Posted September 19th, 2017, 12:58 PM
The website wasn't a migration - they could have rolled that back once they realised they weren't ready - or kept it up to date
I assume you are saying the PCPC is a migration - that's correct but I've never understood why a migration would take months to achieve
I guess they pressed on - but it does seem to be a poor planned and executed project
The website is totally part of the migration.
There are at least three systems that live under the website that drive everything you see -- the CMS (Content Management System), CRM (Customer Relationship Management system), and the reservations system, via whatever portal they have to interface with for that part.
The CMS drives the content on the pages. I don't know for a fact that the CMS wasn't migrated as part of the new website, but if they WERE using the same CMS, the sailing details would match on the legacy site with the new site. To me it appears they are still using the legacy CMS as the primary, since it's functional and tested, and that's why it's the most current. Why the data so infrequently gets pushed from the old system to the new system probably speaks to how different it is, or how antiquated the old system may be, but regardless this is one layer of the migration.
The CRM and the reservation systems together drive the rest of the content, like the "accounts," the PCPC, etc.. This stuff is also bidirectional, or at least should be. Either the reservation system should be connected to the shore excursions from the CMS, or the CMS should be referencing the excursions from the reservation system, for example. The CRM pulls from the reservation system primarily, but also should be able to reference the CMS in order to flesh out what some of the history it holds on a customer. Similarly, reservation system is as dependent on the CRM as the CRM is on it -- the CRM has all of the customer details needed for new reservations, but it also has all of the history on that customer. The reservation system loses that after a short period of time.
ALL of these things drive parts of the website, and there's the challenge. Each of these systems is tricky to migrate, and migrating all of them is a major pain. Again, I'm not saying a year (or whatever it's been) is a reasonable amount of time or not
, but there is definitely more to it than I think people acknowledge here.
For frame of reference, AA has been migrating either their or US's various systems (mostly in the US>AA direction) for the past three years, and similarly there were weeks that either internal or customer facing components were unavailable. Granted none of them anywhere near as major as the PCPC, but just like the AA migration, I'm sure these are not the only systems getting modernized and/or integrated in the plan.