# Should you migrate from Slack? The room usually agrees every channel should become a record, because the companies share an owner, before anyone has asked who in the channel will never log into the org. **Published:** 2026-03-20 **Canonical:** https://synconai.com/should-i-migrate-from-slack **Author:** SynconAI Architecture Team ## In short Slack's deal closed in 2021 and Slack kept its name. A Salesforce org is not a Slack workspace. Do not migrate Slack into Salesforce. The record feed already posts on a record for people who can open it. Keep the workspace for everyone else, including people who are not users. Doti, completed on 1 December 2025, is not this decision. ## Sources - **Salesforce Signs Definitive Agreement to Acquire Doti** (retrieved 2025-12-01) https://www.salesforce.com/news/stories/salesforce-signs-definitive-agreement-to-acquire-doti/ > Salesforce completed its acquisition of Doti on December 1, 2025. ## What to take away - The agreement that Slack should be loaded into Salesforce is compatible with an export of files, and incompatible with a thread a guest can still search. - Slack's deal closed in 2021. Slack kept its name. Channels are not records, and a workspace is not an org. A sandbox does not copy the channels. - The feed on a record already lets people who can open that record post and follow it. It does not hold a channel of people who are not users. - The choices are keep Slack, use the record feed for a post about one record, or both. They are not ranked. Doti is a different acquisition. No listing or shutdown date is invented. ## The guide A programme manager exported a year of Slack on a Friday and asked for it to be loaded into Salesforce before Monday. The reason was the acquisition. Every channel would become a record. Every thread would become a feed. Around the table everyone already agreed the export was the migration. The export arrived as files nobody could search the way the teams searched Slack. On Monday a customer question sat in a channel the seller could not see, because the seller was not a Salesforce user, and the new records were empty of the thread that mattered. The workspace was still where the work was happening. The org had a pile of files. The agreement is the problem. It is easy to reach, and it fits a shared owner, which is not a shared login. A missed thread is compatible with a workspace whose members are not all Salesforce users, a feed that already posts on one record, a later acquisition that does not mention Slack, and a sandbox refresh that copied CRM data and did not copy a channel. Only one of those is a decision about a named channel. The migration had moved an archive and missed the conversation. What follows are the questions that separate those explanations. Each has a good answer and a bad answer, and the difference is whether the answer names something specific: a channel, a guest, a record, a person who is not a user. A general answer at this stage is what turns into an export nobody searches. ::: warn Do not migrate Slack into Salesforce. A Salesforce org is not a Slack workspace. Doti is not the Slack decision. No listing, price, or shutdown date is invented here. ::: | Question | Who has to answer it | What a bad answer usually means | | --- | --- | --- | | 1. Which channel is the problem | The team that uses the channel's name | The load is scheduled against Slack, not a conversation | | 2. Who is in it, including non-users | A person in the channel who is not a Salesforce user | Everyone is being promised a login so the export can proceed | | 3. What does the record feed already do | The administrator who has posted on a real record | The feed is being asked to search a year of workplace chat | | 4. What is Doti doing in the pack | Whoever mixed December 2025 with 2021 | A different company's completion is standing in for a Slack cutover | | 5. What must the plan refuse | Whoever booked the import of every channel | An archive is being called a workspace | ## 1. Which channel is actually in the room? The question is not whether to migrate Slack. It is one channel, by the name the team uses, and the conversation that channel is for. **A good answer sounds like** one channel the team can name, with the kind of post that belongs there, written by someone who is in that channel. **A bad answer sounds like** migrate Slack. A channel is not a record. A thread is not a field. If you cannot name the conversation, one channel or one kind of post, you are not ready to migrate. You are ready to leave the workspace where it is. A programme that starts by exporting every channel has chosen an archive. Send it back. Slack's deal closed in 2021, and Slack kept its name. It is a workspace. People join channels. They write threads. They search the words they wrote. Membership is not the same list as Salesforce users. The product did not become a CRM. It did not become a place where every account now lives. The name you still type is Slack. The 2021 close did not merge the login, the membership, or the search. People still open Slack by