Before buying another platform, ask what problem the existing platforms were supposed to solve.

The observation

Most platform replacements are proposed because the current one is frustrating. Frustration is real, but it is not a diagnosis — it does not tell you whether the tool or the workflow inside it is the constraint.

Why it happens

A migration is a fundable, schedulable project with a clear finish line. Process redesign is neither, so it loses the comparison.

The original platform's business case is rarely revisited, so nobody checks which promised outcomes were actually achieved.

What it may be costing

• Implementation effort spent reproducing existing friction in a new interface.
• A second migration proposed a few years later for the same underlying reasons.
• Change fatigue that makes the next genuinely necessary change harder.

What I would look at

1. 01Write down what the current platform was bought to solve and mark which of those outcomes happened.
2. 02For each remaining problem, decide whether it is a tool limitation or a workflow decision.
3. 03Fix the workflow items first; they will move with you either way.