All Ideas

Currently Partners are only able to view opportunity details in ASPX for customers they have registered CPOR on. This is great where relationships exist already, however there are many times when account teams present new customers with no link to the Partner. It would be beneficial for Partners to have a holistic picture of the customer landscape in those initial conversations to help shape an outcome that will have a higher chance of resonating with the customer and therefore landing successfully. This also reduces the amount of time expended given a Partner would likely have to engage the account team and or customer direct to get the required information. Ultimately this would reduce lead conversion times significantly, reducing effort across the board, and likely see greater satisfaction for all involved. While it was raised by 1 Partner, this would benefit all Partners globally. Given the potential positive impact, releasing this capability sooner rather than later would be highly beneficial.  

When we include the Teir 2 reseller name into the ASPX data feeds, is there a way to include the Teir 2 resellers MPNID along with the name. It can prove to be a good validation point for the Distributors to connect the tenant usage data.

On ASPX, we include the workloads leading to upsell which are defined by relevant teams and Windows 365 is not there yet. Based on the information from Michel Roth (Michel.Roth@microsoft.com) who is a Senior Specialist and EMEA Virtualization Scale leader at Microsoft, deeply involved in partner scale motions, Windows 365, Cloud Endpoint, and FastTrack alignment, and frequently collaborates with partners and field teams across the region, the most successful sales motion in Windows365 is to first land a small Windows365 deployment and land and expand from there. Therefore, it'd be a good option to discuss mentioned enhancement on ASPX.

Describe the scenario briefly (what is the feature? How will it work as a partner I can do X so that I can achieve Y) Adding more metrics to ASPX that are from the FRP dashboard so parters can have more overall historical usage data and account details for better data share and analysis. As the FRP dashboard deprecates, partners will still need the overall metrics that are not captured in ASPX. Describe the business problem or pain point (why is this feature needed?)Partner Compugen suggested adding features from FRP Dashboard that they commonly use for MAU YTD reporting. These reports help the partner consult with their AM, check overall YTD usage and track Specialization metrics. The ASPX are missing the following features from the FRP Dashboard. Performance OverviewAll up Tenants; Usage Visualization and MetricsSpecific month(s)/Year(s) MAU information.Performance by UsageFTA name associated with the customerTPID informationMonthly Users deltaCurrent associated partner nameDescribe the expected impact (quantify the impact e.g. improves productivity, reduces manual toil)Adding the FRP metrics to ASPX will help partners/PSM track historical and overall usage to understand the impact of campaigns, motions and quicker data share. How many partners asked for it? (quantify the ask)Currently 1 but others will benefit from the change. What is the urgency? High/Medium/LowMedium, depending on the date the FRP Dashboard is no longer supported/updated. How does success look like? (success criteria, measurable outcomes, KPI)Adding the data features from the FRP dashboard to another tab in ASPX.

1. Describe the scenario briefly (what is the feature? how will it work as a partner i can do X so that i can achieve Y)   Microsoft needs to ensure partners can clearly articulate why Copilot is unique – consider additional partner training or office hours to reinforce Copilot’s secure, enterprise-ready value proposition.   2. Describe the business problem or pain point (why is this feature needed?)   There is a market misconception of equating Copilot with consumer AI solutions on features alone, overlooking Copilot’s enterprise security advantage.   3. Describe the expected impact (quantify the impact e.g. improves productivity, reduces manual toil)   With the support of our partners, we aim to establish in the market that Copilot is the only solution enabling safe AI usage in enterprise environments. This will lead to increased adoption of Copilot Chat and boost M365 Copilot sales. Furthermore, it will help reduce the risk for customers of using unsafe AI solutions.   4. How many partners asked for it?   At least 7   5. What is the urgency?   High   6. How does success looks like? (success criteria, measurable outcomes, KPI)   Increased adoption of Copilot Chat and growth in M365 Copilot sales.

