bcgov
MVP soft launch - BA assessment
BAs' perspective is required, as requested by Trish:
Below are some areas that we should consider testing to help provide some confidence and understand the potential issues with enabling the core filings in the Business Registry (BR) for all BC Corp types.
In the new BR, we'll need to be able to: • Incorporate a BC Corp - all types in the new BR • Maintain a BC Corp - all types in the new BR Then, assess downstream impacts to: • Search - can this entity be searched? What does it look like? are all docs and details there? • BN & MRAS functions as designed • all data is syncing and working as designed • Orgbook is updated • impacts of scanning/doc mgmt • 'web services' that 'call colin data' are working as designed (e.g., colin web service) • bc laws/gazette works as designed • bceid works as designed • other API's that call corp data work as designed • BNI works as designed • there may be other areas but I'll leave it with the BA's to determine what else should be tested.
@Mihai-QuickSilverDev , @dylan644
@OlgaPotiagalova
In any other situation, on any other project I would be in favour of soft or staggered launches, but for the purposes of our MVP Go-Live in March 2025 I have to advise against it.
Benefit of a soft launch - we get some more users into the new system finding bugs and gaps for us prior to March go-live, enabling more filings as they are ready.
Limitations - We can only do this for net-new corporations so realistically very few of those new corps would have the need to perform further filings within a 2 month time window.
Additionally, if we were to enforce incorporations being done in the new system then we would create a situation where law firms would have to be using two systems simultaneously which may cause confusion and issues. This might be compounded if we were progressively releasing new filings.
Alternative Strategy - we have Benefit Companies in BCROS already, we may gain more by focusing on this test cohort and releasing all new filings in January. We may find more use of the new filings with the existing cohort of BCROS users (other than IA, Continuation In). There are currently 1074 Bens in BCROS, so there is a reasonable chance that all the filings we enable would get used at least once in BCROS just with the Bens.
Significant Risks
There are significant risks that I believe should remove a soft launch as a viable option.
Risk 1 - Data Migration - A scenario we cannot effectively prevent is this:
- User incorporates a new corp. in BCROS
- Data is synced back to COLIN
- User performs an additional filing for same corp. in COLIN
If this were to happen we run the risk of leaving data behind on COLIN and/or breaking the migration process. Given the uncomfortably short timeline we have to develop and prove the migration toolset this is a risk we cannot afford to take on.
Risk 2 - How would we handle an Amalgamation between a corp. in BCROS and a corp. in COLIN ?
re: risk 1 - not an issue. With the soft launch, if the user incorporates a bc corp in the BR, the user will not be able to complete additional filings for the same corp in colin; they must use the BR. Please refer to this miro board w/details on the soft launch and how this will work. https://miro.com/app/board/uXjVLZETzvQ=/
risk 2 - not an issue - as amalgs should not be part of soft launch. They will go live in march with the data migrations and all other filings.
re: Benefits - please see miro boards as their other benefits - that are not technical but help support business and change processes, etc.
re: filings - for the soft launch - as noted on the miro board, suggest: IA, COD,COA, NOA, Corrections.
re: migration - soft launch has no impact on data migration as data is already being synced from the BR to legacy/cprd.
Please keep me posted on the findings once you incorporate a bc corp (ccc, ulc, bc) in the BR and update it with one of these maintenance filings.
Thank you.
if you would like a walk through of how this soft launch will work or what is being requested, please let me know. :-)
I'd really like this to be tested as a top priority (ie, Tuesday/ Wednesday) to ensure all data is syncing and all downstream processes are working as expected.
Enhanced Soft Launch approach that has great benefits.docx
https://1drv.ms/w/c/f50e59c734040ebc/EWUfltSnFkJDhznDTuJCMjgBZhVaocIaffcTmT2ZsZ6_aQ?e=zhzDoa
Added in the attached document a Soft Launch approach that might be the most beneficial yet. @OlgaPotiagalova @trishreimer
Thank you for your thoughts here.
