What is the difference between format migration and normalization when transferring electronic records to an archive?

Format migration and normalization are both strategies for keeping electronic records usable over time, but they answer different questions. Migration asks, “How do we move records forward as technology changes?” Normalization asks, “How do we reduce the variety of formats we have to manage in the first place?” Both are common when records are transferred into an archive or long-term repository.

Format migration

Format migration is the process of converting a record from an obsolete or at-risk file format into a current, supported one. The goal is continued access: as software, operating systems, and hardware change, older formats can become unreadable. Migration moves the content into a format that today’s tools can open.

Key points about migration:

• It is usually an ongoing, repeated activity. A record may be migrated several times across its life as formats age.
• It carries risk of change. Each conversion can alter formatting, embedded objects, or fine detail, so archives often document what changed and verify the result.
• It is reactive to obsolescence, triggered when a format is no longer well supported.

Normalization

Normalization is the practice of converting incoming records into a small set of preferred, stable, well-documented formats at the point of ingest or transfer. Instead of preserving every format an agency happens to use, the archive standardizes on a few open, durable formats (for example, choosing standard formats for documents, images, or data).

Key points about normalization:

• It happens at the front door, typically when records are accessioned.
• It reduces complexity: fewer formats mean fewer preservation problems to manage later.
• It favors open, widely adopted standards over proprietary ones to lower future risk.

How they relate

Normalization is essentially a planned, up-front choice of target formats, while migration is the continuing work of keeping records in usable formats afterward. Many archives use both: normalize on intake to limit format sprawl, then migrate over time as even those preferred formats eventually age. In all cases, sound practice means preserving the record’s content, structure, and context, validating each conversion, and keeping metadata that documents what was done.

For broader background, see the electronic records topic hub.