reference inventory

    We export a complete inventory of every AgilePlace Card Automation including trigger type, conditions, actions, and affected boards. We also log Integration Metadata references (Jira, GitHub, Azure DevOps URLs) as Notes on the corresponding Asana task. This inventory is delivered as a written document to the customer's admin for manual rebuild in Asana Rules.

  6. Validation, reconciliation, and handoff

    We run a reconciliation comparing AgilePlace record counts (cards, comments, attachments, dependencies, custom field values) against Asana counts and spot-check 25-50 random tasks against the source. The customer reviews the migrated data in Asana and signs off before the source is decommissioned. We deliver the automation inventory document and a custom field mapping sheet. We support a one-week hypercare window for post-migration issues and do not rebuild Asana Rules, Forms, or reporting dashboards as part of the standard scope.

Platform deep dives

Context on both ends of the pair

Planview AgilePlace logo

Planview AgilePlace

Source

Strengths

  • Unlimited boards on all paid tiers removes licensing friction for large agile organizations expanding across teams.
  • Visible WIP limits and lane-based workflow visualization help teams enforce pull-based delivery and identify bottlenecks early.
  • Multi-board rollup reporting available via Advanced Reporting API enables portfolio-level analytics across teams.
  • Strong ecosystem integrations with Jira, GitHub, and CI/CD tools reduce context-switching for engineering teams.
  • Hierarchical structure from boards down to cards, tasks, and comments maps cleanly to most destination PM tools.

Weaknesses

  • Reporting requires a paid upgrade tier; board-local charts only unless you purchase Advanced or Enterprise edition.
  • Portfolio-level planning depends on a separate Planview Hub license, adding procurement complexity for organizations needing strategic alignment.
  • Kanban-only view means teams requiring Gantt or calendar views must use a second tool for those work styles.
  • User management and permissions are hierarchical and can be confusing for large organizations with many nested project roles.
  • Community posts document recurring issues with Relations Summary custom fields displaying ERROR states, suggesting data reliability concerns for custom field-heavy migrations.
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?

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 Planview AgilePlace and Asana.

  • 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

    Planview AgilePlace: Not publicly documented on the public-facing API page.

  • Data volume sensitivity

    B

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

Estimator

Estimate your Planview AgilePlace 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 Planview AgilePlace to Asana data migrations

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

Can't find your answer?

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

Book a free 30 minute consultation

Migrations under 10 boards and 15,000 cards with no complex Swimlane hierarchies and no cross-board dependencies land between three and five weeks. Migrations with hundreds of boards, high card volumes, active Swimlane usage requiring flattening decisions, or cross-board Card Dependencies requiring multi-pass resolution extend to seven to thirteen weeks because of the additional dependency pass sequencing and schema design decisions that must be confirmed by the customer before import begins.

Adjacent paths

Related migrations to explore

Ready when you are

Move from Planview AgilePlace.
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