MS Project Online Migration Guide · 2026
Market data shows that SharePoint 2013 workflows were retired in April 2026, which has likely already broken the governance processes for many Project Online users. This explains the surge in "comparison" and "replacement" intent as PMO leaders scramble to fix these gaps before the final September 30, 2026 cutoff. Your "Trusted Expert" messaging is perfectly timed for this high-urgency phase.
Leaving Behind · Project Online
∞ Custom fields
Native
Full
Gantt & Baselines
Native
Resource pool
Gantt & scheduling
Critical path, baselines, all dependency types — FS, SS, FF, SF with lag and lead. Built in, recalculates automatically.
Resource management
Enterprise Resource Pool with availability, allocation percentages, and overallocation alerts — core to the scheduling engine
Cross-dept workflows
Project Online is built for project scheduling only. HR, Finance, Legal, and Support run in separate systems.
Agile / Scrum
Waterfall-first. Teams running Agile use a separate tool and reconcile data manually.
Power BI reporting
Direct connector — project data flows into existing reports without export steps or middleware.
Availability
Retiring September 30, 2026. No longer available for new subscriptions. No extensions announced.
Inside Microsoft 365
Navigate and link documents in SharePoint, surface the plan right inside Teams.
Moving To · jira cloud
What JIRA gives & costs
+2
Add-ons for Gantt
1
Platform for all
teams
Config
Required
upfront
Gantt & scheduling
Basic roadmaps built in. Full critical path and dependencies require Structure.Gantt or BigGantt — a separate add-on with its own license and setup.
Resource management
Tempo Planner covers it well once configured — adds per-user cost and a dedicated setup phase before it's usable at scale.
Time tracking
Native worklog on every task. Tempo adds approval workflows, billing rates, and team-level reporting — embedded in the daily work flow.
Cross-dept workflows
One platform for PM, HR, Finance, Legal, and Support. A bank runs loan approvals here. A consultancy tracks projects and client onboarding in one place.
Agile / Scrum
Native — what Jira was built for. Backlog, sprints, boards, velocity. Agile and Waterfall on the same underlying data.
Reporting
Operational dashboards built in. Power BI models connected to Project Online need rework — data structure changes after migration.
Total cost
Base license is competitive. Add Tempo + Structure.Gantt and per-user cost rises significantly. Budget for add-ons from day one.
Get a right-fit assessment →
The Real Work
Moving from Project Online to Jira isn’t an export-import.
These five carry over as work, not data.
01
Jira configuration
Workflows, permission schemes, issue hierarchy, and project templates — designed before a single project is migrated. This is where most implementations quietly fail.
02
Scheduling add-ons
Structure.Gantt or BigGantt selected, licensed, and configured to mirror the scheduling logic your PMs rely on. Each dependency type and baseline rule rebuilt.
03
Resource model
Tempo set up with availability, allocation, and approval workflows. At scale — 500+ users with detailed timesheets — load testing is not optional before go-live.
04
Reporting continuity
Stakeholder dashboards rebuilt for day one. Power BI models connected to Project Online need rework before they can read from Jira.
05
Team training
PMs and operations teams retrained before cutover — not after. Jira is different enough that a cold switch without preparation produces immediate pushback.
This is the part that breaks quietly if no one plans it.
Map your migration →
Right tool, right team
Not every team should move to Jira. Here's how to read the signals before
you commit.
On the real argument
for Jira
The strongest cases I see are companies where five different departments are running five different tools — and someone realizes Jira can replace most of them. A bank with loan approvals in email, project tracking in Project Online, and HR tickets in a spreadsheet. One platform for all of that is a real operational gain, not just a technical preference.
On Tempo at scale
On one project — 2,000 users, 100+ projects, detailed timesheet reporting across every team — Tempo was causing browser crashes during report generation. Not a dealbreaker, but something to test at your actual data volume before you commit. The browser-based model has a ceiling that file-based systems don't hit the same way.
On migration timelines
Most plans underestimate the Jira configuration phase by a factor of two. The data transfer is the easy part. Rebuilding the scheduling logic, setting up the permission model, aligning workflow states to how the team actually works — that's where the weeks go. The September deadline doesn't move.
From the field
Jira fits well if…
Multiple departments — PM, HR, Finance, Support — currently use separate tools and you want to consolidate.
Approval workflows and process automation across teams are more important than pure scheduling depth.
You need Agile and Waterfall running in parallel on the same data (consulting, IT services, product companies).
Your developers are already in Atlassian — the dev-tool integration becomes a real multiplier.
Budget includes Marketplace add-ons and a resource to own Jira configuration long-term.
PMs run complex multi-dependency schedules where critical path recalculation is a daily workflow.
500+ users with heavy timesheet reporting at high data granularity — test Tempo's performance at your volume first.
Power BI is deeply connected to Project Online data and needs to stay live from day one after migration.
Migration budget doesn't cover Tempo + Structure.Gantt licensing on top of base Jira cost.
No internal resource available to own Jira configuration and administration going forward.
