Since, as McGrath of Harlow has already pointed out,
tradition = innovation + passage of time,
I would suggest that a tradition will successfully transplant when there is a reason to keep doing it in its new location and environment, until it reaches the point where *not* doing it becomes more unusual to the participants than doing it.

Whether that reason for keeping to do it is because it reaffirms statutory and legal rights and privileges, or it ensures that the crops grow and the sun rises, or because it's become a cherished and anticipated event in a group's annual calendar, it is I feel in many ways the repetition of the action itself that reinforces the bond between the participants. As a side thought I would include spectators in that, because there are many people who have never been a participant in a rite or revel but would feel a sense of loss and disconnection if they were not there to be present at their chosen event.

There are traditions that go back hundreds of years, there are traditions that go back to their invention by the Victorians, and there are traditions that only started a few years ago. In a game of traditional Top Trumps, the tradition of my side The Powderkegs dancing out on Boxing Day or May morning will never 'beat' the Abbots Bromley Horn Dance or the Padstow Obby Oss: but whilst the academic folklorists are busy playing Tradition Top Trumps, the rest of us are probably having too much fun to notice ...

That's a bit of a witter, sorry. I'm not even sure what it adds to the OP's question - but (if you have) you've read it now, so sorry about that ....