-
FastTrack Partner of the Year Award
Suggested by Marius Blaauw – Completed – 1 Comments
As the FRP program is maturing can we create a FRP of the Year award at regional and global level. Partners put a lot of store into Microsoft Partner Awards and the visibility they get from a Microsoft Award. The award will be an additional benefit for partners and also be a vehicle where we can encourage and reward behaviours, we are looking for in the ideal FastTrack partner IE: Success Stories, Wizards Usage etc. -
Partner Operational Support UX Improvements
Suggested by Teresa Heuke – Completed – 3 Comments
Hi TeamThe current UX for the Partner Operational Support Partner Support · M365 Specialty Partner (powerappsportals.com) is not very handy and it would be great if we could see improvements in future:1.) Currently there is no function to put someone in CC. So if someone logging a ticket gets on sick leave there is no possibility for a colleague to take over. So an additional field with people being informed and able to access the ticket would be helpful.2.) There is no possibility to escalate a ticket. As global FRP Admin of my company I am supporting our Operations Team and quite often need to jump in to help them to get things moving. Currently I have to send screenshots of the conversation to my FPM, which is very clumsy and not helpful.Thank you very much for thinking this over.BRTeresa -
Add FastTrack Referrals to PartnerCenter co-sell reporting
Suggested by Han Weghorst – Completed – 2 Comments
We would like to propose MSFT adds the FastTrack Referrals and Non Incentive Referrals as co-sell motion in PartnerCenter reporting.
This would enable the partner to use one source of truth for receiving and handling leads from her partner MSFT. -
Request: tenant name included in referral email
Suggested by LeeAnne Hughes – Completed – 2 Comments
When a FT referral email is sent to the FRP it would be helpful to have the tenant name included. Since referral emails are allowed as the initial PoE documentation for submitting the CPOR requests, having the the tenant name would speed up the process. This also helps when the customer does not know what their tenant name is and/or does not know what their default domain is (which happens way too frequently).
I propose a table in the email that could look something like this:FTOP record name Contoso US Tenant ID 2k1wi-2cats-3d0gs-24kgld-12blah Tenant name contosousa.onmicrosoft.com Customer PoC Jo Smith (jo.smith@contoso.com
If emailing this information is a concern then please instruct the Gateway team in adding this information in the OSNs in FTOP.
Any time we can get this information up front would be extremely helpful. -
Add a Column to display the HWM value for each Workload in the FastTrack Insights
Suggested by Aaron Alpha – Completed – 3 Comments
Can a column (non-calculated) be added int he FastTrack Insights area to reference the High-Water mark dollar value for each workload per user value under the FY23 program e.g. Intune -- $1, MDE -- $3 and so on. -
Customer Referral Notes History Difficult to Read
Suggested by Oscar Goco – Completed – 3 Comments
Going to Partner Center > Insights > FastTrack > Referrals > customer name > Notes History, it shows the notes with no formatting:NOTE: replaced customer information with xxxxx characters"10/30/2023 - xxxx@microsoft.com RFA # 83643. 10/30/2023; Request approved for Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management. Assigned to FTCQ FRP • EDU Licenses: No• Nonprofit Licenses: No• Non-FRP Engaged: No• FRP involved: No• GCC: No Partner/MCS listed in RFA: false Contacts: • Customer contact information: xxxxx.xxxx, IT Administrator, xxxxx.xxxxx@contoso.com, 18001234567 • Requestor contact information: xxxxx, IT Administrator, xxxxx@contoso.com, 1801234567 Service Location and Language: • City: xxxxxx• State: Illinois• Country: united states• FT Supported Language: english (united states) The following entitlement counts reflect the entitlements confirmed by the RFA eligibility engine. These entitlements may differ from FTOP due to latency or other issues but please move forward with the RFA based on the eligibility verified by the On-Demand Team. RFA Approved Workloads: • Purview DLM: xxxx Entitlements RFA name: Request M365 assistance: Email retention policy setup Additional information that may impact the project: We plan on implementing Email retention polices for the company and need help to ensure we are setting them up correctly. RFA Form URL: "An improved formatting would make this information easier to read:10/30/2023 -xxxxxx@microsoft.com
RFA # . 10/30/2023; Request approved for Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management.Assigned to FTCQ FRP
• EDU Licenses: No
• Nonprofit Licenses: No
• Non-FRP Engaged: No
• FRP involved: No