Describe the scenario briefly (what is the feature? how will it work as a partner i can do X so that i can achieve Y) Workshop funding tied to conversion KPIs discourages early engagement. Describe the business problem or pain point (why is this feature needed?)Currently Partners have KPIs tied to workshop delivery. This is causing challenges across the Partner given the depth of qualification required. We are now observing a reduction in the number of workshops delivered as a result.  Describe the expected impact (quantify the impact e.g. improves productivity, reduces manual toil)Decouple funding from initial KPIs; reward later-phase progress (deployment milestones). Partners would then be freed up to engage customers to identify opportunities without the burden or overhead of a performance metric tied to it. How many partners asked for it? (quantify the ask)1, but would benefit all What is the urgency? High/Medium/LowThis would be a high urgency one and would see immediate impact as workshop approvals and delivery would rise. How does success look like? (success criteria, measurable outcomes, KPI)No restriction on Partners delivering workshops, but shifting of the incentives and performance metrics to drive behaviour towards funded activities that occur at deployment time. 

ASPX: Automate Lead creation based on customer signals Configure the system such that when it identifies signals that indicate intervention could be required, it alerts the Partner and creates a Lead for them to follow up Describe the business problem or pain point (why is this feature needed?) Currently Partners manually have to export data or review the content within the tool to understand which Customers to target. By having our tool monitoring for changes, and categorising them and pushing them as Leads, it takes the burden off the Partner who can then focus on proactively reaching out to their customer base.   Describe the expected impact (quantify the impact e.g. improves productivity, reduces manual toil) This would save time. At the moment a Partner could be using a variety of resources to dig into ASPX depending on their role - from Pre sales to CSMs [both ends of the usage spectrum]. It would be another way to streamline and add value to an already great tool   How many partners asked for it? (quantify the ask) This would benefit ALL partners globally.    What is the urgency? High/Medium/Low Given its an enhancement request, its hard to quantify - but given the potential upside, the sooner we provide it, the quicker the benefit is to be had.    How does success look like? (success criteria, measurable outcomes, KPI) Partners could focus on value add conversations rather than administrative tasks with our customers. We could push white space to sales roles, or low usage high PAU to CSM roles. This is a feature that has broad scale impact. 

1. Describe the scenario briefly (what is the feature? how will it work as a partner i can do X so that i can achieve Y)     We would like to request the addition of a "Select All" option to the Change Columns feature in the Customer Detail area of ASPX Views (Copilot Opportunities, E3 Opportunities, E5 Opportunities, and E5 Expansion Opportunities).    2. Describe the business problem or pain point (why is this feature needed?)    Currently, partners must manually check every column before downloading Customer Detail data. This process is time-consuming, repetitive, and prone to errors, especially when all columns are needed for analysis. The lack of a bulk selection option creates unnecessary friction and reduces efficiency.    3. Describe the expected impact (quantify the impact e.g. improves productivity, reduces manual toil)    • Reduce manual processes performed weekly to improve productivity.• Minimize human error in row selection.• Enhance the ASPX experience for partners.    4. How many partners asked for it? (quantify the ask)    At least 2+ partners have raised this need.5. What is the urgency? High/Medium/Low    High – This is a frequent pain point impacting daily workflows for partners who rely on ASPX Views for opportunity management and reporting.    6. How does success looks like? (success criteria, measurable outcomes, KPI)    Success Criteria: • “Select All” option is available in Change Columns for all relevant ASPX Views.• Partners can download full Customer Detail data with one click.Measurable Outcomes / KPIs: • Reduction in time spent preparing downloads.Increase in partner satisfaction scores related to usability.