that name. Telling them the org replaced it will not put the thread on their desk. ## 2. Who can still read Tuesday's thread? Stay when the people in the channel are not all Salesforce users, or when the history of the thread is how the team works. A guest in a channel may have no licence and no reason to have one. The org does not become that workspace because Salesforce owns both products. **A good answer sounds like** a list of who is in the channel, including people who are not Salesforce users, written with one of those people in the room, and a statement that this decision does not remove them. **A bad answer sounds like** everyone will get a login. A feed that tries to become the workspace will either lock out the people who are not users, or it will invent users you did not mean to licence. No licence is priced here. The workspace is still the workspace. Read the decision to someone who is in the channel and not in the org. If they disappear from the decision, you have accidentally migrated them out of the conversation. Put them back, or state that this decision does not include them. Move one kind of post only after you have named the record it belongs on, and only the people who can open that record need to see it. Moving "the renewal note, onto the account the seller already opens" might be that sentence, if someone writes the note there on purpose. Moving "Slack" is not. Do not migrate Slack into Salesforce. ## 3. What does the record feed already do? Name the native behaviour before you compare it with a channel. Salesforce has a feed on a record. A person who can open the record can post on it. They can mention a colleague who can also open it. They can follow the record and see later posts. The feed is visible in the org, on that record, to users the org already controls. An administrator can see it where the record lives. A sandbox can contain the feed behaviour, because it is part of the org. That is what native collaboration on a record already does. The feed already holds posts about one record, for people who can open that record. It already keeps those posts with the account, the opportunity, or the case. It does not already hold a channel of people who are not users. It does not already search a year of workplace chat. It does not already notify a guest who has no Salesforce login. Those are not settings on the feed. They are a workspace. **A good answer sounds like** four lines from a record a seller actually uses: which object, who can post, who cannot because they are not users, and what a post on that record is allowed to decide. **A bad answer sounds like** use the feed for everything. If you cannot write the four lines, you do not yet have a native feature to stand beside Slack. You have the idea of a feed. The comparison starts after you have watched a real post on a real record. If the problem is "the seller should see a short note on this account", you may not be migrating. Someone may post on the feed. Write who is allowed to post, and what the note is for. If that is the whole need, leave the channels alone. If the problem is the team, including people who will never have a Salesforce login, the feed is the wrong destination. A single note on a record can be a choice. The channel export is not. ## 4. Why is a 2025 completion in a 2021 decision? Do not migrate because a later acquisition completed. The page cited here is about a different company. The sentence is quoted once, so the dates cannot be mixed: "Salesforce completed its acquisition of Doti on December 1, 2025." Doti is not the Slack decision. The sentence does not mention Slack. It does not say a workspace became an org. It does not move 2021. Slack's deal closed in 2021. Leave that year on the Slack line. Leave Doti on its own line. A completion in December 2025 is not a reason to empty a channel. **A good answer sounds like** two dates kept apart by a named person: Slack's close in 2021, and Doti's completion on 1 December 2025, with a line that says the second date does not choose a channel's home. **A bad answer sounds like** because Doti closed. Turning Doti's completion into a Slack cutover is not a migration. The quoted sentence is a different company. Different years, different products, different decisions. The seller's missing thread is a channel problem until you name one post that belongs on one record. There is no end date for Slack in the material this decision is allowed to use. Do not invent a shutdown. The 2021 close was not a sunset. Doti's completion is not a sunset either, and it is not about Slack. If a vendor tells you to turn the workspace off because of an acquisition, ask for a retirement notice that names Slack. A sentence about Doti does not qualify. Until a notice like that exists, the software is the workspace it was. Owning a sandbox does not clone the channels. Refreshing a sandbox copies Salesforce metadata and, depending on the type, some CRM data. It does not copy Slack. Anyone who says the refresh brought the channels across should open the sandbox and show the thread. The