# ERP Go-Live Readiness Assessment > Source: https://netray.co/tools/erp-go-live-readiness-assessment > Publisher: Netray (netray.co), AI and integration engineering for ERP and manufacturing systems. > Section: Free Tools ## Short answer A ten-question scored assessment of your ERP go-live readiness, with a verdict and recommended actions before your go/no-go meeting. ## Category erp-migration ## Audience - Project manager - Steering committee - IT director - Executive sponsor ## Tool **Kind:** assessment **Questions:** #### How complete is user acceptance testing? **Help:** Think of the share of planned scripts executed and the open defect position. **Options:** ##### Less than half of scripts run, severity 1 or 2 defects open **Score:** 0 ##### Most scripts run, some severity 2 defects still open **Score:** 1 ##### All scripts run, only severity 3 or lower open with workarounds **Score:** 2 ##### All scripts passed and signed off by process owners **Score:** 3 #### How many full data migration rehearsals have you completed? **Options:** ##### None **Score:** 0 ##### One, with significant errors still open **Score:** 1 ##### Two, reconciled with minor open differences **Score:** 2 ##### Three or more, including a dress rehearsal signed off by data owners **Score:** 3 #### Is there a written cutover runbook with timings from rehearsal? **Options:** ##### No runbook yet **Score:** 0 ##### Draft runbook with estimated timings **Score:** 1 ##### Runbook with rehearsal timings but no rollback plan tested **Score:** 2 ##### Rehearsed runbook with owners, timings and an agreed rollback trigger **Score:** 3 #### How many end users have completed training for their role? **Options:** ##### Under 50 percent **Score:** 0 ##### 50 to 74 percent **Score:** 1 ##### 75 to 94 percent **Score:** 2 ##### 95 percent or more, with role-based access verified **Score:** 3 #### How ready are interfaces and integrations (EDI, banking, shop floor, tax)? **Options:** ##### Several not tested end to end **Score:** 0 ##### Tested in isolation but not in a full cycle **Score:** 1 ##### Tested end to end with partners for most interfaces **Score:** 2 ##### All tested end to end, with monitoring and switchover steps documented **Score:** 3 #### How is security and user access prepared? **Options:** ##### Roles not finalised **Score:** 0 ##### Roles built but not tested by role owners **Score:** 1 ##### Roles tested, segregation of duties review in progress **Score:** 2 ##### Roles tested, segregation of duties reviewed and approved by audit or finance **Score:** 3 #### Is post go-live support organised? **Options:** ##### No hypercare plan **Score:** 0 ##### Plan exists but no named staffing **Score:** 1 ##### Named team and issue process, no exit criteria **Score:** 2 ##### Named team, issue log, severity SLAs and agreed hypercare exit criteria **Score:** 3 #### How ready is the business operationally for the change? **Help:** Consider key user availability, SOP updates, and frozen or reduced operations during cutover. **Options:** ##### Business not aware of the cutover impact **Score:** 0 ##### Communicated but procedures not updated **Score:** 1 ##### Procedures updated, some departments unconfirmed **Score:** 2 ##### Procedures updated, departments confirmed, customers and suppliers notified **Score:** 3 #### How current is finance readiness (period-end, tax, reporting)? **Options:** ##### Close and reporting not tested **Score:** 0 ##### Test close run but reports not validated **Score:** 1 ##### Close and key reports validated in test **Score:** 2 ##### Close, tax and statutory reports validated, opening balances reconciled **Score:** 3 #### Is there a formal go/no-go decision process? **Options:** ##### No criteria or date set **Score:** 0 ##### Date set but no written criteria **Score:** 1 ##### Written criteria, owners not yet confirmed **Score:** 2 ##### Written criteria, named decision makers and a scheduled go/no-go meeting **Score:** 3 **Bands:** #### Not ready **Min:** 0 **Max:** 39 **Verdict:** Major gaps remain in testing, data, cutover or support. Going live on the current date carries high risk of operational disruption. **Recommendations:** - Re-baseline the go-live date and take the new date to the steering committee - Run another data migration rehearsal and complete UAT before setting a date - Document a cutover runbook and agree rollback criteria - Name the hypercare team and the issue process #### At risk **Min:** 40 **Max:** 64 **Verdict:** Progress is real but several readiness areas are still weak. A go decision would need clear mitigations and executive acceptance of the risk. **Recommendations:** - List the lowest-scoring areas and give each an owner and due date - Complete a dress rehearsal with timings and reconciliation - Confirm training coverage for all roles