Project Management migration

Migrate from ProjeQtOr to Microsoft Project

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

ProjeQtOr logo

ProjeQtOr

Source

Microsoft Project

Destination

Microsoft Project logo

Compatibility

42%

5 of 12

objects map 1:1 between ProjeQtOr and Microsoft Project.

Complexity

BStandard

Timeline

3-5 weeks

Rollback included Accuracy guarantee Field-level validation

Overview

What this migration involves

Migrating from ProjeQtOr to Microsoft Project means moving from a self-hosted, API-free PHP application to a commercial Windows-desktop and cloud platform with no unified REST endpoint on the source side. ProjeQtOr stores all records in MySQL or PostgreSQL with a flexible EAV model for custom fields, so we extract via direct database queries or the built-in MS-Project XML export plugin, then reconstruct Projects, Tasks with full WBS hierarchies, Milestones, Resources with capacity and cost rates, and Allocations in Microsoft Project. We do not migrate ProjeQtOr Risks, Issues, Documents, or Expenses as native Microsoft Project objects because MS Project has no built-in risk register, document management, or expense tracking module; we deliver these as written inventory records for the customer to rebuild in SharePoint, Teams, or a dedicated expense tool. Workflows, custom status workflow definitions, and ProjeQtOr's bug-tracking module are out of scope for data migration because they require manual rebuild in Microsoft Project's environment.

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

ProjeQtOr logo

ProjeQtOr

What's pushing teams away

  • The web interface lacks the polish and UX consistency of modern SaaS PM tools—users report that navigating between modules and locating specific services feels unintuitive and dated.
  • Performance degrades noticeably with large portfolios—projects with hundreds of tasks and many concurrent users can experience slow load times and sluggish form submissions.
  • No native mobile app exists; teams requiring iOS or Android access must use a browser, which produces a suboptimal experience for field workers or traveling project managers.
  • Limited third-party integrations compared to platforms like Jira or Asana mean teams that rely on Slack notifications, Confluence documentation, or Salesforce CRM sync find ProjeQtOr falls short without custom development.
  • Self-hosted deployment demands internal IT resources for server maintenance, backups, PHP version updates, and database administration—ongoing operational overhead that managed SaaS tools eliminate.

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 ProjeQtOr objects map to Microsoft Project

Each row shows how a ProjeQtOr 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.

ProjeQtOr

Project

maps to

Microsoft Project

Project (MPP) or Project Online Project

1:1
Fully supported

ProjeQtOr Project records map to Microsoft Project Project files or Project Online project sites. We extract project name, description, start date, end date, status, and priority from the project table. Project-level custom fields stored in the EAV attribute-value tables are explicitly enumerated and mapped to Microsoft Project custom text, number, date, or flag fields. ProjeQtOr's multi-project portfolio structure maps to individual MPP files or a Project Online Project PWA site collection per project.

ProjeQtOr

Task

maps to

Microsoft Project

Task

1:1
Fully supported

ProjeQtOr Tasks map directly to Microsoft Project tasks. We preserve the WBS numbering sequence stored in ProjeQtOr's WBS field and recreate the same WBS string in Microsoft Project's WBS field. Parent-child hierarchy is reconstructed using Microsoft Project's Outline Number and Summary Task structure. Task fields mapped include name, duration, start date, finish date, priority, status, and work (hours). Actual work logged against tasks in ProjeQtOr migrates as actual work in Microsoft Project, driving percent complete calculation.

ProjeQtOr

Milestone

maps to

Microsoft Project

Task (Milestone = Yes)

1:1
Fully supported

ProjeQtOr Milestones map to Microsoft Project tasks with Duration set to zero and the Milestone flag enabled. Milestone name, due date, and project association migrate directly. Milestones that serve as phase gates in ProjeQtOr are linked as predecessors to the first task of the subsequent phase to preserve the phase-gate logic.

ProjeQtOr

Resource

maps to

Microsoft Project

Resource

1:1
Fully supported

ProjeQtOr Resources (team members with calendar availability and cost rates) map to Microsoft Project Resources. We extract resource name, type (material vs work), max units (capacity percentage), hourly cost rate, and calendar exceptions from the ProjeQtOr resource and calendar tables. Resource calendars in Microsoft Project are reconstructed by mapping ProjeQtOr leave days and non-working time to calendar exceptions. ProjeQtOr skill profiles are not natively supported in Microsoft Project and are flagged for documentation.

