How to Test Office Suite Replacements: Compatibility and Macro Risk Matrix

Stop guessing — measure the risk before you swap Office suites

Many IT teams want the cost and privacy benefits of LibreOffice, but fear breaking critical macros, corporate templates, and document fidelity. This guide gives you a practical, developer-friendly test plan and a macro/template interoperability risk matrix so you can evaluate LibreOffice as a replacement for Microsoft 365 with measurable confidence.

Executive summary — why this matters in 2026

In late 2025 and early 2026, organizations continued to prioritize data sovereignty, reduced SaaS spend, and stronger zero-trust controls. Open-source office stacks (LibreOffice, Collabora Online) and private cloud editors (Nextcloud + Collabora) gained traction for cost and privacy reasons. But the single largest migration blocker remains macros, templates, and subtle interoperability features that power core workflows in finance, HR, legal, and operations.

This article gives you a repeatable approach: a detailed test plan, automation suggestions, concrete test cases, a scoring method, and a risk matrix that maps common document artifacts to remediation options (refactor, containerize, or keep in Microsoft 365).

What you'll get

• A prioritized test plan for macro-heavy documents, templates, and complex interoperability scenarios
• A repeatable scoring model and risk matrix you can adapt to your environment
• Actionable tooling and automation patterns for bulk evaluation and fidelity checks
• Decision criteria and KPIs for pilot and full migration

High-level decision framework

Before running tests, align stakeholders around three outcomes:

1. Replace — Document types that work in LibreOffice with acceptable fidelity and no high-risk macros.
2. Refactor — Documents requiring macro conversion or template redesign; doable but requires engineering work.
3. Retain — Documents or workflows that must remain in Microsoft 365 (or a hybrid model) due to unresolvable features or third-party integrations.

Phase 0 — Prep: goals, scope, and KPIs

Establish measurable gates for the pilot. Typical KPIs:

• Document fidelity rate: percentage of documents judged functionally equivalent after conversion (target 95%+ for non-macro docs).
• Macro function rate: percentage of critical macros that run correctly (target depends on business tolerance; 80% is aggressive for 2026).
• Template usability: percent of templates that render, print, and export correctly.
• User acceptance: pilot users who accept LibreOffice as primary tool (survey target 80%+).
• Time-to-remediate: average engineering hours per macro/template migrated.

Phase 1 — Inventory and discovery (automated + manual)

Start with a complete inventory of document assets. Use automated scans to locate Office files and extract metadata.

Automated discovery

• Scan file shares, SharePoint, OneDrive, and endpoints for .docx, .xlsm, .xltm, .dotm, .pptm and legacy .doc/.xls/.ppt files.
• Extract macro presence flag: for OOXML, check zipped package for vbaProject.bin or Macros parts. For binary formats, use libmagic or file-identification tools.
• Collect file metadata: last modified, owner, path, size, and access frequency.
• Where possible, augment discovery with AI-driven discovery to prioritise the assets most likely to block a migration (use models that combine access frequency, owner importance and macro flags).

Manual sampling

• Target the top 100 files by business importance and top 200 by access frequency.
• Interview owners to understand template dependencies, macros' business purpose, and SLA for downtime.

Phase 2 — Prioritization and categorization

Classify documents into buckets that map to the risk matrix (see below). Use these attributes:

• Macro presence: none / simple (UI helpers) / complex (financial models, automation, COM/OLE)
• Template dependency: branding-only / layout-dependent / logic-driven (forms, mail-merge)
• Interop features: tracked changes, comments, conditional formatting, pivot tables, SmartArt/OfficeArt, embedded objects, ActiveX controls
• Business criticality: low / medium / high

Phase 3 — Macro analysis and risk scoring

Macros are the largest migration risk. Use a two-stage approach: static analysis, then dynamic sandbox testing.