1. Describe the scenario briefly (what is the feature? how will it work as a partner i can do X so that i can achieve Y) We propose adding a new column in the Customer Details section of Copilot Opportunities Insights that displays the growth potential for Copilot Chat.This metric would be calculated as:Total number of M365/O365 SKUs owned by the customer – Current Copilot Chat MAU.As a partner, I can quickly identify customers with high growth potential and prioritize proposing Copilot + Power Accelerate, enabling faster engagement and deeper adoption. 2. Describe the business problem or pain point (why is this feature needed?)Currently, partners lack a clear, data-driven method to evaluate the growth potential of Copilot Chat. Without this insight, decision-making is delayed, potentially missing opportunities to upsell Copilot + Power Accelerate. Partners are spending extra time manually estimating potential, which is hindering the adoption of Copilot Opportunities Insights.Adoption of ASPX is accelerating.Improved productivity: Reduces manual analysis time by delivering actionable insights directly within MPX.Faster decision-making: Enables partners to prioritize high-potential customers immediately.Drives revenue growth: Facilitates targeted proposals for Copilot + Power Accelerate, boosting adoption rates.3. Describe the expected impact (quantify the impact e.g. improves productivity, reduces manual toil)Partners' adoption of ASPX will advance through the following improvements:    • Productivity gains: Reduce manual analysis time by delivering actionable insights directly within MPX.    • Faster decision-making: Enable partners to instantly prioritize high-potential prospects.    • Accelerated revenue growth: Facilitate targeted proposals for Copilot + Power Accelerate and boost adoption rates.4. How many partners asked for it? (quantify the ask)At least 7+ partners have raised this need.5. What is the urgency? High/Medium/LowHigh – Partners are actively seeking ways to accelerate Copilot adoption, and this feature directly supports FY26 growth priorities.6. How does success looks like? (success criteria, measurable outcomes, KPI)Success Criteria:Columns are available in MPX Customer Details for all partners.Accurate calculation of growth potential based on SKU and MAU data.Measurable Outcomes/KPIs:・Promotion of ASPX adoption by partners.・Partners plan campaigns using Copilot Opportunities Insights within 3 months of launch.・Improvement in partner satisfaction scores in MPX usability surveys. 

Overview:Angi (eGroup) highlighted a critical trend impacting partner revenue streams: as customers transition from EA to CSP, they often discontinue Unified Support because CSP includes break-fix support at no additional cost. This shift significantly reduces the perceived need for paid managed services, creating a structural GTM blocker for partners like eGroup.Detailed Feedback & Context:Customer Behavior:Many customers only use Unified Support for ticket resolution and do not leverage its additional value-add services (training, proactive engagement).When moving to CSP, these customers see an opportunity to eliminate costs while still receiving break-fix support, making managed services upsell difficult.Angi noted: “We try to upsell it and want to be in there, but as people make that move, they’re like, sweet, I can save money on this and what I still need tickets for is just included in being a CSP.”Market Dynamics:CSP indirect providers like Ingram offer robust Tier 2 support and absorb Microsoft escalation costs, reinforcing the perception that CSP support is “good enough.”This model commoditizes basic support and erodes differentiation for partners who traditionally relied on Unified Support gaps to position premium managed services.Partner Impact:Reduced attach opportunities for managed services, especially for customers who prioritize cost savings over enhanced experience.Even when prospects express dissatisfaction with Unified Support (e.g., poor value, lack of technical depth), converting them to paid managed services remains challenging for large enterprises due to cost competitiveness.Angi emphasized that non-break-fix requests (e.g., proactive optimization) are rare, limiting upsell triggers.Business Implications:Revenue Risk: Partners lose a key monetization lever as CSP adoption accelerates.Customer Experience Gap: Customers may settle for reactive support, missing opportunities for proactive optimization and strategic guidance.Program Misalignment: Current CSP support structure unintentionally disincentivizes managed services adoption, conflicting with Microsoft’s goal of driving partner-led value.Recap: eGroup + Enabling/FRP Microsoft Sync Wednesday, November 12 | Meeting | Microsoft Teams

Our data today is broken down into individual workloads. This is great for an EA customer that aligns to E3 and E5 license types. In the SMB space the CSP terms for licenses are Business essentials or standard and Business Premium. Some of the advanced workload have add on SKUs to these “hero” SKUs. It would be great if we could map the workload to the license type that aligns with CSP. 

Some of the Disti PDMs have raised concerns over the amount of Data we are exposing to potential competitors and the motion of Share shift.  It has been proposed that if a certain partner doesn't own the majority of the license that we don't expose the data in their feeds. This is potentially more important in the CSP world as customers can purchase licenses form multiple partners. 

