Program Tools (non OSU) ideas/suggestions

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

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

Context:Partners operating across several regions (such as SoftwareOne) are encountering global caps on MCI (Microsoft Commercial Incentives) nominations. These caps limit the number of nominations a partner can submit globally, regardless of regional demand or opportunity. As a result, partners are attempting to route nominations through other locations to maximize their engagement, but this workaround is not always effective and can create reporting and operational challenges. For example, SoftwareOne is nominating from a global account in EMEA to customers in LATAM, but these nominations do not appear in LATAM-specific filters, obscuring true activity and slowing down execution. Insight and Impact:The global cap is slowing down partner execution, as seen with SoftwareOne, by restricting their ability to fully leverage MCI programs in high-demand regions. This leads to underreported activity, operational inefficiencies, and missed opportunities for both Microsoft and the partner. The workaround of submitting nominations via other regions is not sustainable and complicates tracking, ultimately reducing the effectiveness of MCI engagements and partner growth in key markets. Currently Partner MCI nominations have been paused because they've already reached the cap. Regions are also worried about the MCI performance requirements that might not be met by one region and impact other regions.

Context:Global Go-To-Market (GTM) initiatives (Copilot Chat Accelerate) are designed at a worldwide scale but require adaptation and execution at the regional level. The process of translating these global strategies into actionable regional plans is often complex, involving multiple stakeholders, local market nuances, and alignment with regional partner capabilities. This complexity can lead to delays and inconsistencies in execution.Insight:Landing global GTM initiatives in regions is frequently messy and time-consuming. Regional teams must interpret, localize, and operationalize global directives, which can result in misalignment, duplicated efforts, and confusion among partners about priorities and available resources. The need to coordinate across time zones, languages, and business cultures further complicates the process.Impact:The slow and uneven execution of global GTM initiatives at the regional level can delay market impact, reduce the effectiveness of partner programs, and hinder the achievement of business targets. Partners experience uncertainty or lack of clarity, leading to missed opportunities and suboptimal use of available incentives and resources. 

Softchoice is deprioritizing Microsoft Immersion Briefings because: 1. Programmatic ConstraintsParticipant Cap: Microsoft’s Immersion Briefings limit sessions to 35 companies, while Softchoice’s Customer Immersion Experiences (CIEs) often host 50–150 customers. This cap makes the program less scalable for their engagement model.Environment Requirement: The mandate to use Microsoft’s environment for Immersion Briefings was seen as unnecessary because customers already have access to the needed environment for Copilot Chat. 2. Survey & Proof of Execution (POE) IssuesDual Surveys: Microsoft requires its own survey in addition to Softchoice’s, which leads to low response rates and extra friction for customers.POE Flexibility: Softchoice wants Microsoft to accept partner-led survey data for POE, but this is not yet confirmed.3. Misalignment with Softchoice’s ModelSoftchoice has a mature one-to-many CIE program that scales better and aligns with their go-to-market strategy. Immersion Briefings feel restrictive compared to their established approach.4. Strategic FocusSoftchoice is prioritizing broad Copilot Chat engagement (upsell, cross-sell, net new) over program-specific targets like QuickStart or Immersion Briefings. They want flexibility to execute at scale and demonstrate impact through their own metrics. 

Context: The MPX dashboard lists a high number of Copilot-related opportunities, reflecting accounts with paid licenses, free chat usage, and potential for engagement. However, these numbers do not always represent actionable or realistic sales prospects. Positive PotentialScalable Targeting: MPX provides a broad view of accounts with Copilot-related signals (paid licenses, free chat usage), which can help identify where to start.Data-Driven Prioritization: Using MPX as an initial filter can reduce guesswork and give partners a starting point for segmentationRisks and Negative ImpactOverestimated Pipeline: Many MPX-listed opportunities are not actionable due to budget constraints, long procurement cycles, or lack of intent. This inflates pipeline numbers and creates a false sense of progress.Resource Misallocation: Partners may waste time and marketing dollars chasing accounts that have no near-term buying intent, reducing ROI on campaigns.Forecasting Inaccuracy: Over-reliance on raw MPX data without validation can lead to poor forecasting and misaligned incentives.Partner Frustration: If campaigns fail to convert because the base data wasn’t qualified, partner trust in Microsoft programs and tools can erode.The gap between dashboard signals and true opportunities is large. 

[MPX] Request Graph of usage details with timeline per tenant with timeline in one view (like Lynx Usage details view) Background : Tracking of all products usage is difficult to use as it's spread in multiple rows in the tabDifficult to measure the usage impact based on timeline after the CPOR is claimed. ( partner want to know since the cpor is claimed / workshop done, how's the usage impact or gap) Request : Have usage details view similar like in Lynx Microsoft that shown the workload usage in graphs/ one page view instead of separate in rowsAsk: to have it's in the page of the tenant (together with the subscriptions they have)

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

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. 

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.