Static analysis

• Extract VBA code using tools (python-oletools, vba-extractors). Search for high-risk calls: CreateObject, Shell, SendKeys, COM automation, Windows API calls.
• Score macros by complexity: lines of code, external COM usage, UI automation, file-system/network access.
• Flag macros that call external services, use Windows-only APIs, or depend on add-ins — these usually need redesign.

Dynamic sandbox testing

• Run macros in an isolated Windows VM with Microsoft Office and record behavior. Capture inputs/outputs, file operations, and side effects.
• Repeat the same macro with LibreOffice (where supported) in a Linux or Windows VM and log errors and differences.

Automate runs where possible using cloud pipelines, python-uno, headless LibreOffice (soffice --headless), and PowerShell/Win32 automation in Windows to capture function disparities.

Phase 4 — Template and document fidelity testing

Templates often break in rendering (styles), mail-merge, or form fields.

Test cases for templates

1. Visual rendering: compare header/footer, fonts, spacing, and page breaks.
2. Form fields and protection: confirm text fields, dropdowns, content controls, and protection behave similarly.
3. Mail-merge: run real data merges and validate outputs against golden samples.
4. Export/print: verify PDF output byte-for-byte or visually; compare OCRable text for legal compliance.

Tools for comparison: LibreOffice --convert-to (headless), odfvalidator, Apache Tika for text extraction, and visual diff tools (image-based diffs for PDF).

Phase 5 — Interoperability scenarios

Test real-world workflows, not just isolated files.

• Co-authoring and collaboration: LibreOffice by itself is desktop-first; evaluate Nextcloud + Collabora or OnlyOffice for web editing behavior compared to Microsoft 365 co-authoring.
• Track changes and comments: open, edit, re-open, and accept/reject cycles across both suites.
• Complex spreadsheets: formulas (esp. XLOOKUP, LET), array functions, dynamic arrays, and pivot refresh behavior.
• Charts and data visualization: check rendering, axis formatting, and exported images.
• Embedded content: OLE objects, linked Excel charts, and ActiveX controls.

Automation tools & scripts (practical examples)

Use automation to scale discovery and testing. Example patterns for engineers:

Bulk conversion & text extraction (Linux server)

<code># Convert files to PDF and extract text (batch)
soffice --headless --convert-to pdf *.docx --outdir /tmp/converted
for f in /tmp/converted/*.pdf; do pdftotext "$f" "${f%.pdf}.txt"; done
</code>

Extract VBA for static analysis (Python + oletools)

<code>from oletools.olevba import VBA_Parser
v = VBA_Parser('file.xlsm')
if v.detect_vba_macros():
    for (subfilename, stream_path, vba_filename, vba_code) in v.extract_all_macros():
        # scan vba_code for risky calls
</code>

Note: unoconv is convenient but less maintained; prefer direct soffice calls or LibreOfficeKit where available. Store converted artifacts in reliable object storage as part of your pipeline.

Macro & template remediation strategies

• Convert to LibreOffice Basic: Only viable for simple macros. Automated conversion is partial and often requires manual fixes.
• Refactor to Python/JS services: Extract complex automation to a server-side microservice (Python + REST). Desktop actions invoke the service via an add-in or macro wrapper.
• Containerize: Keep high-risk files in a managed Windows environment (VDI or app virtualization) while moving the rest to LibreOffice.
• Hybrid approach: Use LibreOffice for the majority, preserve Microsoft 365 for specialised teams/workflows.

Risk matrix — macros, templates, and interoperability

Use this matrix to map asset attributes to recommended actions. Score each document and aggregate for business units.

Scoring guidelines

Simple numeric method you can use programmatically:

• Macro complexity: none 0, simple 3, complex 6, COM/OLE 8
• Template dependency: branding 0, form logic 3, heavy logic 5
• Interop features: basic 0–2, moderate 3–5, complex 6–8
• Criticality multiplier: low x1, medium x1.25, high x1.5

Sum and apply the multiplier — results >7 mean high risk; 4–7 medium; <4 low.

