Complexities involved in Testing Cards Migration Projects

1. T r u s t t h e E x p e r t s
WHITE PAPER
User Acceptance Testing (UAT) Challenges
in Cards Migration Projects
Large scale migrations and conversions across portfolios and
applications are on the rise in the banking and financial services
sector. Given the complexities involved in the management of such
migration, User Acceptance Testing (UAT) poses daunting
challenges.
With the UAT experience across large card migration projects
(including the largest cards migration in Europe to date) and the
aggregate card portfolio of these projects being of the order of 25
million, this paper aims to list the typical challenges encountered.
Card portfolio migrations/ conversions are necessitated by: -
• Mergers and acquisitions of banks
• Consolidation and centralization of card processing activities of
multi-country banks
• Upgrades of the existing platform or product version
• Replacement of legacy cards applications with current technology
Contrasting Trends
Trends in the Middle East and APAC region
Product and Processing services are not mutually exclusive. With intense
competition to gain a larger market share there is migratory movement in
both directions; from In-house processing to Outsourcing and vice versa
Trends in USA and Europe
Major general purpose card issuers in the US including Citigroup, Bank of
America, American Express, Discover, US Bank and HSBC are wedded to
in-house processing. Now, other major bankcard issuers, with the notable
exception of ‘Capital One’, who relied on outsourcing, are thinking of
moving back to in-house processing, directly or in phases.
In contrast, in Euro-land, where most card processing has been performed
in-house or by bank-owned cooperatives, the trend is decidedly in the
opposite direction; outsourcing to commercial third party card processors.
In-house processing
Vs
Outsourcing to third party processors

2. T r u s t t h e E x p e r t s
2
WHITE PAPER
White Paper
Challenges in UAT:
Program specific challenges and risks need to be critically assessed and diligently addressed at the time of
formulating the UAT Strategy.
The challenges encountered can be broadly categorized under three heads, each corresponding to the three
phases of UAT
1. Scoping
2. Test Planning
3. Test Execution
• Key challenges in UAT
Planning relate to batch
requirements, multiple
teams/ environments and
parameter configurations
1. Challenges in Scoping
a. Changing requirements and solutions: The typical duration for a medium-to-large scale migration
project is around 12 months. Considering the competitive environment and the rapid technological
advances it would become necessary to address a plethora of changes even during the budgeted
12-month. Requirements and solutions cannot be cast in stone.
b. Insufficient documentation: Changes to legacy applications are seldom clearly documented. Even what
documentation exists is not easily locatable and would have to be ferreted out of current business users.
These constraints become critical when ‘like for like’ functionality is expected to be delivered on the ‘to be’
application.
c. Non-finalization of business process specs: The business processes adopted by user groups are
seldom finalized in time and hence present a serious challenge to completing the UAT in time
2. Challenges in Planning
a. Multiple Batch Run Requirements: Cards’ testing is a batch process that is dependent on functionalities
such as delinquency collection queues, reminder letters and direct debits involving specific run
requirements. Conversion of purchase transactions into installment transactions add to the requirements.
UAT planning is thus challenged by numerous such batch process requirements in a limited iteration
window of 4-5 weeks
b. Multiple Test Teams and Environments: Migration of card management applications entails changes in
upstream and downstream processes and interfaces within the enterprise. Owing to specific requirements,
the UAT would have to be carried out in specific test environments (Examples: data-warehouse, marketing
promotions, internet banking, and IVR). While some of the functionalities would require date bumping (to
advance the system dates), other interfaces could have restrictions in advancing the system dates. UAT
planning is challenging where multiple test teams and environments are involved.
c. Baseline Parameter Values Unavailable: Most card management applications are parameter driven.
However, the parameter configuration intended for the migrated portfolio is typically not finalized during the
UAT planning phase.

