Solution
Migrate Qlik apps and metrics to Power BI with redesign, reconciliation, and team enablement.
Contact UsContact us for a Free Assessment. We'll follow up within 2 business days. See a sample Free Assessment.
Qlik's associative model lets people select any field and see what is related, excluded, or possible. Power BI filters a model differently. A migration that copies sheets and ignores that difference will feel broken to the revenue and finance users who explore for a living.
Set analysis, section access, and QVDs are the other traps. The move is a redesign of the decisions those apps support, with a reconciliation, not an export.
Users trust the state of a selection: what is included, what is possible, what is excluded. Power BI does not show that the same way. We identify the explorations the weekly meeting actually needs and design the model and the report for those paths.
A set expression can lock a total to last year while the sheet is filtered to this quarter. If that rule is not a measure, the Power BI page will move the comparison by accident. We write those rules down in business language first.
Section access often reduces rows by a reduction field tied to the user. That becomes row-level security, tested with the same kinds of users. An app that opens for an admin is not a test.
A QVD can be the only store of a transformed pipeline or a historical snapshot. We say which of those files are the source of a number finance still defends, and which are leftovers.
Hypothetical example. A pipeline app uses set analysis so 'coverage' ignores a product selection, while the sheet still shows that product's deals. In this hypothetical, a copied Power BI visual changes coverage as soon as someone clicks a product. The assessment turns that set into an explicit measure and checks one week of coverage both ways.
You leave with the priority Qlik apps redesigned, the set-analysis rules that change totals called out, and section access tested in Power BI.
Which apps finance and revenue still use to explain a miss, and which sheets are the ones they select on. The rest are parked.
Each kept expression becomes a named measure with the filter behavior described in a sentence a revenue leader can read.
Row rules checked with a restricted user and a finance user, with differences written down.
The selections that still work, and the ones that will not feel the same, so training is honest.
Assess, Redesign, Implement, Reconcile, and Adopt.
Inventory, usage, risk, and success criteria.
Target model, semantics, and governance.
Rebuild or migrate workloads deliberately.
Parity checks and cutover confidence.
Training, handover, and optional ongoing support.
A Free Assessment sits with the Qlik app the revenue or finance meeting still clicks through. We list the selections and set expressions that would change a total, and the section access that limits rows.
Bring that app and someone who uses it in the meeting. We follow up within 2 business days with the first wave and the behavior we will not pretend to clone.
No. Associative selection is a different model. We preserve the business questions and the totals. We do not promise the same green-white-gray exploration.
Sometimes as a source for history. They are not a semantic model. Rules buried in the load script still have to be written as measures or as preparation you can see.
We design the report for the paths the meeting uses, and we train people on what is different. A field list with no model will not recreate Qlik and will make totals worse.
No. Apps with no current audience are listed and left. The close and the pipeline review come first.
Describe the outcome you want. The next step is a Free Assessment.
Contact Us