General Observation:There is some perceived overlap and emerging competition between ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, and to a lesser extent, Google Gemini. However, the use cases and user experiences differ significantly.1. Adoption & Usage PatternsShadow AI:Many organizations see employees using ChatGPT privately or professionally (so-called “Shadow AI”). This happens regardless of corporate policy and can affect Copilot adoption rates.Organizational Deployment:Some organizations experiment with a company-wide version of ChatGPT or a “local” deployment. This group is smaller but visible.2. User Experience DifferencesChatGPT:Perceived as better tuned to users — feels more natural and intuitive.Users appreciate that ChatGPT remembers context and history, which makes workflows smoother.The textual output quality (especially rewritten or summarized texts) is often considered more elegant and better phrased.Copilot:Users find it less fluid, as it doesn’t remember context beyond the immediate prompt — each item must be provided manually.The integration with Microsoft data (e.g., Outlook, Teams, SharePoint) is seen as a huge advantage, but still developing.The RAI principles and enterprise data safeguards make the product feel more secure and compliant, which users appreciate for corporate environments.3. Competitive LandscapeGemini:Some awareness of Gemini rising as another player, but limited direct experience or impact so far.Overall Perception:Users view ChatGPT as stronger in language generation and “creative” use cases, while Copilot is recognized as more governed, secure, and enterprise-ready, though still maturing in flexibility and contextual understanding.4. Individual Remarks“ChatGPT is textually stronger; its rewritten outputs are more beautiful and refined.”“Copilot still needs to build up the same level of contextual memory that ChatGPT already has.”“Integration between ChatGPT and Microsoft data is accelerating — in principle, it could soon do the same as Copilot.”

Please increase partner-facing technical enablement sessions—similar to the October Copilot Oversharing Guidance Community Call. Partners struggle to keep up with rapid updates in M365, especially Copilot and Security.   What’s needed More frequent partner-facing calls/webinars with: Latest feature updates and roadmap highlights Deployment/adoption best practices and security guidance   Impact Improves pre-sales confidence Accelerates M365 products adoption Strengthens competitive positioning

Partners face challenges converting EA customers to CSP because EA contracts offer access to programs and funding that CSP cannot match. This creates friction during renewal cycles and slows CSP growth. Recommend publishing clear guidance and value comparison for EA vs CSP, along with potential funding levers to offset gaps. Both BDO and Quisitive have provided this feedback in Q2.  EA to CSP Transition Challenges and Funding Opportunities: Michelle and Josh discussed the complexities of transitioning customers from EA to CSP, including eligibility, funding programs, and the need for compelling business cases to secure Microsoft support, with input from Emily on operational alignment. Recap: BDO:Microsoft - FRP Rhythm of Business Tuesday, October 28 | Meeting | Microsoft Teams 

We are looking at “Insights” data in Partner Center and on the Copilot tab, we can see Potential Earnings which is calculating customers doing BOTH the pre-sales Envisioning & POC workshop as well as the Deployment Accelerator engagement. Do you have data or a resource to pull high level statistics on how many customers do BOTH engagements in their Copilot journey? This information will be helpful in getting to a more realistic understanding of potential earnings to share with ELT.

The MCI guide outlines the steps required to validate an engagement; however, it does not specify at which point(customer nomination or customer consent) a workshop ceases to be eligible for other partners. Clarifying this would help partners understand the process when a customer is associated with another partner. It would also assist partners and internal teams in determining whether an issue is due to a system error or because another partner has already initiated the engagement, particularly in cases where an engagement initially appears eligible but then becomes ineligible.

The current MCI engagement guidelines do not provide clarity on scenarios where an engagement is cancelled after nomination but before delivery, or when payment has already been processed by the team. This ambiguity creates confusion for partners regarding whether such cancellations impact their performance metrics. To address this, the guide should explicitly outline these situations and confirm that partner performance will not be negatively affected when an engagement is cancelled under these circumstances. Clear guidance, including examples and FAQs, will help ensure transparency, prevent misinterpretation, and maintain partner confidence in the evaluation process.

Partners have expressed concerns about the current performance measurement requirements in MCI engagements, particularly the expectation for customers to commit to license purchases before workshops are delivered. This creates hesitation among partners, who fear being penalized if the customer does not convert. As a result, some partners choose not to engage at all, missing opportunities to showcase the product and potentially influence customer decisions. To address this, would it be an option to allow 1–2 engagements per partner per year to be excluded from performance requirements? Maybe by adding criterias as can be used on education customers or the customers above x amount of seats. This would give partners the flexibility to deliver workshops to customers they believe have strong potential or genuine interest, even if those customers cannot confirm investment upfront, ultimately encouraging more proactive engagement and reducing missed opportunities.

