Planning models · not client results
See how migration decisions
See how migration decisions
are measured.
These planning examples show the baseline, target, measurement window and evidence source Bayna Studio records for a migration decision. The values are illustrative, not client results or prices.
Illustrative planning scenario
A six-week release cycle is constrained by manual handoffs.
Observed baseline6 weeks
→
between production releases
Modeled target2 weeks
after separating release paths
- Manual handoffs
- 11 → 5
- Change window
- 2 h → 30 min
- Evidence
- Pipeline history + signed release record
The decision is not “move faster.” It is whether five explicit gates can replace eleven person-to-person handoffs without exceeding the 30-minute operating window.
Illustrative planning scenario
A recurring-cost model separates monthly operation from one-off migration work.
Current monthly run cost€18,400
−
Modeled stable run cost€11,900
× 12 =
First-year recurring difference€78,000
- Formula
- (€18,400 − €11,900) × 12
- Excluded
- One-off migration cost
- Evidence
- Invoices + agreed cost model
No value is assigned to avoided incidents. The model remains useful only if the same services, usage window and ownership boundary are compared.
Illustrative planning scenario
A reporting service moves first while the transaction core stays live.
- First move
- Reporting reads
- Known state kept live
- Transaction core
- Evidence
- Reconciliation log + acceptance sign-off
The 21-day period is not a universal recommendation. It is a modeled measurement window tied to a specific rollback condition.
Calibration ruleReplace every example with
Replace every example with
your platform data.
- Observethe current platform baseline
- Agreethe target and measurement window
- Verifyagainst a named technical source
A project record uses the client's real system data, not the illustrative values above.
Submit a technical enquiry