absence is the finding. Logging into the org does not log you into the workspace. ## 5. What is the plan using instead of the channel? An export of channels into files on records is not a migration. It is an archive the team will not search. Creating one record per channel, with the history pasted into a long text field, is not a migration. A document is not a record, and a channel is not a field. Replacing the workspace with a feed you have not posted on is a hope. Post on the record. See who can read it. If the guest cannot, keep Slack. **A good answer sounds like** a refusal, written with a non-user from the channel present, of four things: loading the export, promising everyone a login, treating Doti as the reason, and a ranked listing. **A bad answer sounds like** a listing that files channels into objects. No listing is invented here. An app that files channels into objects is not described. A listing does not replace the workspace. If a proposal cites a listing that was never named here, ask them to show one channel and say who can still read it on Monday. Until they can, the listing is a rumour. The shapes here are not ranked. Keep Slack for channels whose members are not all Salesforce users. Use the record feed for a post that is about one record and only needs people who can open it. Keep both, which is the ordinary split: the channel stays, and a person writes a note on the record when the record needs it. Firms are not ranked. Listings are not ranked. Two options can be compared by whether the guest in the channel can still read Tuesday's thread. A league table cannot. The 2021 close did not produce a ranked replacement. Doti did not produce one either. Stop after one channel. The next channel is the next decision. A map of every channel in the company is a poster. Cross out the channels this decision will not touch. An export file is not a decision. Do not let an import wizard choose the workspace's future. ## What staying actually looks like All five answers are measured against an alternative, and the alternative is usually left unstated, which flatters the export. State it. Staying means the channel keeps its members, including people who will never have a Salesforce login, and a note is written on a record only when that note is about the record and only the people who can open it need to see it. The cost of a false move is Monday: a customer question in a channel the seller could not see, and an org full of files that were not the thread. There is a version of staying that is simply the correct decision. If the guest cannot read the feed, the workspace stays. An organisation that names one channel first reaches any later note with the people still in the conversation. **A good answer sounds like** the channel, who is in it, what the feed already does, the gap for non-users, and a choice to keep Slack, write one kind of note, or keep both, with a date and a person who will check that the members are still there. **A bad answer sounds like** we cannot keep a workspace after the close. The 2021 close kept the workspace. It did not pour the threads into the org. ## Where the neighbouring questions live Cost and hiring sit on [the Slack implementation page](/slack-salesforce). The purchase story sits on [what happened to Slack](/what-happened-to-slack). The connector sits on [integrating Slack with Salesforce](/integrating-slack-with-salesforce). ## Questions ### Should I migrate from Slack to Salesforce? Do not migrate Slack into Salesforce. Slack's deal closed in 2021 and Slack kept its name. A Salesforce org is not a workspace. Keep the channel, use the record feed for a note about one record that only Salesforce users need, or keep both. Doti is not this decision. ### What is Slack software now? A workspace that kept its name after the 2021 close. People join channels and write threads, including guests who may have no Salesforce licence. It did not become an org. No end date is given here. ### How does Slack compare with the record feed? The feed already lets a person who can open a record post on it and follow later posts. It does not hold a channel of people who are not users, and it does not search a year of workplace chat. Compare only after the record and who can post are written down. ### What are the alternatives after the acquisition? Keep Slack, use the record feed for a post about one record, or keep both. They are not ranked. No listing is invented. Another chat tool is an alternative only if the same people can still meet there, and you have said so. ### Where are cost, the acquisition story, and the connector? Cost and hiring are on the implementation page. The purchase story is on the what-happened page. How a channel is tied to a record is on the integration page. No price and no shutdown date are stated here. --- SynconAI is a Salesforce Select Partner and an OpenAI Select Partner, delivering architect-led Salesforce and AI programmes across the United States and Australia. Related service: Agentforce consulting (https://synconai.com/salesforce-agentforce-consulting).