BMC partner
Start a migration assessment →
BMC partner
Start a migration assessment →

ESP → Control-M

Migrating to Control-M from ESP.

ESP Applications, Procs, and TRIGGER logic translate into Control-M’s Folder and Job model. Mainframe job lineage and security translation are the harder parts. WayPoint surfaces both.
Request an ESP-to-Control-M assessment →

Concept-by-concept

What changes, what stays the same.

Three paths, one destination

Engagement shaped to your team. Methodology comes from BMC.

Every ESP-to-Control-M conversion runs on BMC’s proven methodology. The engagement model is the part we shape with you.
  • Control Point chevron mark Advisory. Your team leads. We coach your conversion-rule design in the Control-M Self Conversion Tool, review outputs, and stay close through validation and cutover.
  • Control Point chevron mark Blended — where most engagements run. Your team owns the parts where you want to stay close. Our ESP-experienced team owns the parts where deep Control-M expertise pays off. The line moves as the project moves.
  • Control Point chevron mark Comprehensive. We run the conversion end to end using the Control-M Conversion Tool, while your team stays focused on day-to-day operations.
WayPoint accelerates the assessment phase across all three paths. ESP Application and Schedule objects translate cleanly. The variance lives in deep TRIGGER chains, custom Procs, and mainframe security mapping sign-off.
The structure is BMC’s. The shape of the engagement is yours.

What the assessment looks like

Sample WayPoint output.

  • Illustrative output · ESP → Control-M
Request an ESP-to-Control-M assessment →

What drives the work

Scope and timeline are confirmed in the assessment.

Job count is a poor proxy for migration effort. The drivers on a ESP-to-Control-M conversion are calendar complexity, dependency density, and the number of application owners who sign off in parallel test. WayPoint scores all three before the engagement is scoped.

Frequently asked

ESP → Control-M questions.

Will Control-M for z/OS handle our JCL the way ESP does?

Control-M for z/OS submits standard JCL and integrates with the same mainframe submission services ESP does. JCL is preserved verbatim during conversion in nearly all cases. Where ESP-specific syntax appears inside JCL — typically symbolic substitutions — the conversion translates them into Control-M Auto-Edit Variables.

What happens to RACF / ACF2 / Top Secret mappings?

Mainframe security mapping is signed off by the customer’s mainframe security team in the assessment phase. Control-M for z/OS supports the same integrations ESP supports. The translation is mechanical, but the sign-off is not optional — the security team owns it.

Can we run ESP and Control-M in parallel during cutover?

Yes. For mainframe environments specifically, parallel test routinely extends to four to six weeks to capture full month-end and quarter-end coverage before cutover.

Get an ESP-to-Control-M assessment.
Request a WayPoint assessment →