Your LMS is eight years old, the contract is coming up for renewal, and nobody at head office really knows who still uses it in the field. Your sales associates, technicians or drivers were the first to drop off, long before the training department noticed. Changing LMS is not an IT project: it is the acknowledgement that a system no longer fits the reality of the people who have to use it. The question is no longer whether to migrate, but to which platform, and how to do it without losing ten years of training history.
The 6 signals that say it is time to change LMS
An LMS never dies of a bug. It dies of a gradual loss of interest that nobody measures until it is too late. Here are the signals to check before launching a migration project.
- The monthly login rate drops below 30% of enrolled users, and no reminder campaign brings the curve back up. Below that threshold, the system lives on past momentum, not on usage.
- Your deskless staff have no mobile access worthy of the name: they should be learning at the counter, in the warehouse, between two deliveries, and instead face an LMS designed for a desktop computer.
- You can no longer trace a regulatory authorisation with certainty when an inspection or an internal audit comes.
- The cost per active user climbs while the number of logins falls: you are paying for licences nobody opens any more.
- The vendor's support is deteriorating: tickets pile up, every awaited improvement takes months.
- The LMS no longer talks to your HRIS: joiners and leavers are still handled by hand, spreadsheet in support.
The one-question test. The 30% threshold above covers all enrolled users. Now look at the frontline population alone: what percentage of your deskless staff logged in at least once last month? Below 20%, the problem is not the content catalogue. It is the tool itself that does not speak the language of the field.
Let us move on to what that means in practice, depending on where you start.
The 3 migration scenarios, and what they involve
An LMS migration is defined as the full replacement of one training platform by another, with carry-over of content, history and authorisations. Three scenarios come up most often, and each has its own difficulty.
| Scenario | Where you start | Where you go | Main difficulty |
|---|---|---|---|
| Generalist LMS unsuited to the field | Platform designed for head office, low mobile usage | LMS built for frontline teams | Carrying over head-office practices without imposing them as-is on the field |
| HRIS training module | Generalist HR building block, little thought given to pedagogy | Dedicated LMS or HRIS module, the question to settle before migrating | Rethinking the link with the HRIS without going back to double data entry |
| Ageing LMS, technical obsolescence | Vendor at end of life, degraded support | Modern platform, whatever the profile | Carrying over historical data and regulatory authorisations |
The most frequent scenario among our customers is not “my LMS is old”, it is “my LMS works for head office and not for the field”. That is the typical case, when the platform works for head office but not for the field, and it is also the only scenario where Beedeez, the LMS built for frontline teams, is the obvious answer. Migrating from one generalist HR suite to another generalist HR suite is not our playing field.
Which platform to migrate to, by profile
The choice depends first on who, in your workforce, drops off fastest: your desk-based teams at head office, or your operational teams on the move. Here are the platforms most often cited on this topic, with what their public pages document on the three points that matter for a migration: content import, history carry-over and offline access. When a vendor does not document a point, the table says so: it is a question to ask them, not a proven flaw.
| Platform | Type | Best for | Content and history carry-over | Offline access | Watch-out |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beedeez | LMS built for frontline teams | Migration driven by a frontline population the current platform does not reach | SCORM 1.2 and 2004, H5P and document (PDF, PPT, DOCX) import; accounts synced through HRIS connectors (Workday, Talentsoft, SAP SuccessFactors). Completion-history carry-over not documented on the website, to be scoped in the project as with every other vendor | Native offline mode, sync when the network is back | Not designed as an all-head-office generalist LMS: relevant when the field is the core need |
| Didask | LMS, LXP and authoring tool grounded in cognitive science | Content with high pedagogical demands, onboarding, sales forces, compliance | LMS and HRIS connectors, “SCORM Connect” export to another LMS documented; history import not publicly documented | Mobile learning claimed, offline mode not publicly documented | Pedagogy-first approach: for a frontline population, check offline and engagement mechanics in a demo, they are not at the heart of the public pitch |
| Apolearn | Agentic LMS (8 AI agents) | Training providers, apprenticeship centres, higher education, companies with Qualiopi obligations | Universal import documented (SCORM, xAPI, H5P, 300+ formats), a dedicated AI agent to recover content from a previous LMS; history carry-over not documented | Mobile app documented, offline mode not documented | Strongly geared to training providers and French Qualiopi compliance; little public content on frontline use in companies |