With the rollout of ASPX to all partners, non-FastTrack partners now have access to the dashboard. While learning materials are available in the portal, GPS team members familiar with the platform have requested sessions for their partners by country/area.To avoid creating duplicate efforts for PSMs, a more efficient approach would be to organize a single webinar on how to use the dashboard. PSMs can then share the recording or link with GPS teams, ensuring all interested partners can access the training.

Microsoft shows inconsistent data for the partners in PC which leads confusion and delays on partner end. An example, the partner has 5 certified people to achieve Copilot specialization. The numbers for example "Microsoft Applied Skills: Create agents in Microsoft Copilot Studio" are not the same across partner center. In skilling report for Copilot Advance Certification, is stated there are 3, in Training section of the Insights, there are 2 and when the skilling report is downloaded, this exam doesn't exist. The numbers are off across the partner center which slows down the process, confusing the partners and preventing them from having necessary certificates on time to proceed with business opportunities.  

Request to Include Customer Sub Segments in all Reports (MPX and others)

Request to Include CSP Revenue to PIIR in PSM Dashboard to measure the partner contribution across CSP deals

Situation: Some customer shows MAU > PAU Request : Add details Needs clarity of reason why? is it data error? is it counting trial license? is it possible technically MAU>PAU . Happen in many customers in various security workloads Add suggestion talking point what to discuss with customer based on the reason. 

Request to enhance MPX by including the count of all eligible customer seats as whitespace in Copilot opportunities. This will enable better prioritization based on customer size and improve opportunity targeting. Current Limitation: Whitespace is calculated as Paid MAU - Free Chat MAU, which doesn’t reflect total customer potential.Partner Impact: Partners currently need to manually analyze license data to estimate customer size, which is time-consuming and inconsistent.Currently partner need to understand customer size by analyzing the existing license

I would like to request the addition of a CSP Renewal column to the customer data section in FPX. Currently, FPX includes the EA Renewal column, but it would be helpful to also have the CSP Renewal column. Partners take different approaches depending on whether a customer has an EA or CSP agreement, so they need visibility into the type of agreement and its renewal timing within FPX. When prioritizing customers, partners first check the agreement type and renewal timing.

I would like to request the addition of a customer segment filter in FPX. Our partners are strategically focusing on SMC customers. However, FPX currently includes both Enterprise and SMC segment customers, which requires manual extraction of SMC data. This process is time-consuming and has become a blocker for FPX adoption.

CSP product names do not correlate to the workloads in the MPX data feeds. CSP sellers need to understand what the usage data means in the CSP vernacular. i.e. Business essentials, etc. 

Distribution needs to have both the Tier1 and the Teir 2 resellers information in the API feed for integration into their provisioning and billing reseller portals.

Request to add the information of the incentive, from CPOR, MCI , Deployment Offer earned together in the Land and Expand dashboard. Background; leadership team to utilize the MPX dashboard consistently, having motivation that it will help doing renewal, upsell, incentive, when they use the dashboard they want to actually see the immediate impact of which and if the effort resulted in the revenue, without having to spend too much manual effort cheking one by one currently

Test

Currently in MPX a user is able to filter on MCI by selecting either 'Eligible' or ‘Ineligible’. To allow for better targeting depending on the specific campaign or motion a partner is looking to run, it would be useful if the filtering was more granular. For example, the ability to filter on Copilot eligibility, Data Security etc.

Currently, the Change Columns button in the FPX customer data area allows users to add or remove data fields displayed. However, these settings are not saved, so every time we access FPX, we must reconfigure the columns. While this may seem like a small task, it becomes a repetitive burden over time. If the Change Columns configuration could be retained, it would significantly reduce wasted time in the long run and greatly improve the usability of FPX. As an advanced enhancement, allowing users to save multiple personalized views e.g., My Views would be even more powerful. This would enable instant switching between different perspectives for analysis, making workflows faster and more efficient.