Pilot plan and go/no-go criteria

Run a 4–8 week pilot with representative business units (finance, HR, ops). Pilot steps:

1. Onboard 20–50 power users and provide training materials covering key differences.
2. Run the automated inventory and the macro/test scoring on their documents.
3. Execute fidelity and macro tests for the top 100 assets; log issues and remediation effort.
4. Collect KPIs: document fidelity, macro function rate, and user acceptance.

Suggested go/no-go thresholds:

• Fidelity > 95% for non-macro docs
• Critical macro function rate > 80% OR a clear remediation path with estimated effort within budget
• User acceptance > 75% among pilot users

Security, compliance, and governance

Macro risk is also a security risk. Key controls for LibreOffice adoption:

• Group policies for macro execution: set default to disabled and enable only signed macros from known locations.
• Centralize macro repositories and consider signing macros where possible.
• Audit and logging: collect macro execution telemetry during the pilot to detect anomalies.
• SSO and document access: if moving to private cloud editors, ensure SSO (SAML/OIDC) and proper DLP integration.

Also plan clear communication about macro security — see the patch communication playbook approaches for how to coordinate vendor/security messaging when you change macro policies.

2026 trends that affect your decision

Late 2025 and early 2026 saw improvements in LibreOffice's interoperability and ongoing community work on VBA coverage. At the same time, enterprise tooling improved around private-cloud office stacks (Nextcloud + Collabora/LibreOfficeKit) and headless conversion workflows. Expect incremental compatibility gains in 2026, but don't assume feature parity. Budget for engineering work to refactor mission-critical automation.

Estimated effort & cost models

Rough engineering estimates per document class (adjust to your context):

• Low-risk documents (templates, static): 0.5–2 hours each to test and adjust styles.
• Medium-risk (simple macros): 4–12 hours to convert or wrap macros.
• High-risk (complex financial models): 40–160+ hours per model to refactor to server-side services or redesign workflow.

Use these estimates to calculate total TCO vs continued Microsoft 365 licensing and remediation costs.

Actionable checklist (start this week)

1. Run discovery to inventory all Office file types and extract macro flags.
2. Interview owners for the top 100 critical assets.
3. Score assets using the matrix above and select pilot candidates.
4. Automate batch conversions and build fidelity tests (PDF/text comparisons).
5. Plan remediation: categorize into replace/refactor/retain and estimate engineering hours.
6. Run a 4–8 week pilot and evaluate KPIs against go/no-go thresholds.

“Measure first, migrate second. The macro is rarely the only hidden cost—templates, printing/export fidelity, and collaboration workflows matter just as much.”

Final recommendations

For most organizations in 2026, a hybrid strategy wins: move low-risk documents and templates to LibreOffice first, refactor medium-risk automation to centralized services, and retain or containerize the highest-risk macros in a managed Windows environment. This approach minimizes business disruption while harvesting cost and privacy gains.

Key takeaway: Don’t treat LibreOffice migration as all-or-nothing. Use the test plan and risk matrix in this guide to quantify risk, prioritize engineering work, and make a defensible, data-driven migration decision.

Need a jumpstart?

If you want a ready-to-run version of the inventory scripts, scoring spreadsheet, and a pilot workbook tailored to finance or HR, we can provide them and run a 2-week assessment to baseline your environment and present an executive report with remediation estimates.

Contact us to schedule a migration assessment or download the test-plan template and risk spreadsheet.

Related Reading

• AI-powered discovery patterns for large content inventories
• Cloud pipeline patterns for repeatable automation and testing
• Serverless edge strategies for compliance-first workloads
• Cloud NAS and private-cloud storage options for document workflows
• Glam Tech for the Vanity: Smart Lamps, Warmers and Beauty Gadgets That Actually Deliver
• Meta destroyed the VR fitness leaderboards — where do competitive VR workouts go from here?
• Ocarina of Time DIY Party: Build the LEGO Battle Stage & Craft Props
• Monetizing Sensitive Subjects: What YouTube’s Policy Change Means for Journalists and Creators
• Old Map Nostalgia: Running Community Events on Classic Arc Raiders Maps