PART OF THE EBS → FUSION CASE STUDY

    EBS → Oracle Fusion Migration Approach: Mock Runs, Cutover & Hypercare

    A staged, evidence-driven method: configure the tool, prove it across three main runs (the later ones at full volume) and many smaller delta runs, then execute a sequenced production cutover with hypercare, followed by a historical data load post go-live.

    3
    Main runs + delta
    Item→…→Finance
    Cutover sequence
    5-day
    Hypercare
    Post go-live
    Historical load

    Five stages, each with a gate

    1

    Tool configuration

    Syntra configured for the Fusion procurement scope — templates, mappings, target-schema validations and non-prod connectivity — and proven end-to-end on a small sample before any real data moved.

    2

    Three main runs

    Three main transform-and-load runs into Fusion non-prod: the first on a representative dataset to prove the mappings, the next two at full production volume (including the 1M+ item master) to prove throughput and finalise the cutover runbook.

    3

    Many delta runs

    Between the main runs, many smaller delta runs loaded only the corrected and changed records, converging to a clean, reconciled load without re-running the full volume each time.

    4

    Production cutover + hypercare

    Production load executed per the runbook in the sequence Item → Supplier → Procurement → Finance, with per-wave reconciliation and a fixed hypercare window for tool-side reruns.

    5

    Historical data load

    Post go-live, historical procurement transactions and attachments loaded to Fusion/UCM in document-type batches, with a final reconciliation pack.

    Why the cutover sequence matters

    Master data must exist before the transactions that reference it. Loading Item → Supplier → Procurement → Finance means that by the time purchase orders load, their items, suppliers and sites are already in Fusion — and by the time AP invoices load, their POs and suppliers exist too. Sequencing removes a whole class of “parent not found” failures.

    Governance that kept it clean

    🧊

    Spec freeze per milestone

    Templates, value sets, mappings and the BU master were frozen at the start of each milestone. Later changes were handled as change requests, so in-flight work wasn’t invalidated mid-run.

    🧪

    Golden records first

    Small “golden record” sets validated mappings before full-volume runs, catching setup issues cheaply.

    ⏱️

    Deemed acceptance

    Each milestone closed on a technical closure pack and a fixed acceptance window — decoupling delivery pace from long business sign-off cycles.

    🤝

    Single interface

    Syntra worked through PwC as the single operational interface, with a written audit trail for every dataset received and every sign-off requested.

    Frequently asked questions

    Why three main runs and many delta runs?

    The first main run proves the mappings on a representative dataset; the later main runs prove throughput at full production volume and finalise the cutover runbook. Between them, many smaller delta runs load only the corrected and changed records, converging to a clean, reconciled load without re-running the full volume each time — so production day holds no surprises.

    What order was data loaded in?

    Item → Supplier → Procurement → Finance, so every transaction’s referenced master data already exists in Fusion when it loads.

    What happened after go-live?

    A historical data-load phase moved years of historical procurement transactions and their attachments into Fusion/UCM, reconciled and delivered as a closure pack.

    Planning an Oracle EBS to Oracle Fusion migration?

    Tell us your source EBS footprint, modules and business units — we'll scope a mock-run-based transform-and-load plan on the Syntra ETL platform.