How to Migrate from Wrike to an All-in-One Work OS
Wrike is a capable, enterprise-grade project manager. Teams move on when they want its structure connected to CRM, contracts, and the rest of the business rather than sitting in its own silo.
Wrike is a serious project management platform with real strengths: flexible folder hierarchies, custom workflows, request forms, and solid resource and portfolio management. For structured project delivery it is a well-built tool, and teams that adopted it usually did so for good reasons.
The reason to consider moving is scope and connection. Wrike manages projects well, but the client relationship, the signed agreement, the tracked time and billing often live in adjacent tools. When those handoffs become a tax, consolidating the surrounding work onto the same model as the projects is what a unified work OS offers. The decision is rarely about Wrike's project capabilities and almost always about ending the translation between project delivery and the rest of the business.
Map Wrike's hierarchy before exporting
Wrike organizes work as spaces, folders, projects, and tasks, with custom fields and workflows layered on. Document how deep your hierarchy actually goes and where the meaningful structure lives, because Wrike folders often nest more than the work requires.
- Projects and their tasks, which migrate directly.
- Folders used for real grouping versus folders used only for navigation.
- Custom workflows, which should be standardized to the states you truly use.
- Request forms, which become intake workflows in the destination.
Export tasks and preserve structure
Wrike supports Excel export of tasks and offers API access for more complete data, including custom fields, assignees, and dependencies. For anything beyond a flat list, the API preserves the relationships that matter. Export a dated snapshot and record your custom field and workflow configuration for accurate mapping.
Map Wrike users to destination accounts before importing, preserve start and due dates and dependencies, and translate custom workflows into a lean standardized set of statuses. Pilot one space or large project, verify that structure and owners resolved, then migrate the rest. Reconcile the imported counts against the source after each load, since Wrike's deep hierarchies make it easy for a nested folder of tasks to be missed in an export.
Preserve reporting and resource data
Wrike teams often invest heavily in dashboards and resource management, and those are the parts most easily overlooked in a migration because they are derived rather than stored. A dashboard is a saved question, not data, so it does not export; instead, document what each dashboard answers and rebuild the equivalent report against your migrated records. The underlying data must arrive intact for the report to be recreatable, which is another reason to preserve dates, owners, and dependencies faithfully.
Resource allocation and workload data deserve special care. If your team plans capacity in Wrike, capture how effort and availability are recorded so the same planning is possible in the destination. In a unified work OS this often improves, because the person you are allocating is the same identity who owns tasks and logs time, so workload is computed from real work rather than maintained as a separate estimate.
Connect projects to the wider operation
The value of moving off Wrike is not better task tracking but connection. When the project, the client, the contract, and the hours share one record, the reporting Wrike produced in isolation becomes reporting across the whole business, and the handoffs to CRM and billing disappear.
Atlas is built for that consolidation. Projects and tasks retain the structure Wrike teams expect, now on one data model alongside CRM, contracts, time tracking, and analytics. See /all-in-one for how it fits together and /pricing to pilot before committing your team.