ProjeQtOr

Allocation

maps to

Microsoft Project

Assignment

1:1
Fully supported

ProjeQtOr Allocations (resource-task assignments with start date, end date, and daily assignment percentage) map to Microsoft Project Task Assignments. We reconstruct each assignment with the assigned resource, units (percentage), start, and finish. ProjeQtOr allocation percentages translate directly to Microsoft Project assignment units. Over-allocated resources in ProjeQtOr are flagged and surfaced in a pre-migration reconciliation report so the customer can resolve before or after cutover.

ProjeQtOr

Expense

maps to

Microsoft Project

Task custom fields or external document

lossy
Fully supported

Microsoft Project has no native expense tracking module. ProjeQtOr expenses (category, amount, date, project, and VAT) are extracted and written to a structured CSV delivered alongside the migration. Each expense row references the migrated ProjeQtOr project ID. The customer imports this CSV into an expense management tool or maps it to Microsoft Project task cost fields if the expense is task-specific. We document the mapping decisions in the migration handoff.

ProjeQtOr

Risk

maps to

Microsoft Project

Task or external document

lossy
Fully supported

ProjeQtOr Risks include probability, impact, mitigation plan, and owner assignment. Microsoft Project has no native risk register. We extract all risk records to a structured CSV with probability, impact, mitigation description, owner, and project reference. The customer imports this into a risk management tool (SharePoint list, Azure DevOps, or ServiceNow) or creates risk entries as summary tasks with a risk flag custom field. We document the chosen strategy during scoping.

ProjeQtOr

Issue / Incident

maps to

Microsoft Project

Task or external document

lossy
Fully supported

ProjeQtOr Issues and Incidents are combined in a single object with type, priority, status, and description. Microsoft Project does not have a native issue log. We extract issue records to CSV and recommend mapping them to a SharePoint list integrated with the Project Online site or to a task with an issue flag. Issue type (bug, change request, incident) is preserved as a custom text field in the CSV for the customer to structure in their chosen destination.

ProjeQtOr

Document

maps to

Microsoft Project

SharePoint document library or file attachment

lossy
Fully supported

ProjeQtOr documents are file-system references stored in the database with file paths pointing to the application server's document directory. We identify all document records, locate the corresponding files, and run a parallel file transfer to the destination SharePoint document library or local file share. Attachment URLs in migrated records are updated to point to the new storage location. If the destination is Microsoft Project desktop without SharePoint, files are attached directly to the MPP file and we flag the file-size constraint.

ProjeQtOr

Custom Fields (EAV)

maps to

Microsoft Project

Custom Fields

lossy
Mapping required

ProjeQtOr extends standard objects with a flexible attribute-value model stored in separate tables. Custom fields are not direct columns; a standard column export omits them entirely. We write migration queries that explicitly join the custom field tables per object type and flatten each attribute-value pair into a named field in the destination. Fields with no natural Microsoft Project equivalent are flagged in the migration handoff for the customer to decide whether to drop them, merge into a notes field, or create a new custom field. Microsoft Project supports custom text, number, cost, date, flag, and drop-down fields per object type.

ProjeQtOr

Versions / Releases

maps to

Microsoft Project

Task or Summary Task

lossy
Mapping required

ProjeQtOr Versions track product releases linked to a project with name, number, status, and target date. Microsoft Project has no native version or release object. We map version records to summary tasks with a release flag custom field, preserving version name, target date, and status. The customer decides whether to use this as a planning construct or to document releases externally.

ProjeQtOr

Budget

maps to

Microsoft Project

Task cost fields or external document

lossy
Fully supported

ProjeQtOr Budgets track planned versus actual spending per project with line items and totals. Microsoft Project does not have a native budget tracking module beyond task cost fields. We extract budget line items to a structured CSV. For task-level costs (resource-based billing), we map planned cost and actual cost to the relevant Microsoft Project cost fields. For project-level budgets, we deliver a CSV for the customer to manage in Excel, Power BI, or a financial system.