• GCC: NoPartner/MCS listed in RFA: falseContacts:
• Customer contact information: xxxxx, IT Administrator, xxxxxxx@contoso.com, 18001234567
• Requestor contact information: xxxxx, IT Administrator, xxxxxxx@contoso.com, 18001234567Service Location and Language:
• City: xxxxx
• State: Illinois
• Country: united states• FT Supported Language: english (united states)The following entitlement counts reflect the entitlements confirmed by the RFA eligibility engine. These entitlements may differ from FTOP due to latency or other issues but please move forward with the RFA based on the eligibility verified by the On-Demand Team.RFA Approved Workloads:• Purview DLM: xxxx Entitlements
RFA name: Request M365 assistance: Email retention policy setupAdditional information that may impact the project: We plan on implementing Email retention polices for the company and need help to ensure we are setting them up correctly. RFA Form URL: -
About the destination of the first referral email
Suggested by Otsuka Referrals – Completed – 2 Comments
Currently, the same email is sent to the user email address and FRP, but I would like you not to include the customer in the first referral email. We don't want our customers to know that we have declined support. If we decline the customer, the mail containing other FRP will be resent to the user. Customers know that we have declined. Is there a way to prevent customers from knowing their partner name? -
Microsoft Edge reporting needs improvement
Suggested by Balaji G – Completed – 1 Comments
Dear Team,
Currently before a month ago, we received Microsoft Edge FRP Claim Incentive. We have not had any clue on for which customers and for how many seats the claim has been shared. It only indicated the $ value alone.
We would need the below
1. A clear reporting against each customer claim that is been received for the Edge workload.
2. In FRP PowerBI dashboard, there should be an option to track the usage once the customer POE is submitted against the workload.This will help us to understand what was the Edge usage before we claimed and what we can expect as claim once we deploy remaining users. -
Feedback around FastTrack Deployment Funds
Suggested by Jeff Whealen – Completed – 1 Comments
https://m365-specialty-partner.powerappsportals.com/knowledgebase/article/KB-01262/en-us
This new incentive mentioned in this article above does not apply to CSP customers. Microsoft has been pushing partners to leverage the CSP program for customers under 1500 seats. This program assumes that customer will be provided ServiceDesk and some managed services for the M365 Platform. It does not mean the CSP partner will provide professional services for the various deployments in the M365 Suite. This is outside the scope of traditional ServiceDesk or managed services for CSP Direct/Indirect partners. These funds would help expand usage/consumption of their licensing suite. By excluding CSP customers it leaves a lot of customers out of the incentive for FRP Deployment funds. From Microsoft's view, the CSP program is seen to be a managed service. It also is a way for partners to make some money off subscriptions. Instead of them going direct to MSFT or through an EA (which the threshold for being eligible is changing). Microsoft pushes CSP for partners to do, but then if someone is on CSP they are not eligible for Workshop funding, or deployment funds. Deployment is not managed services. -
Remove the Term "Proof of Execution" (and POE in general) from the Engagement Template
Suggested by Chris Owens – Completed – 1 Comments
This seems like a constant piece of feedback, but maybe putting it on this board will finally make a difference. "Proof of Execution" means that you have finished the project/task/assignment/etc. in 100% of the cases when those words are used, including dozens used by Microsoft. Proof of Execution is a document for ECIF as well as the MCI program and both have the customer completing and signing a document after the partner has done work.For some reason, FastTrack wants to use the term Proof of Execution for a document required of the partner prior to doing any work for the customer. This leads to confusion and the customer not understanding why "this time it is different" and not wanted to sign something that seems to indicate that the partner has completed something when no work has started. "FastTrack Engagement Form" or just about anythign would be better.When this feedback was presented at various FastTrack Community Calls and other live events, the partners were told the document would only have "POE" on it and that it stood for "Proof of Engagement" - that is not what has happened. "Proof of Execution" is written right across the title bar.This needs to be changed.
FPC Program ideas/suggestions
Share insights/feedback, ideas and requests related to the FRP Program.