Partner described the high-stakes nature of the new performance metrics, where partners must demonstrate sustained Copilot adoption over 12 months, and the risk of being paused if targets are not met, especially for smaller partners.  The risk of usage regression post baseline is a concern that can be due to customer out of business or organizational disruptions.  How will these be addressed? Can a high water mark post baseline at claim be considered? 

Partners can benefit from an Microsoft office hours regarding extensibility, how to leverage use cases for Agents bridging conversations between business stakeholders and IT from deploying agent to getting them into production.  Partner asks if SME's personas are available for business and IT stakeholder conversation guidance to bridge the gap

My idea would be for me to have a way to quicky get a preformatted report from Partner Center within 1 click.  Currently I go to the Partner Center page and gather data for my sales team. The sales team doesn't have access so I provide them with the information on existing customers that are ready for any MCI, SCI, E3, or E5 upgrades. Currently I have to select the area in Partner Center that I want to export. Then it processes into a CSV file. I then download the CSV file. I have to open Excel use Get Data and point it to the CSV. After that, I have to click on Transform Data and the screen switches to the Data Screen where I can set the values for each cell. For example, Customer Is Eligible the value may be set to 1 or ineligible may be set to 2. However on my report I want the word Eligible or Ineligible so I se that on this screen.After all that I have to close and import the data into Excel. From there I have to use the existing data to create a Pivot table to group all the like data together. This would be more efficient if that was all done on the backend and what I download is an editable Excel sheet. Just have a basic template with all the data logically sorted and let the user be able to edit it so they can change whatever they need on their time. This would be so helpful and save massive amounts of editing time.

Problem statement: FPX currently shows the number of available workshops but not the specific eligible workshops. Impact: Users need to click to see eligibility, which is inefficient. Measurement: Improved user efficiency and satisfaction.

Problem statement: Need to show EDU customers and SKUs in Insights.Specific process/tool/data: FPXImpact: EDU customers and SKUs not visible.Measure impact: Improved visibility of EDU data.

Problem statement: Need functionality to select one MCI engagement and see a list of all eligible customers.Specific process/tool/data: FPXImpact: Unable to create targeted campaigns efficiently.Measure impact: Increased campaign success rate. 

We are a global company that manages FastTrack centrally. We recently received questions from our teams in Germany and Australia about redeeming Deployment Vouchers. We confirmed we could, but now have to figure out the Accounting on the back end for the payments. It would be better if we could redeem these vouchers through Partner Center where we already have Partner IDs and Payment and Tax profiles set up for these various markets. Is there a reason that Workshops are managed through the MCI portal and Partner Center, but Vouchers have to be managed in the FastTrack Partner Community Portal?

As partners and Microsoft focus on moving customers to NCE contracts at renewal, is Microsoft considering allowing customers renewing from EA into NCE to be eligible for the MW Security Deployment Offer voucher program? We have several opportunities where we are working with Microsoft on renewals and encouraging customers to move to NCE, which disqualifies them from the voucher program. These customers are renewing from M365 E3 to M365 E5 and need assistance with deploying security products and would be a great fit for the deployment voucher.

Process and Expectations - FastTrack – Microsoft 365 | Microsoft Learn   Hi dear team,    Many discussions with partners generated this piece of feedback/advise, to help customers understand that they can involve themselves directly with FRP instead of raising an RFA. Sometimes customers/partners think that the process requires the completion of an RFA to "officialize" the association process, when in reality, just a CPOR claim is sufficient. With the RME engine, raising an RFA via the "official" source can translate into an assignment to a wrong partner, when in reality, the customer doesn't even need to raise that RFA in the first place.   Our suggestion is to change the vocabulary in the "Engaging FastTrack" to something like: "Raising FastTrack assistance requests are not required for customers already working with our FastTrack Ready Partner (link here). Instead of just "For a list of FastTrack Ready Approved partners, click here"."   I am available for additional conversations around this.

Please add an option to add multiple files when submitting our claims. Often you revert to us to ask for the sign log. Will causes a delay in approval. We could submit the sign log together with the signed document. 