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.

ProjeQtOr logo

ProjeQtOr gotchas

High

No API means migrations rely on database exports or UI exports

Medium

PHP and database version dependencies constrain self-hosted upgrades

Medium

Custom fields stored as EAV rows require careful mapping

Medium

File attachments and documents are server-filesystem references

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

  • No API on the ProjeQtOr side forces direct database extraction

    ProjeQtOr exposes no REST API, GraphQL endpoint, or bulk export endpoint. All migration data must be extracted via direct SQL queries against the MySQL or PostgreSQL database or through the CSV and XML export functions in the application UI. Direct database access requires read credentials with SELECT privileges across all tables without locking production data. We request a replica database connection or a read-only dump for migration scoping, and we map PHP application field names to underlying database column names using the schema documentation we generate during discovery. The XML export via the MS-Project plugin is available but limited to Projects, Tasks, Resources, and Allocations; it does not cover custom fields, expenses, risks, or documents.

  • ProjeQtOr EAV custom fields are not in standard column exports

    ProjeQtOr extends its standard objects with a flexible attribute-value model stored in separate tables. Any standard export tool or simple column-list dump will omit all custom field values unless the export query explicitly joins the custom field tables and pivots the attribute names into columns. We write migration queries that enumerate the custom field associations per object type and flatten them into destination fields during the load phase. We also flag any custom fields that have no natural equivalent in Microsoft Project so the customer can decide whether to drop them, merge them into a notes field, or create a new custom field in the destination.

  • Microsoft Project has no native risk, issue, or expense module

    ProjeQtOr bundles risk registers, issue logs, and expense tracking as native PM objects. Microsoft Project has none of these. We extract these records to structured CSV files as part of migration delivery, but they do not land as native project objects in Microsoft Project. The customer must import them into SharePoint lists, Azure DevOps, ServiceNow, or a dedicated expense tool. We document the chosen strategy during scoping and deliver the CSV with clear column headers and project references so the customer's admin can complete the import post-migration.

  • Document attachments are server file-system references requiring parallel file transfer

    Document attachments in ProjeQtOr are stored as files on the application server filesystem with references stored in the database. Migrating the records alone produces broken links. We identify all document records, locate the corresponding files in the ProjeQtOr file storage directory, and run a parallel file transfer to the destination's document storage location using the same folder hierarchy. We then update the attachment URLs in migrated records. If the destination is Microsoft Project desktop without SharePoint, files attach directly to the MPP file, and we flag the per-file-size constraint.

  • WBS numbering requires explicit reconstruction from ProjeQtOr's outline structure

    ProjeQtOr stores WBS numbers as a flat field on each task. Microsoft Project generates WBS numbers from its outline structure, not from imported values. We preserve the original ProjeQtOr WBS string in a custom WBS_source field and reconstruct Microsoft Project's outline hierarchy from the parent_id references during import. If ProjeQtOr uses non-standard WBS formatting (alphanumeric codes, phase prefixes), the customer chooses whether to regenerate WBS numbers in Microsoft Project's standard numeric format or preserve the original codes in the custom field for reference.

Migration approach

Six steps for a successful ProjeQtOr to Microsoft Project data migration

  1. Discovery and source-environment assessment

    We audit the ProjeQtOr instance to establish migration scope: PHP version, database engine (MySQL or PostgreSQL), schema version, number of active projects, task count per project, resource count, allocation patterns, and presence of custom fields, risks, issues, expenses, and documents. We request read-only database credentials or a replica connection. We also identify the ProjeQtOr MS-Project plugin availability (bundled in the Enterprise Edition) and assess whether XML export is viable for the core scheduling objects. The discovery output is a written migration scope document with record counts per object type and a database-readiness checklist.

  2. Schema extraction and EAV custom-field enumeration

    We run schema discovery queries against the ProjeQtOr database to map application field names to database column names for Projects, Tasks, Milestones, Resources, Allocations, Expenses, Risks, Issues, and Documents. We specifically enumerate the EAV custom field tables, identify which attributes apply to which object types, and build the pivot query that flattens custom fields into export columns. We generate a schema map document that documents every field we will extract, its source column, data type, and destination mapping for Microsoft Project.

