Almost every client database in a small practice suffers from the same disease, and it is not missing information. It is fields nobody fills in. Somebody set the system up optimistically, added everything that might be useful, and now every record is mostly empty, which teaches everybody that the record is unreliable and that teaches them to keep their own notes elsewhere. The cure is a smaller schema that is actually complete, and the discipline for getting there is worth applying before any migration, not after.
A field earns its place two ways
Either something depends on it, or somebody maintains it. Ideally both. A field that is used by a template, a filter, a reminder or a document is a field that stays current because its emptiness causes visible trouble. A field that exists in case it is useful later never becomes complete, because nothing ever notices that it is missing. Before adding anything, name what will break if it is blank.
The core is smaller than people expect
For most practices the working core is the client's identity and how to reach them, who owns the relationship internally, what stage the relationship is at, the date it started, and the documents held. Everything else is either derivable, belongs on a document, or is a note. Starting from that core and adding only under pressure produces a database people trust, which is the only kind that gets used.
Migrating is the moment to delete, not to preserve
Moving from a spreadsheet is the one opportunity you will get to leave things behind, and most practices waste it by importing everything in case. Import the core, complete it properly, and keep the old sheet read only in an archive for the rare occasion somebody needs a stray column. A clean small record with high completeness beats a rich one that is mostly blank, every time.
Questions people ask about client database software
Should client database software be customisable?
Enough to add a handful of fields your trade genuinely needs. Unlimited customisation tends to produce the empty field problem faster, because it removes the friction that would have made you ask whether the field was necessary.
What about clients who are businesses with several contacts?
Check this before you buy. A product that models only a person forces companies into a name field and the contacts into notes, and everything downstream inherits the compromise.
How do we keep the database current?
Attach maintenance to something that already happens. Confirming details at onboarding and at an annual review keeps records fresh without anybody being asked to do a data cleanup, which is a task that never gets done.