Platform migrations without chaos
We migrate legacy websites into structured Webflow platforms using a proven architecture framework that protects SEO, improves accessibility, and supports long-term maintainability.
List Item
List Item
List Item
Why “rebuild the pages” isn’t enough
Most migration failures start with the wrong definition of the job. Teams copy templates and content into a new stack without fixing structure, relationships, or accessibility debt. The launch looks fine; six months later, the same problems return — with less budget and more risk.
Failure modes
- Broken URLs and weakened SEO equity
- Inaccessible or inconsistent UI patterns
- CMS chaos after import — no governance
- Lost relationships between content types
- No plan for post-launch ownership
We treat migrations as platform architecture projects: inventory, modeling, rebuild, validation — with accessibility integrated, not appended.
The whole system at a glance
Three layers — platform migration, content architecture, accessibility governance — so visitors see how the work connects before they read the detail.
From legacy CMS to structured Webflow
Audit and understand the legacy system → extract and normalize content → build accessible Webflow → validate → govern.
Why migrations aren’t a direct “old CMS → Webflow” hop
Real work lives in the normalization layer: cleaning relationships, fixing models, and mapping content into structured collections that editors can use without breaking layout.
Accessibility isn’t “fix once and leave”
After launch, content changes. Templates evolve. The loop is audit → remediate → validate → govern — so accessibility stays aligned as the organization grows.
How we score complexity
Migration Complexity Index (MCI)
Short paragraph: six dimensions, indicative tier, used to scope work — not to shame the client’s stack.
Compliance Exposure Score (CES)
Short paragraph: four categories, sums to exposure framing — not legal advice; aligns remediation and prioritization.
Model your migration before you commit
Use the Platform Migration Planner for an indicative view of complexity and exposure. Discovery still validates scope — especially for large sites or regulated sectors.
Need a deeper pass?
For funded initiatives or RFP-driven work, use the migration intake — structured discovery that maps cleanly to proposals.
Frequently Asked Questions
How is this different from the Approach page?
Approach is the readable process story. Migration Framework is the technical home for diagrams, engine stages, scoring (MCI/CES), and the embedded planner — same philosophy, more depth.
Do I need an audit before using the assessment?
No. The assessment is an indicative planning input. A formal audit may still be part of discovery for large or regulated sites.
Is the Compliance Exposure Score legal advice?
No. CES is a structured way to discuss accessibility-related exposure for prioritization — not a legal opinion.
How does the six-node homepage diagram map to the five-stage engine?
Copy should name the mapping once (six nodes include combined accessibility + governance; five-stage engine is audit → extract → normalize → build → validate → govern).
Can agencies use this framework for client work?
Yes — the same stages apply; handoff and white-label boundaries are set in discovery.