The situation
You are not the only one asking this question.
A lot of businesses are sitting on FileMaker systems they still like. The system knows the work, the team knows the screens, and replacing it casually would be expensive and disruptive. At the same time, the requests keep piling up: better web access, cleaner mobile workflows, AI, integrations, reporting, or changes Claris has not delivered fast enough for your business.
The problem is that everyone you ask has a bias. FileMaker consultants may want to keep you on FileMaker. Web agencies may want to rebuild everything. Nobody starts with the question that matters: what does your system do well, where is it holding you back, and what would it cost to change that?
Scoped assessment
The Modernize-or-Migrate Assessment
A focused review of your FileMaker system, scoped around the size and complexity of the file. You get a written report with a clear recommendation for a current FileMaker environment: keep investing, modernize specific weak spots, or plan a migration with your eyes open.
How scoping works
Start with the conversation
After the first conversation, I will define the assessment scope before work begins.
What I look at
- 1What the system actually does: schema, scripts, integrations, and the workflows your team depends on every day.
- 2What is worth keeping: the FileMaker decisions, shortcuts, and business rules that still fit the way your team works.
- 3What is causing pressure: missing updates, slow screens, fragile scripts, mobile or web expectations, AI requests, and Claris roadmap concerns.
- 4Honest cost ranges: for modernizing in place, for a partial migration, and for a full rebuild.
What you get
- A written report you can share with your team, your board, or another vendor.
- A recommendation I will defend: keep improving FileMaker, modernize the rough spots, or plan a careful migration.
- A working session to walk through it and answer questions.
Why me
I have seen this decision from every side.
FileMaker visibility
FMDojo helps make the current system less mysterious.
If the right answer is to keep investing in FileMaker, the next problem is usually visibility: what changed, what broke, what is risky, and what the server is trying to tell you. I built FMDojo for that work: FileMaker-aware monitoring, log review, and system insight that can support the assessment and the modernization work after it.
What happens after
The assessment is the whole product. What you do with it is up to you.
Some clients take the report and hire their existing team. Some ask me to do the modernization work. Some plan a migration over a year or two. The report is designed to be useful no matter who does the next step. It is not a sales funnel with only one exit.
Frequently Asked Questions
- Should I migrate off FileMaker?
- Not automatically. Many FileMaker systems still fit the business well. The right answer depends on what you like about the system, where Claris or the current build is not keeping up, and what changing it would cost.
- How much does it cost to migrate from FileMaker?
- A migration cost depends on schema, scripts, integrations, business rules, and workflow complexity. The assessment gives you real ranges for modernizing in place, partial migration, and full rebuild so the decision is based on evidence.
- What is a FileMaker alternative?
- A FileMaker alternative might be a custom web application, a SaaS platform, or a hybrid approach that keeps FileMaker where it still fits. The best alternative is the one that matches the workflow without recreating old problems.
Start with a 20-minute conversation
Tell me what has you nervous about the system.
Tell me what the system does, what is making you nervous, and what you have been told so far. I will tell you honestly whether the assessment would be worth it for your situation.