Project Management migration

Migrate from Tability to Asana

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

Tability logo

Tability

Source

Asana

Destination

Asana logo

Compatibility

83%

10 of 12

objects map 1:1 between Tability and Asana.

Complexity

BStandard

Timeline

3-5 weeks

Rollback included Accuracy guarantee Field-level validation

Overview

What this migration involves

Moving from Tability to Asana is a migration from a purpose-built OKR platform into a broader work-management suite that layers Goals on top of project tracking. Tability's Objectives and Key Results map into Asana's Goals and custom-field-augmented Projects, but the structural relationship differs: Tability embeds progress measurement directly in OKR records, while Asana stores progress on Goals as a separate rollup requiring manual or rule-driven updates. We sequence migration by exporting Objectives first, then Key Results, then Tasks linked to those OKRs, and merge in the check-in history as task comments or Goal notes. We do not migrate Tability's AI-generated goal drafts, Strategy Map dependency graphs (which have no export format), or the weekly reminder automations, which are rebuilt as Asana Rules or manually on the Advanced tier.

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

Tability logo

Tability

What's pushing teams away

  • Teams outgrow the platform as OKR programs scale across departments, citing insufficient cross-team visibility and reporting depth for organizations beyond 50-100 users
  • Layout and navigation UX frustrates power users who need fast access to objectives and quick-check workflows, with multiple reviews flagging unnecessary complexity in the interface
  • The platform skews toward simple weekly check-ins rather than strategic planning, leading teams who want roadmapping and portfolio-level goal management to seek more capable alternatives
  • Limited API and automation capabilities push technically-oriented teams toward platforms with better programmatic access and custom workflow support
  • Pricing becomes less competitive at scale, especially when teams require advanced analytics, SSO, and audit capabilities available only on higher tiers

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 Tability objects map to Asana

Each row shows how a Tability 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.

Tability

Objective

maps to

Asana

Goal

1:1
Fully supported

Tability Objectives map to Asana Goals. We preserve the objective title, description, owner (mapped by email to Asana User), start/end dates, and current status (At Risk, On Track, Completed). Parent-child objective hierarchies in Tability map to Asana's hierarchical Goals with a parent_goal_gid reference. Progress percentage migrates as a manual value in Asana's progress field since Asana Goals do not auto-rollup from sub-items without an integration.

Tability

Key Result

maps to

Asana

Goal (via custom fields)

1:many
Fully supported

Tability Key Results are sub-objects attached to Objectives with a metric type (number, percentage, currency, binary), current value, target value, and unit label. Asana has no native Key Result sub-object; we model Key Results as custom fields on the linked Asana Project or as numbered Tasks under a Key Results grouping section. For numeric Key Results, we create Asana custom number fields; for percentage Key Results, we create percentage fields; for binary (yes/no) Key Results, we create a checkbox custom field. The Objective-Key Result relationship is preserved by linking each KR Task or field group to the parent Goal.

Tability

Check-in

maps to

Asana

Task Comment or Goal Note

1:1
Fully supported

Tability check-in history (date, author, note, updated progress value) does not export in the standard CSV. We extract it from the activity log separately and merge it by Objective and Key Result ID. Check-ins attach to the corresponding Asana Goal as Notes (for objective-level check-ins) or to the parent Project Task (for Key Result-level check-ins). The original author and timestamp are preserved. If the activity log is inaccessible on the customer's tier, we flag the gap before migration.

Tability

Task

maps to

Asana

Task

1:1
Fully supported

Tability Tasks connected to Objectives carry assignees, due dates, and completion status. We map them to Asana Tasks, preserving the objective linkage as an Asana Tag (named with the parent objective title) so that task-to-OKR alignment is visible via tag filtering. Due dates, assignees, and completion status transfer directly. Subtasks in Tability map to Asana Subtasks under the parent Task.

Tability

User / Owner

maps to

Asana

User

1:1
Fully supported

Tability user records carry name, email, and role. We match by email to the destination Asana organization's User directory. Owners without a matching Asana User are flagged as ghost owners and held in a reconciliation queue; the customer provisions matching Asana users before record import resumes.

Tability

Custom Property

maps to

Asana

Custom Field

lossy
Fully supported

Tability allows custom fields on Objectives and Key Results. We export them as name-value pairs and map them to Asana custom fields by type: text to Asana text fields, numbers to number fields, dates to date fields, and dropdowns to enum fields. Asana does not allow custom field type changes after creation; we create new fields with the correct type before import and flag any type mismatches for customer resolution.

Tability

Tag / Label

maps to

Asana

Tag

1:1
Fully supported

Tags applied to Tability Objectives and Key Results export as a string array. We map them to Asana Tags with identical labels. Asana Tags are org-wide and can be applied across projects; this preserves cross-project tagging that Tability supports.

