Comprehensive Guide - External Stakeholders
External to the Organization
Constituents / Program Participants: Their data is being migrated; portal or engagement tools may be affected
Goals:
Continue receiving services without interruption or confusion
Have their data handled accurately and with appropriate privacy
Experience no regression in how the organization communicates with or serves them
Challenges:
Have no visibility into the migration and no ability to advocate for their own needs in the process
If portal or self-service tools are affected, they may lose access to resources they depend on
Data errors during migration can have real consequences for people receiving services
Questions to Ask:
What tools or systems do you use to interact with us, and how dependent are you on them day to day?
How would you prefer we communicate with you if any of those tools were temporarily unavailable?
Are there things about how we currently communicate with or serve you that you would want to make sure stay the same?
Donors: Continuity of acknowledgment, receipting, and communication is at risk during migration
Goals:
Continue receiving timely and accurate acknowledgments and tax receipts
Experience no disruption in their relationship with the organization
Have confidence that their giving history and preferences are maintained accurately
Challenges:
Donors are often unaware a migration is happening until something goes wrong
Errors in acknowledgment or receipting during a migration can damage trust and affect future giving
Recurring gift setups and payment integrations are among the most sensitive and complex things to migrate
Questions to Ask:
Are there specific ways you prefer to be communicated with or recognized that you would want us to make sure carry forward?
If you have a recurring gift set up, how important is it that that process continues without interruption?
How would you want us to communicate with you if a technology transition caused a delay in acknowledgment or receipting?
Funders / Foundations: Grant reporting structures may be tied to existing data models
Goals:
Continue receiving accurate and timely grant reports without disruption
Have confidence that the organization’s data infrastructure supports accountability and compliance
Understand if and how the migration affects reporting commitments already in place
Challenges:
Grant reporting deadlines do not pause for a migration
Reporting structures built in NPSP may not map cleanly to Agentforce Nonprofit without significant rework
Organizations may be reluctant to disclose a migration is in progress for fear of raising funder concerns
Questions to Ask:
Which funders have active grants with reporting requirements that fall within the anticipated migration window?
Are there any funder relationships where a technology disruption could put a grant renewal or relationship at risk?
What is the organization’s plan for communicating proactively with funders if reporting is delayed or affected?
Volunteers: Affected if volunteer management lives in Salesforce
Goals:
Continue engaging with the organization without disruption to scheduling, communications, or tracking
Have their volunteer history and preferences maintained accurately through the transition
Experience no change in how they interact with the organization unless it is an improvement
Challenges:
Volunteer management is often handled through a third party tool connected to Salesforce, adding migration complexity
Volunteers have no visibility into the migration and no formal voice in the process
Organizations vary widely in how much of their volunteer management actually lives in Salesforce, making this persona highly org-specific
Questions to Ask:
Are there things about how we currently communicate with or coordinate you that work well and should stay the same?
Are there gaps or frustrations in how we currently manage your volunteer experience that you would want us to fix?
How would you want us to communicate with you if a technology transition temporarily affected your ability to access volunteer resources?
Current Consulting Partner(s): Hold institutional knowledge; may have a conflict of interest
Goals:
Protect and leverage the institutional knowledge they have built about the organization’s implementation
Position themselves as the natural choice for the migration engagement
Maintain a positive client relationship regardless of whether they are selected to do the migration work
Challenges:
Their familiarity with the existing implementation is valuable but their perspective on the migration may not be neutral
Documentation of past implementation decisions may be incomplete or held informally by individuals rather than recorded
An organization may feel loyal to a current partner even when a different partner might be a better fit for the migration
Questions to Ask:
What documentation exists of the decisions made during our original implementation, and can you provide that to us?
What is your assessment of our current state, and what would you flag as the most complex parts of our implementation to migrate?
What experience does your team have with Agentforce Nonprofit migrations specifically?
Current Vendor and AppExchange Partners: Their tools may not support NPC, creating blockers or forced replacements
Goals:
Retain the organization as a customer through the migration
Communicate clearly about their product roadmap and Agentforce Nonprofit compatibility
Be involved in the conversation early enough to assess and address any compatibility gaps
Challenges:
Some vendors have built Agentforce Nonprofit support; others are still on a roadmap; others may never migrate
Organizations often do not think to ask vendors about compatibility until late in the planning process
A vendor that cannot support Agentforce Nonprofit may create a forced and unplanned tool replacement on a parallel track
Questions to Ask:
Does your product currently support Agentforce Nonprofit, and if not, what is your roadmap for compatibility?
What would the transition look like for our organization specifically, and are there any known limitations we should plan for?
What do you need from us in order to assess compatibility and give us an honest timeline?
Salesforce (AE, SE, Product Team): Enthusiastic about migration but not a neutral voice
Goals:
Move organizations from NPSP to Agentforce Nonprofit to align with their current product direction
Identify opportunities to expand the organization’s Salesforce footprint during the migration
Maintain a positive customer relationship and reduce churn risk
Challenges:
Their enthusiasm for migration reflects Salesforce’s product strategy, which may not align with the organization’s readiness or resources
Organizations may take Salesforce’s guidance as neutral when it is inherently shaped by sales and retention goals
Product roadmap promises are not guarantees, and organizations may make migration decisions based on features that are not yet available
Questions to Ask:
What is the current state of Agentforce Nonprofit relative to NPSP feature parity, and where are the known gaps?
What is on the product roadmap, and what is the difference between what is available today and what is planned?
What resources, programs, or funding does Salesforce offer to nonprofits undertaking this migration?