3. T r u s t t h e E x p e r t s
3
WHITE PAPER
White Paper
3. Challenges in Execution
It may not be feasible to mitigate all risks during the scoping and planning phases. Some of the critical
challenges thus move into the execution phase.
a. Shared Test Environment: UAT involves multiple test teams and perhaps multiple test environments for
end-to-end execution of certain functionalities and business processes. Coordination across a shared test
environment is challenging.
b. Quality of Migrated (Scrambled) Data: Business processes are expected to work without any snags
viz-a-viz new and migrated accounts. Towards this all migrated (scrambled) data would have to be diligently
verified lest they cause bottlenecks during the UAT execution phase as the data-migration testing and
functional UAT are done in parallel.
c. Availability of all Interfaces: As the data flows and business processes need to be tested end to end
during UAT, availability of all interfaces during the iteration timelines become important.
d. Incorrect Setup of Parameter Configuration: The parameter configuration values may not be finalized
and available during UAT planning phase. Incorrect setup of parameter configuration results in avoidable
issues during the UAT execution phase.
e. Tracking of Issues and Regression Impact across Multiple Releases: Often the functionalities required
for the migration are delivered in a staggered manner. Thus UAT execution spanning multiple releases or
code drops poses challenges in tracking issues and related regression impact. Slippages in delivery of
functionalities further reduce the time available for testing; known as the testing window.
f. Large Number of Open Defects: A large number of open defects would upset test execution progress.
This could pose serious challenge during UAT that could disrupt the go-live dates.
During data migration
• Validation of all migrated customer accounts, demographic details, embosser details, authorization data,
transaction data and merchant details as per conversion specifications
• Validation of all control records/parameters as per business requirements and conversion specifications
• Validation of all conversion specific reports
• Reconciliation of financial details, discrepancies and exceptions
• Data loads/refresh in surround systems due to changes in numbering structure as part of migration
• Assurance that all day-to-day business functions on migrated data meet expectations
Conclusion: While specific risks associated with a specific project are mitigated on a case-by-case basis,
awareness of the typical challenges that could be expected could be extremely helpful in preparing a
comprehensive test strategy.
Factors critical to the success of UAT
During functional Testing:
• Meeting business requirements defined by the client
• Customization on the existing platform
• Implementation of all current end-to-end operational procedures and business processes
• Management of all handoffs and data-flow between the card application and interfaces as per specifications
(online and batch)
• Management of In-house systems
• Management of surround systems and interfaces
• Management of third parties
• Production of collateral outputs such as letters, statements, card mailers, PIN mailers and, plastics as
expected
• Execution of day-to-day business functions covering both migrated and new card data without any
regression impact on existing functionalities

4. T r u s t t h e E x p e r t s
4
WHITE PAPER
White Paper
References: Card Portfolio Migration details of some of the leading Financial Institutions have been provided
below
All the documentation and other material contained herein is the property of Thinksoft Global Services and all intellectual property
rights in and to the same are owned by Thinksoft Global Services. You shall not, unless previously authorized by Thinksoft Global
Services in writing, copy, reproduce, market, license, lease or in any other way, dispose of, or utilize for profit, or exercise any
ownership rights over the same. In no event, unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, shall Thinksoft Global Services,
or any person be liable for any loss, expense or damage, of any type or nature arising out of the use of, or inability to use any material
contained herein. Any such material is provided “as is”, without warranty of any type or nature, either express or implied. All names,
logos are used for identification purposes only and are trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective companies.
For more details visit, www.thinksoftglobal.com
T r u s t t h e E x p e r t s
Financial Institution Card/Portfolio Migration details Source
Lloyds TSB Conversion to First Data VisionPLUS http://www.finextra.com/news/an
nouncement.aspx?pressreleasei
d=12693
Tesco Bank Transfer of 2.4 million cards to TSYS
TS2 platform
http://www.finextra.com/news/an
nouncement.aspx?pressreleasei
d=34865
DnB NOR Bank Migration of 2.2 million MasterCards
followed by phased migration of AMEX
and 0.7 million Visa cards to in house
TSYS PRIME
http://us.generation-nt.com/tsys-
successfully-completes-dnb-nor-
kort-conversion-press-2269771.
html
Co-operative
Financial Services
CFS)
Migration of 1.7 million debit cards and
one million credit card portfolios on to
First Data’s FirstVision
http://www.firstdata.com/en_us/a
bout-first-data/media/press-relea
ses/05_20_09_2
Vanquis Bank Migration of the 400,000 cards portfolio
on to First Data’s FirstVision
http://www.firstdata.com/en_us/a
bout-first-data/media/press-relea
ses/05_20_09_3
JP Morgan Chase Deconversion of consumer card portfolio
and in house processing on the
technology platform licensed from TSYS
http://www.paymentsnews.com/2
008/12/chase-to-take-w.html
GE Capital The company acquired a private label
credit card portfolio and needed to
complete the conversion of merchants
and cardholder accounts to its
own system
http://www.floorbiz.com/BizNews
/NPViewArticle.asp?ArticleID=60
69
Advanzia Bank Conversion of portfolio from TSYS' Prime
platform to its TS2® processing platform
(1.5 million MasterCard records)
http://www.finextra.com/news/an
nouncement.aspx?pressreleasei
d=38915