Tability

Strategy Map

maps to

Asana

Dependency Linkage (manual rebuild)

1:1
Mapping required

Tability's Strategy Map visualizes cross-team objective alignment and dependencies as a UI-level graph with no structured export format. We extract a best-effort adjacency list by querying each Objective's linked dependencies from the Tability UI. On Asana, dependencies are task-level constructs (not goal-level), so we document the dependency pairs and deliver a written relinking guide for the customer's admin to rebuild using Asana's dependency linking on the migrated Projects. Organizations with more than 20 cross-linked objectives should plan for a manual review session post-migration.

Tability

Dashboard

maps to

Asana

Portfolio / Project Dashboard (manual rebuild)

1:1
Fully supported

Tability dashboards are saved view configurations with chart layouts and filter states. These are UI-level constructs without semantic data. We do not migrate dashboard layouts. The customer rebuilds visibility using Asana Portfolios (Advanced tier) or project-level reporting views. We document the key metrics and objectives visible on each Tability dashboard so the customer can configure equivalent Asana views.

Tability

Standup

maps to

Asana

None

1:1
Fully supported

Tability Standups are async daily updates scoped to individuals. They are transient, conversation-level data with no structural equivalent in Asana. We do not migrate standups. If the customer uses standups for OKR-adjacent progress tracking, we recommend Asana's My Tasks view or a daily standup section within a project as the replacement.

Tability

AI Goal Recommendations

maps to

Asana

None

1:1
Not supported

Tability's AI-generated goal drafts and suggestions exist within the platform's AI layer and are not stored as exportable database records. They cannot be migrated to any destination platform. Asana does not offer an equivalent AI goal recommendation feature at this time. We document this boundary upfront so customers do not expect their AI-generated draft library to carry over.

Tability

Integration Configuration

maps to

Asana

Integration Reconfiguration (documented)

1:1
Fully supported

Tability integration settings (Jira, Slack, Teams, Asana connectors) are destination-side configurations that do not export. We document which tools were connected to Tability and deliver a reconfiguration checklist for each so the customer can re-establish the connections in their Asana workspace. The Asana integration settings in particular (Tability's bidirectional Asana sync) are replaced by using Asana Goals natively.

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.

Tability logo

Tability gotchas

High

No documented public API for bulk exports

High

Check-in history is not exported in standard CSV

Medium

AI-generated goal drafts are not structural data

Medium

Per-seat pricing with no published rate card

Low

Strategy Map dependency graph has no export format

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

  • Tability has no public API — CSV export has column and row limits

    Tability does not publish a documented public REST API with bulk data endpoints. Migration relies on the built-in CSV export, which has column and row limits that may truncate workspaces with more than 50 objectives or 500 Key Results. We batch exports by Tability workspace or date range, reconstruct the full dataset from multiple CSV files, and cross-reference against the activity log for check-in history. Customers should request a pre-export data audit to confirm all Objectives and Key Results fit within export limits; large workspaces may require a manual Tability data pull assisted by Tability support.

  • Check-in history does not export in the standard CSV

    The CSV export from Tability captures current progress values and status but drops the check-in log—the dated trail of progress updates with author notes. We reconstruct check-in history by exporting the activity log separately and merging it with the CSV export by Objective and Key Result ID. If the activity log is not accessible (e.g., on certain Tability tiers), we flag the gap and advise the customer to screenshot key check-in periods before cutover. Without check-in history, the progress narrative for each Objective is incomplete on day one in Asana.

  • Asana Goals and Key Results have no native linked object model

    Asana Goals do not have a native Key Result sub-object equivalent to Tability's OKR structure. Progress on Asana Goals is entered manually or pulled from integrations (currently Jira, Aha!, or Miro). We model Key Results as custom fields on linked Projects or as numbered Tasks, but the rollup to the parent Goal must be updated manually or via Asana Rules. Organizations that rely on Tability's auto-calculated Key Result progress percentages will need to change their check-in workflow in Asana. We document this gap during scoping and recommend a manual progress update cadence or a third-party OKR integration.

  • Asana OKR features require Advanced tier ($24.99/user/mo)

    Asana's Goals module — the destination for migrated Objectives — is gated to the Advanced plan at $24.99 per user per month. Starter ($10.99/user) and most existing Asana customers on lower tiers will see a significant license cost increase to access Goals. We verify the customer's current Asana tier during scoping and flag the upgrade requirement. Teams migrating from Tability's $5-8/user plans will experience a 3-5x per-seat cost increase. We do not include Asana license procurement in migration scope.

  • Strategy Map dependency graph has no structured export

    The cross-team alignment visualization in Tability's Strategy Map is a UI-level construct. There is no export of the dependency graph as structured data. We export a best-effort adjacency list by querying each Objective's linked dependencies manually from the UI, but this is fragile for organizations with more than 20 cross-linked objectives. We flag large dependency graphs for manual relinking planning on the destination. The customer should allocate a planning session for their OKR program manager to rebuild the alignment map in Asana's Goals hierarchy or via a documented spreadsheet.