Is it possible to include a change log whenever the FastTrack Microsoft learn page is updated?    Changes and updates are made fairly frequently throughout the year (Products and Capabilities, Entra, Sentinel, Office 365 sections), but it is not really clear what has been updated.   FastTrack Center Benefit for Microsoft 365​ - FastTrack – Microsoft 365 | Microsoft Learn

For global partners it would be very helpful if there would be a downloadable voucher earnings statement that would contain complete earnings for all location IDs. The Power BI statement under Partner Statement Report · FastTrack Partner Community Portal is nice, but as global admin I would have to drill into every single location ID which makes working with the earnings report very clumsy. Would be great to have a consolidated view across all location Ids.... Thank you! :) 

Why not have automated forms sent out to partners after a certain period of time to provide feedback on a referral? 

We need to log CPOR for program performance. We have clients that decline to complete the POE for CPOR because we are claiming Copilot or other Modern Workloads all because in partnercenter currently CPOR of Modern work or Security workloads is called Security Usage Incentive this is confusing for the client! please rename the partnercenter ability to CPOR to something more generic like CPOR for Modern Work/Security or something but not only "Security Usage Incentive"     many thanks

Our customers are finding it very confusing to sign the POE before having to complete the full SoW because of the naming of both Proof of Execution and Proof of Engagement document having the same text in the document, and says that the partner has performed these activities already. Nevertheless, we are required to have this document signed by the client PRIOR to claiming CPOR.

With the current focus on the Customer Copilot Adoption Journey, we are actively conducting many workshops and engagements supporting Copilot. As we enter Funding/Incentive Claims for Proof of Value or Role-Based Deployment & Adoption Accelerator workshops, these claims should automatically align to a Change Partner of Record claim, utilizing the same POE already required to complete the association rather than requiring that a separate CPOR claim and documentation submission occur. This will also reduce the need to send another email to the customer contact to approve of the association.I can see not making the association automatic for the Vision and Value workshops, but if they involve a Proof of Concept/Value or Deployment/Adoption aspect I think it should be streamlined.Do you agree?

This is regarding the FastTrack Community partners.  We are currently unable to edit our endorsement profile, which has resulted in us receiving a referral for a workload that we are not specialized in. We are a Converged communications partner, but we received a referral in SPO due to our ACM, Teams Rooms and phone specializations, that includes that SPO, although it is not requirement to drive growth and consumption around it. We are hoping the option to edit the endorsements will become available for partners like us that does not have the required specialist to deliver the service and who will be negatively affected by declining the referral. Thanks! 

LXP Dashboard(Opportunities)で実態として該当しない顧客がオポチュニティとして表示されるため、SKUの判定ロジックを見直し、正しいSKUで扱われるように変えて欲しい。例) 既にME5をお持ちのお客様のSKUがO365と扱われているケースがあります。 Since customers who do not actually fall under this category are displayed as opportunities, I would like to see the SKU judgment logic reviewed and changed so that it is handled with the correct SKU.For example, there are cases where customers who already have ME5 have SKUs that are treated as O365.

Tech Plus にパートナーがアクセスできなくなったので、サービス概要書等を入手できるポータルを別途作成してほしい最新のサービスの概要書、技術要件書などが、FPMやPDM等に相談しないと入手できない。相談してもタイミングによっては、すぐ入手できなくて困る場合がある。ほしいデータとしては下記。今は Copilot とか AI 関連のサイトもあれば。Since partners no longer have access to Tech Plus, I would like to create a separate portal where they can obtain service overviews, etc.The latest service overviews and technical requirements are not available without consulting with FPM or PDM. Even if you consult, depending on the timing, you may not be able to get it right away. The data you want is as follows.Now there's Copilot and other AI-related sites.Enterprise Mobility + Security - 技術ドキュメント  Technical DocumentationM365 Security & Compliance - 技術ドキュメント  Technical DocumentationMicrosoft Azure - 技術ドキュメントTechnical DocumentationMicrosoft Viva - ドキュメント DocumentMicrosoft Viva - 技術ドキュメントTechnical DocumentationOffice Client - 技術ドキュメントTechnical DocumentationPower BI Analytics - 技術ドキュメントTechnical DocumentationPowerApps Flow - 技術ドキュメントTechnical DocumentationSharePoint - 技術ドキュメントTechnical DocumentationTeams - 技術ドキュメントTechnical DocumentationWindows Client - 技術ドキュメントTechnical DocumentationWindows Client - 標準ドキュメントTechnical Documentation

There should be a list of customers which should be made available to account managers or partners so we can proactively work with the ATU team on utilization and also working closely with the sales team for ensuring it is in the system, so the vouchers are eligible post sales, just like we had it in the days of Software Assurance vouchers.