| LearnUpon | Multi-audience LMS (employees, customers, partners, associations) | Groups training several audiences from one platform, English-first | Dedicated implementation consultant, HRIS integrations (BambooHR among others), API and webhooks; history import format not documented | Not publicly documented | Irish vendor, website and documentation in English; recent “agentic” positioning shifts the emphasis to AI rather than the field |
| Lucca | Training module of an HRIS | Companies that first want to manage the training plan, budget and requests inside their HRIS | History of completed training kept for mandatory reviews and audits; online content synced by API from a third-party LMS, not hosted | Not publicly documented | Not a delivery platform: to publish modules and train the field, you need an LMS alongside. This is scenario 2 of the previous table |
| Dokeos | LMS geared to assessment, certification and regulatory compliance | Regulated sectors (healthcare, pharma, industry), training providers, franchise networks | SCORM 1.2 and 2004 and LTI documented, automatic user import and export, results export through a REST API | Not publicly documented | Neither a mobile app nor an offline mode documented on the website; the emphasis is on traceability, not on use on the move |
| Teach on Mars, now LumApps Learning | Learning component of an intranet and internal communication suite | Companies already on the LumApps intranet, or wanting to merge internal communication and training | Not publicly documented on the LumApps Learning pages | Not publicly documented on the current pages | The Teach on Mars brand was absorbed by LumApps in December 2023; teachonmars.com redirects to LumApps. To clarify with the vendor: exact product scope and continuity for historical customers |
Beedeez. The scenario we know best is the one where head office has an LMS that works and the field never touches it. That is where the native offline mode and account sync with the HRIS change the day-to-day of the project, because they fix the two most frequent causes of abandonment: no network in the stockroom or on the road, and accounts never created for new joiners. Watch-out: if your need is first an all-head-office catalogue with heavy administrative management, that is not our core.
Didask. A direct competitor we follow closely: their cognitive-science approach to pedagogy is serious and recognised, and the SCORM Connect export makes an eventual reversal easier. Best for demanding content, with published cases in onboarding, sales forces and compliance. Watch-out: mobile learning is claimed but offline is not documented, which matters if the field is the population dropping off.
Apolearn. A French LMS betting on a team of AI agents, including one dedicated to migrating content from a previous LMS, and a very broad format import. Best for a training provider, an apprenticeship centre or a company whose priority is Qualiopi compliance and fast content production. Watch-out: offline mode is not documented and the public cases are mostly on the vocational-training side, less on frontline teams.
LearnUpon. An Irish platform designed to train several audiences at once, employees, customers and partners, each in its own portal. Best for a group that wants a single platform for internal and customer training. Watch-out: documentation and support in English, and nothing public on offline or on the format for carrying over a history.
Lucca. Not an LMS: it is the training module of an HRIS, which manages the catalogue, requests, plan and budget, and keeps the history of completed training for mandatory reviews. Best if your problem is administrative. Watch-out: online content comes from a third-party LMS synced by API. If you are leaving an LMS deserted by the field, migrating to Lucca alone does not fix usage; the dedicated LMS or HRIS module question remains open.
Dokeos. An LMS geared to assessment, certification and regulatory training, with customer cases in healthcare, pharma, industry and franchising, and documented SCORM and LTI compatibility. Best when authorisation traceability is the first criterion. Watch-out: neither a mobile app nor offline documented, which limits use on the move.
Teach on Mars, now LumApps Learning. The former French mobile-learning specialist has been part of LumApps, an intranet vendor, since December 2023. Best for a company that wants to bring internal communication and training together in one hub. Watch-out: the current pages no longer document the historical functions (offline, import formats), and the product's trajectory depends on the suite it is embedded in. Check in a demo before betting on it for a migration.
Before signing, also check what an LMS really costs over the life of the contract, not just the per-licence price on the proposal. And if you are running a formal tender, here is how to build a shortlist without spending three months on it.
What you lose when you change, and how to limit it
Nothing carries over automatically: it has to be negotiated before signing, not discovered afterwards.
- SCORM and proprietary content. Modules in SCORM 1.2 or SCORM 2004 format usually import without loss. The previous vendor's proprietary formats almost never survive the migration: plan to convert or rebuild them.
- Completion history. It carries over if it is exported before the switch, rarely in one click. Ask for the export format and the return deadline before signing the termination of the old contract.
- Certifications and regulatory authorisations. This is the weakest point. An authorisation that cannot be traced at inspection time is not an administrative detail, it is a legal risk for the company.