that touch orders, inventory and finance - Define severity 1 and 2 workarounds before go-live #### Nearly ready **Min:** 65 **Max:** 84 **Verdict:** Most areas are in good shape. Close the remaining gaps and confirm rollback and hypercare arrangements before the go/no-go meeting. **Recommendations:** - Close any open severity 2 defects or document accepted workarounds - Rehearse the rollback decision at least once on paper - Confirm business unit readiness and communicate the freeze period to customers and suppliers - Agree hypercare exit criteria #### Ready for go/no-go **Min:** 85 **Max:** 100 **Verdict:** Readiness is strong across the areas assessed. Proceed to the formal go/no-go meeting and keep the cutover and hypercare teams on a short standing meeting. **Recommendations:** - Hold the go/no-go meeting with written criteria and named decision makers - Keep the runbook under change control until cutover - Set up the hypercare issue log and daily stand-up - Plan the first month-end close support in advance ## Content **Intro:** A go/no-go decision should rest on evidence, not on the date on the plan. This assessment scores ten readiness areas so the steering committee can see where the project really stands. **Sections:** #### How to use the assessment **Body:** Answer each question as honestly as you can, using the status of your project today rather than the plan. Ideally have the project manager, the IT lead and a business process owner each answer independently, then compare. Differences in answers are as useful as the score itself because they show where the team does not share the same picture. Use the verdict and recommendations as a starting agenda for the go/no-go meeting. #### What the questions measure **Body:** The questions cover the areas that most often decide whether a cutover goes well: acceptance testing, data rehearsals, the cutover runbook, user training, interfaces, security roles, support readiness, business operational readiness, finance readiness and the go/no-go process. Each is scored from zero to three. The total is converted to a percentage and matched to one of four bands, from not ready to ready for go/no-go. **Bullets:** - Evidence over opinion: ask for the test result, not the assurance - Rehearsed timings beat estimated timings - Role-based access must be verified with real users - Hypercare exit criteria prevent endless support #### Reading the result **Body:** A single weak area can matter more than the total. A project scoring well on training but with no rehearsed data load is still at risk, so look at individual answers as well. If two or more answers are zero, treat the project as not ready regardless of the average. Document the accepted risks, who accepted them and the mitigation, in the go/no-go minutes. #### Common mistakes **Body:** Teams often confuse activity with readiness: training delivered is not the same as users able to perform their tasks, and tests run is not the same as tests passed. Another is treating the go-live date as fixed and the criteria as flexible. Reverse that. Fix the criteria early, and move the date if the criteria are not met. **Cta:** If you want a second pair of eyes on your readiness evidence, particularly on data reconciliation and report validation, we can review it with you and suggest checks worth automating. **Faq:** #### What are typical ERP go/no-go criteria? **Answer:** Common criteria include UAT sign-off with no open severity 1 or 2 defects, a reconciled dress rehearsal, trained users, tested interfaces, verified security roles, a rehearsed cutover and rollback plan, and a staffed hypercare team. #### Who makes the go/no-go decision? **Answer:** The steering committee, chaired by the executive sponsor, normally decides on the project manager's recommendation. Process owners for finance, operations and supply chain should be present and each state their area's readiness. #### When should the go/no-go meeting be held? **Answer:** Usually one to two weeks before cutover for the main decision, with a final confirmation on the day the freeze starts. This leaves time to correct gaps or to communicate a delay to customers and suppliers. #### What if the score is low but the date is fixed? **Answer:** Document the risks, define workarounds and add contingency such as extra support staff. Where the date is driven by a licence expiry or a statutory deadline, consider limited-scope go-live rather than forcing every module live at once. ## Search terms erp go live readiness assessment, go live readiness checklist erp, erp go no go criteria, erp go live criteria, are we ready for erp go live, erp readiness scorecard, go live readiness review, erp go no go decision template --- Talk to an engineer: https://netray.co/contact?intent=erp_ai | Machine catalog: https://netray.co/agent/catalog.json