The first iteration/soft launch that we are proposing is focused on features/filings that are available 'now' and ready to use, eg, IA, COD, COA, NOA, corrections which is why we are proposing this as the 'soft launch' as soon as possible (pending technical and ocm). This is why we want to focus our testing efforts here right now. Can you please let me know today if you're not able to complete this testing?
Then 'next', we can focus on data migration.
we are still working through the 'what' and the 'how' for the data migration, so I would like to recommend that we focus our time on what is available now and ship these filings to clients to get feedback and test, etc. then consider adding additional filings after the first iteration and then focus on data migration.
For onboarding, we will want to leverage some of our existing strategies to onboard users such as the business, annual report filing and mass affiliations. Moving people over early and asking them to create an account will create unnecessary change management effort when business annual report filing and mass affiliations could be used.
When we look at the data migration strategies shortly, we will want to consider strategies like the one you recommended here, if they are a lawyer or third party, how to manage outputs & receipts, if they are active/historical, the last time people filed annual reports to give us an idea when they will be back into the system, etc
After collecting the ideas and number of brainstorming sessions Dylan kindly put together the plan : https://miro.com/app/board/uXjVKM8E6xo=/
Data migration strategy: 1. Prior to the MVP release - Feb. Migrate the business information snapshot for all corps to enable new filings for existing businesses. At this stage ledger with the filings history is not populated. COLIN is used as a system of reference in read-only mode. 2. Prior to the MVP release - March (Possibly, still needs discussion and a subject to migration scripts readiness). Add an option for ad-hoc migration for the filing history : The business filings are migrated at the time when user accesses the business (triggered manually or automatically) 3. After the MVP release Continuous migration of business history for all businesses. This process can start before the MVP release in March (subject to migration scripts readiness), but according to the current estimates won't be completed till May.
Thanks. Why is the team recommending we turn off IA and CONTI in colin for the soft launch?
There are concerns that if IA and CONTI remain enabled in COLIN, clients might try to do filing for the same business in both places.
What are the issues with that? It should be okay for the client to start a corp in either system.
Are you saying, if they have an approved NR, we think the client will incorporate in both systems? Feel free to setup a time for a quick chat if that is easier
Today, I understand when a company files an alteration to convert a corp, we freeze the company in colin. This same functionality can be leveraged to prevent people who start a business in the BR, try to file something in colin.
let's follow up with David R on this and see if we can also display a message in colin for these companies incorporated in the BR to state - you must go to the BR to make an update to your corp.
In addition, we can look at messaging in the UI and leverage existing message boards.
Also, we should note that the scope of change for the soft launch is targeting external users who are not lawyers/bcol users. Launching for Service BC and staff should be out of scope for initial release. I'd like to recommend we focus on the external cohort first to give us time to work on staff preparation, training, etc.
Checked with the Home team.
For BEN companies the business is frozen in COLIN as part of synchronization process. Then In COLIN this business is shown as frozen with the message advising this business should be managed in the modernized BR.
While for other corp types we could use the same mechanism of freezing the business in sync, implementing a logic to display such message will be problematic as it can't be based on the checking the corp type (=BEN) any longer
Another concern is that we need to come up with a new temporary logic for handling NRs. This logic will be in place till the MVP release
Right now the same NR flow is used for filings in Modernized BR and COLIN, and the users are re-routed based on the company type. If NR is requested for BEN company, the UI guides the user to the Modernized BR, if it is other than BEN - to COLIN. This logic needs to be modified to allow users to file non-BEN company in the BR or in COLIN
RE: the logic to freeze the company in colin - @OlgaPotiagalova could we could update the logic to check corp class = BC
For the NR concerns @OlgaPotiagalova - what is the simplest solution that could be implemented? could you please forward some options and a recommendation? ie., could outputs be easily updated? screen text? etc.
@trishreimer the solution has been found for freezing a company during sync. The effort includes relatively minor changes on the Modernized BR side and COLIN side.
The approach for NR handling and directing users to the corresponding system will be addressed in Way of Navigation update to support Directed Launch epic https://app.zenhub.com/workspaces/entities---olga-65af15f59e89f5043c2911f7/epics/Z2lkOi8vcmFwdG9yL1plbmh1YkVwaWMvMjE4NTQw