- Accounts and groups. The organisational structure (sites, entities, access rights) does not recreate itself. It gets rebuilt by hand if the new LMS does not interface with your HRIS.
- SCORM 1.2 and SCORM 2004 modules, imported without loss into most LMSs
- Completion history, if exported before termination
- Accounts and groups, when the new LMS syncs with the HRIS
- Content in the previous vendor's proprietary format: to convert or rebuild
- Certifications and regulatory authorisations in progress: the weakest point
- Site, entity and access-rights structure, rebuilt by hand without a connected HRIS
To ask every vendor before signing: the data export format, the return deadline after termination, and exactly what happens to certifications in progress at the time of the switch.
The migration in 5 steps
A successful LMS migration follows a precise order, and skipping a step always costs more later. The durations below are orders of magnitude for a network of a few hundred to a few thousand users, and they do not add up: data carry-over is prepared during the pilot, the parallel run starts with the switch and the re-engagement plan runs during the parallel run. End to end, count on 3 to 6 months; less for a single entity, more for a multi-country rollout.
- Usage audit, 2 to 4 weeks. Who really logs in, where, on which device, before even choosing a platform.
- Selection and test on a pilot population, 1 to 3 months. One store, one site, one team: never the whole network at once.
- Data carry-over, 2 to 6 weeks. Content, completion history, authorisations, accounts and groups. This is the step whose duration depends most on the previous vendor.
- Switch, 2 to 4 weeks, then 1 to 3 months of parallel run. Opening the new LMS, gradually closing the old one, with a parallel-run period for mandatory training in progress.
- Re-engagement plan at day 30. Without change management, adoption falls back as fast as it rose, exactly the problem that motivated the migration.
At Amorino, the network shows a 90% completion rate, and the top 30% of franchises are also the ones where that level is reached. The correlation between data-driven management and real usage is clear, without it being a mechanical rule. Method matters as much as the tool.
The 4 mistakes that make a migration fail
Migration projects rarely fail for technical reasons. They fail because the steps that seem secondary get skipped.
- Migrating the whole catalogue at once, including content nobody was viewing in the old LMS anyway.
- Switching without a pilot population, and discovering adoption problems once the whole network is on it.
- Neglecting the carry-over of authorisations, the point project teams forget most often because it stays invisible until the first inspection.
- Not planning a re-engagement plan at day 30. A brand-new deserted LMS looks uncannily like the old one, and you find yourself reviving usage of a deserted LMS six months after paying for it a second time.
Frequently asked questions
How long does an LMS migration take?
As a rough guide, 2 to 3 months for a single entity under 500 users, 3 to 6 months for a network of 500 to 5,000 users, 6 to 12 months for a multi-country rollout, parallel run included. A parallel run that has to cover a full cycle of mandatory training stretches the upper end. What moves the duration most is not the number of users but the volume of content to carry over and how responsive the previous vendor is on the data export.
Can you recover the training history from your previous LMS?
Partly. SCORM content and completion history usually carry over well if they are exported before termination. Certifications and regulatory authorisations are the weakest point: always ask for the export format and the return deadline before signing.
How do you migrate without interrupting mandatory training?
By planning a parallel run: the old LMS stays active for training in the process of being validated while the new one takes over new enrolments. This is the most often neglected step, and the one that costs the most if an inspection happens during the transition.
Which LMS should you choose when the problem comes from frontline teams?
If the login rate collapses among your deskless populations, the problem is rarely the content catalogue. Beedeez, the LMS built for frontline teams, was designed for this exact scenario: native offline mode, short formats, sector-trained AI to produce capsules faster.
Should you migrate to an LMS or to your HRIS training module?
An HRIS module covers the administrative side of training; it rarely covers engagement and frontline pedagogy. Beedeez integrates with the main HRIS platforms (Workday, Talentsoft, SAP SuccessFactors) rather than trying to replace them: you keep administration in the right place and learning in a tool designed to actually be used.
What should you do with existing SCORM content?
It can be reused as-is in the vast majority of modern LMSs, Beedeez included, which supports SCORM 1.2 and SCORM 2004. The question is not whether it is compatible, but whether it deserves to be carried over: content nobody opened in the old LMS will not be opened in the new one either.
You now have what you need to challenge your current vendor, compare the right platforms and secure the carry-over of your data before signing anything. The only question that really remains: how many of your frontline staff logged in last month? If the answer worries you, you already have your answer. A demo with our team puts that number next to a concrete plan.
