Why Namely’s employee profile sync dropped custom fields during an HRIS migration and the mapping restore that brought data back
In the rapidly evolving landscape of human resource information systems (HRIS), organizations face both opportunities and risks when migrating data between platforms. One such incident occurred during Namely’s employee profile synchronization process, where custom fields were unexpectedly dropped during a migration. This case underscores the intricacies and potential pitfalls of data mapping and the painstaking work required to restore critical HR data.
TL;DR: During a recent HRIS migration, Namely’s employee profile sync dropped several custom fields due to a mapping misconfiguration. These dropped fields led to temporary data loss in employee records, impacting reporting and compliance. A thorough audit revealed the issue, and a mapping restore was successfully implemented, recovering all dropped custom data. This incident highlights the importance of data validation and field-level mapping precision in HRIS integrations.
The Background: Namely’s Migration Journey
Namely, a popular HRIS platform that offers employee data management, payroll, and benefits administration, embarked on a large-scale migration to optimize its back-end architecture. The move was intended to bolster performance and integrate more seamlessly with third-party applicant tracking systems (ATS) and performance management tools.
However, as with any migration involving large datasets and intricate schemas, the risk of data inconsistency or data loss increases dramatically. Custom fields—defined by clients to track non-standard information like work authorizations, training completions, or local job titles—were especially vulnerable during the process.
What Went Wrong: The Custom Field Sync Issue
Many organizations using Namely had created unique custom fields tailored to their organizational and regulatory needs. These fields were not part of Namely’s default schema but were often business-critical. During the sync process associated with the migration, these fields failed to be transformed properly, resulting in their exclusion from the new environment.
The root cause eventually traced back to a misalignment in the field mapping schema used during data transformation.
- No dynamic mapping for custom fields: The migration tool pointed only to the default Namely schema and did not dynamically update with user-created fields.
- Missing metadata on field dependencies: Many custom fields had complex dependencies. For example, a “Shift Differential Eligibility” field referenced rules from other fields that were left unmapped.
- Insufficient testing: Pre-deployment testing mostly validated default fields and overlooked custom configurations across multiple clients’ environments.
The Impact of the Dropped Fields
The effects rippled across several businesses. Without key custom fields:
- Key employee attributes vanished from dashboards and reports.
- Automated workflows depending on those attributes failed, such as onboarding or compliance notifications.
- Data discrepancies arose between Namely and integrated apps like BambooHR, Lever, or ADP.
In some organizations, the absence of custom field data led to time-consuming manual audits and even payroll report errors. For HR professionals, the incident meant increased workload and escalated complaints from employees and executives.
Discovery and Diagnosis
The missing fields were first reported by clients who noticed discrepancies in employee profiles when pulling reports or syncing with connected platforms. Namely’s support team escalated the issue to their engineering group, who initiated a full-scale data comparison.
The comparison revealed that although the source data—stored securely in the original database—remained intact, it was never mapped to the destination schema during transmission. This clarified that the problem was with field mapping, not data deletion.
The Mapping Restore: Bringing the Data Back
Once the diagnosis was complete, Namely engineers moved to implement a mapping restore strategy. This multi-phase approach involved:
- Re-scanning original schema definitions: All client-side custom fields across environments were cataloged and reconciled with the destination schema.
- Restoring field-level metadata: Dependencies, validation rules, and field types were re-established to avoid misclassification or performance issues.
- Re-running the sync process in “compare-and-replace” mode: This ensured that existing profiles were not duplicated but rather enriched with missing custom field data.
Once restored, extensive validation was conducted to compare restored profiles against historical snapshots. This included hash-checks on field combinations and user confirmation processes, particularly where compliance-sensitive data was involved.
Client Communication and Lessons Learned
Namely took full responsibility for the incident and proactively reached out to clients with impact statements, recovery timelines, and ongoing monitoring options. Many clients appreciated the transparent handling, though some raised concerns about platform stability for mission-critical HR tasks.
From this event, several key lessons emerged:
- Prioritize custom field mapping in migration checklists: Custom fields are increasingly central to modern HR strategy and can’t be treated as optional.
- Use dynamic schema detection tools: These tools can recognize and incorporate custom fields on the fly, which reduces mapping gaps.
- Improve rollback capabilities: Had the migration included true rollback support, restoration could’ve been performed faster with reduced risk.
Preventing Future Issues
Namely has since implemented a number of measures designed to prevent a recurrence of similar issues:
- Enhanced schema detection: A new engine now detects and integrates custom fields automatically during any sync or migration.
- Client-side field registry: Each client now maintains an independent registry of field definitions that Namely can reference during operations.
- Migration dry-runs: Clients can now run sandbox migrations that simulate the entire process with full field visibility.
As custom HR configurations become more prevalent, this experience stands as a cautionary tale—and a learning moment—for software platforms and clients alike.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Q: How did the custom fields get dropped in the first place?
A: The sync process relied on a default schema map that did not account for client-specific custom fields. As a result, those fields were excluded during data transmission.
Q: Was any data permanently lost?
A: No, all original data remained safely stored. The issue was strictly related to schema mapping, not deletion. A mapping restore process was able to recover all dropped information.
Q: How long did it take to restore the missing fields?
A: The identification and restore process took approximately two weeks, including full validation and client-side confirmation steps.
Q: What should Namely clients do to make sure this doesn’t happen again?
A: Clients are advised to keep documentation of all custom fields and to test critical workflows after any system update or migration. Namely now also offers sandbox migration testing features.
Q: Is this issue specific to Namely or common across HRIS platforms?
A: While this particular issue affected Namely, similar problems can occur on other HRIS platforms during migrations if custom fields are not properly architected and mapped.
For companies deeply invested in HR data, field-level integrity is everything. Namely’s migration issue may have caused disruption, but it also opened the door for stronger, more intelligent data integration frameworks that others can learn from and improve upon.