Migration approach

Six steps for a successful Tability to Asana data migration

  1. Discovery and data audit

    We audit the Tability workspace across account tier, workspace count, objective hierarchy depth, Key Result volume, check-in frequency, task linkage count, and custom field configurations. We request a pre-export data audit from Tability support for workspaces exceeding CSV row limits. We also verify the customer's current Asana tier and confirm whether the Goals module is accessible (requires Advanced). The discovery output is a written migration scope document with record counts per object type, a list of any inaccessible data (activity log, AI drafts, Strategy Map), and an Asana tier recommendation.

  2. CSV batch export and activity log extraction

    We guide the customer through Tability's multi-batch CSV export process, grouping by workspace or date range to stay within column and row limits. We extract the activity log separately for check-in history reconstruction. Each batch is validated for row count, column completeness, and referential integrity (Objective IDs on Key Results, Owner IDs on all records) before the next batch is exported. Any records that exceed export limits are flagged and pulled manually with Tability support assistance.

  3. Schema design in Asana

    We configure the Asana destination workspace before migration. This includes creating custom fields on the target Projects (matching Tability's Key Result metric types: number, percentage, currency, checkbox), creating Tags that mirror Tability's tag labels, setting up a Goals hierarchy structure that reflects Tability's parent-child Objective relationships, and establishing a naming convention that preserves Tability's workspace separation within Asana Projects or Portfolios. Custom fields are created in Asana before any data import to avoid type-mismatch issues since Asana does not allow field type changes after creation.

  4. User reconciliation and owner mapping

    We extract every distinct Tability Owner referenced on Objectives, Key Results, and Tasks and match by email against the Asana destination organization's User table. Owners without a matching Asana User go to a reconciliation queue for the customer's admin to provision. Migration cannot proceed past this step because assignee and owner lookups must be satisfied at import time. We also verify that the customer has Asana Advanced licensing for all owners who need Goal creation access.

  5. Production migration in dependency order

    We run production migration in record-dependency order: Asana Goals first (from Tability Objectives), then Projects with custom fields (from Tability Key Results), then Tasks (linked to parent Objectives via Tags), then check-in history (merged as Goal Notes and Task Comments), then tags. Each phase emits a row-count reconciliation report before the next phase begins. Strategy Map dependencies are documented as a structured adjacency list and delivered as a manual relinking guide rather than imported.

  6. Cutover, validation, and automations handoff

    We freeze Tability writes during cutover, run a final delta migration of any records modified during the migration window, then enable Asana as the system of record. We deliver the Automation Rebuild Checklist for Asana Rules (weekly reminder automations equivalent to Tability's check-in reminders) and the Strategy Map relinking guide for the customer's admin. We support a one-week hypercare window where we resolve any reconciliation issues. We do not rebuild Tability's weekly reminder automations as Asana Rules inside the migration scope.

Platform deep dives

Context on both ends of the pair

Tability logo

Tability

Source

Strengths

  • Weekly automated check-in reminders reduce manager overhead and keep OKR conversations flowing without dedicated follow-up
  • AI goal generation speeds up the goal-writing process for teams new to OKR methodology
  • Multiple view modes (list, Kanban, dashboard, Strategy Map) accommodate different roles from contributor to executive
  • Native Microsoft Teams integration makes Tability accessible within the Microsoft 365 environment where many enterprise teams already live
  • Strategy Map provides visual cross-team alignment without requiring complex manual linking of objectives

Weaknesses

  • Limited API surface means programmatic migration and automation require workarounds or manual export/import steps
  • Reporting and dashboard capabilities are basic compared to enterprise OKR platforms, with users reporting insufficient visibility at scale
  • Layout and navigation UX receives consistent criticism in user reviews, particularly for power users who interact with the tool frequently
  • No native time-tracking or resource-planning features, making it unsuitable for teams that want OKRs embedded within broader project delivery
  • Custom field and object extensibility is minimal, constraining organizations that need to model domain-specific Key Result types
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. 3 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 Tability and Asana.

  • Object compatibility

    B

    3 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

    Tability: Not publicly documented.

  • Data volume sensitivity

    B

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

Estimator

Estimate your Tability 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 Tability to Asana data migrations

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

Can't find your answer?

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

Book a free 30 minute consultation

Migrations under 50 Objectives, 200 Key Results, and 1,000 Tasks land between three and five weeks. Migrations with large check-in histories (over 5,000 records), multiple Tability workspaces, complex Strategy Map dependency graphs, or cross-team hierarchies move to seven to eleven weeks because of multi-batch CSV processing, activity log reconstruction, and manual dependency relinking planning. Timeline is also affected by the customer's Asana tier verification and user provisioning speed.

Adjacent paths

Related migrations to explore

Ready when you are

Move from Tability.
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