We have started to receive 'Non-Benefit' referrals and noticed the notes lack details on why the customer did not qualify for the FT Benefit. Most of them seem like they should have qualified. Could more detail be provided on why the customer did not qualify for the FT Benefit? This could help us get to the right solution for the customer faster.

We find ourselves more often than not educating the Microsoft Field sellers on the MWDO (voucher) program - They have historically not all been aware and they don't attach it to the MSX opportunity, resulting in an RFA, with no funding post-sale.

Have you begun measuring how many dynamic/prioritized customers have an FRP attached vs. how many do not? Might that become a measured outcome of success in the future?

The requirement of 1000 Copilot-eligible licenses for the FastTrack Copilot campaign is still too high, especially compared to the eligibility for MCI Copilot workshops. It's hard to promote FastTrack’s exclusive Copilot offers because most buyers are still testing the product and are unlikely to commit to purchasing 1000+ licenses. Why hasn’t this been reviewed and adjusted, especially with many partners expressing concerns?

The first slide of this call mentioned that AI Transformation would be a key focus for FY25, but we haven't received any information on that or on Copilot. Will this be covered in another call? How do we prepare in time for any new campaigns that may come in that space?

Referral team does a poor job differentiating between FastTrack referral and Standard referrals. I have received a FastTrack referral that clearly stated in the case history "not a FastTrack assistance".

Any plans to better educate the Microsoft sellers on the FastTrack benefit? Many times we encounter sellers proposing FastTrack to customers and overselling what is actually in scope for the benefit.

Suggestion for next event - Explore presenting slides via PowerPoint Live in the meeting so that the links in the slides are clickable for the audience. Something I learned when conducting webinars

Difficulty in reaching Deployment Vouchers and customers not using them. Suggest that the referral team engages with customers to ensure voucher usage and explore converting unused vouchers into referrals.

Feedback was given on the need to better educate Customer Success Managers (CSMs) in Japan about the Voucher Program, as there was only one engagement last fiscal year. The problem is the lack of awareness among CSMs. The impact of not addressing this is low engagement in the program. To measure the impact, Microsoft could track the increase in CSMs’ knowledge and subsequent engagements by region.

As Viva workloads, especially Connections and Engage, are crucial drivers for customers to implement sophisticated intranets and migrate contents to the cloud it would be great whether to: - Add Viva Workloads to the eligible ones in M365 Deployment Voucher- Add Viva Deployment Vouchers as currently there are no deployment benfits for customers anymore except ECIF.  Hope that this feedback helps you to think about upcoming adjustments. We would be more than happy to be heard here.  Best regardsJens Paape

Hi team, regarding the Modern Work Deployment Vouchers we are seeing a lot of delay in customers deciding the affiliate partner for whom to give the voucher. This results in delay of activating the voucher and getting the deployment activities ongoing. Some customer segments have more delays than others, for example critical infrastructure related companies or government entities. Public sector overall is usually slower and resources in the customer side are really thin. This affects gravely in the project activities and we run great risk in not being able to deliver within the timeline because of customer resourcing. For better program experience for partners and better success for deployment activities one idea would be to extend the initial standard voucher deadlines for these kind of customers. The current possible extension of 2 months through request to the program team would come on top of this.

The RFA notes feedback - It would be great if carriage returns are retained in the notes as they are entered into the RFA... It comes across as a blob of text all in one paragraph and makes it challenging to read and reformat.

partners have encountered difficulties in locating a clear and detailed breakdown of the earnings. Specifically, they are unable to determine:When the usage was captured: The statements do not clearly indicate the time period during which the usage occurred.Which customer or workload the earnings were achieved from: There is a lack of information linking the earnings to specific customers or workloads Currently Partner Center statement doesn't offer these information