  3. Destination preparation and resource calendar design

    We set up the destination Microsoft Project environment: create or confirm the Project Online site or Project desktop file, establish the resource pool, and design the custom fields that will receive ProjeQtOr data (text, number, cost, date, and flag fields per object type). We map ProjeQtOr resource calendars (leave days and non-working time) to Microsoft Project calendar exceptions. We define the WBS reconstruction strategy and any custom field mapping decisions made during scoping. All custom field definitions are documented before any data is written.

  4. Sandbox migration and record reconciliation

    We run a full migration into a Microsoft Project sandbox environment (Project Online test site or local MPP file in a test folder). We extract ProjeQtOr data via the direct database queries, run the EAV flatten transform, and import into the sandbox. The customer's PM lead reconciles record counts, spot-checks 20-30 task records for accuracy (dates, durations, WBS, predecessors), verifies resource assignments, and confirms that milestone dates match the source. Any mapping corrections are made before production migration begins.

  5. Production migration in dependency order

    We run production migration in record-dependency order: Resources first (so the resource pool is populated before assignments), then Projects with Tasks and Milestones (preserving WBS and predecessor chains), then Allocations (reconstructing resource-task assignments with correct units and dates), then custom fields (mapped from the EAV flatten), then Expenses and Risks (as CSV delivery alongside the MPP), then Documents (parallel file transfer with URL update). Each phase emits a row-count reconciliation report before the next phase begins.

  6. Cutover, validation, and handoff

    We freeze ProjeQtOr writes during cutover and run a final delta migration of any records modified during the migration window. We validate task counts, resource counts, milestone dates, and allocation totals in the destination against the ProjeQtOr source. We deliver the Expenses CSV, Risks CSV, and Issues CSV with clear column headers and project ID references. We do not rebuild ProjeQtOr workflows, status workflow definitions, or bug-tracking modules in Microsoft Project because no equivalent automation engine exists natively; we deliver a written inventory of these for the customer's admin to handle separately.

Platform deep dives

Context on both ends of the pair

ProjeQtOr logo

ProjeQtOr

Source

Strengths

  • Completely free and open source under AGPLv3+ with no artificial user, project, or feature caps.
  • Wide functional scope covering tasks, resources, risks, expenses, documents, budgets, and bug tracking in a single application.
  • Supports MySQL and PostgreSQL, giving teams flexibility in their database infrastructure and hosting environment.
  • Active community and documented MS-Project import/export via a dedicated plugin for organizations migrating from or to other PM platforms.
  • Multi-platform deployment on Windows, Linux, macOS and web-based access from any modern browser.

Weaknesses

  • No documented REST, GraphQL, or bulk API—migrations require direct database queries or XML/CSV export from the application UI, which is error-prone for large datasets.
  • Self-hosted model places all server maintenance, backups, and security hardening on the customer's IT team.
  • No native mobile applications; mobile access depends entirely on the responsive web interface which users describe as functional but not polished.
  • Limited integration ecosystem compared to commercial alternatives—no native Zapier, Microsoft Teams, or Google Workspace connectors.
  • User interface complexity and dated visual design create a steeper onboarding curve than modern SaaS project management tools.
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. 1 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 ProjeQtOr and Microsoft Project.

  • Object compatibility

    B

    1 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

    ProjeQtOr: Not applicable—no API exposed.

  • Data volume sensitivity

    B

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

Estimator

Estimate your ProjeQtOr 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 ProjeQtOr to Microsoft Project data migrations

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

Can't find your answer?

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

Book a free 30 minute consultation

Migrations land between three and five weeks for portfolios with fewer than 500 tasks per project and fewer than 20 resources, assuming direct database access is available and no complex EAV custom-field mapping is required. Portfolios with 500+ tasks per project, multi-resource allocation patterns, expense-line histories, or large document repositories move to six to ten weeks because of query complexity, allocation reconstruction, and parallel file transfer work. Microsoft Project Online retirement planning adds urgency but does not change the migration duration estimate.

Adjacent paths

Related migrations to explore

Ready when you are

Move from ProjeQtOr.
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