FPC Program Ideas/Suggestions

Alert/notification will automatically send to sender's manager email if the sender (internal user) send out email (labelled with sensitivity label) to external user. Sender's Manager means the specific manager that has been attributed in Azure AD/portal. Every single users in the tenant should have their own manager.

In coming period, MSFT will migrate from FTOP to Partner Center (OSU-M365).
It would be very helpfull if MSFT could share then API Framework (or future enhancements) to partners so they can integrate their internal systems.
If it would be possible to have a 2-way API that would even be super (for downloading and uploading relevant data).

Today there is a FRP PowerBI dashboard that shows what other partners have claimed workloads for a customer that you have claimed a workload with. That information would ideally be available in Partner Center!

More and more, we are finding that customers don't want to register or associate a different partner for a CPOR workload. Too often it is controversial, or another partner (LAR) might have a deal to have them all associated with them, or there might have been another partner that "also" had a role driving MAU and they don't want to switch. 

The net effect is that we aren't getting proper attribution for our role driving adoption and our monthly/quarterly/annual performance looks underwhelming. This also impacts how we are rewarded through the incentive model and can negatively impact how we are graded from a compliance standpoint. This may not be impacting all partners, but at last count we've only been able to register 1/20 engagements in the last 3-4 months where technically we are driving adoption or advancing the cause! In my experience, the friction is real and causing the whole CPOR registration to not work for us. 

I have a few suggestions to consider:
1. Perhaps it is time to reconsider the business rule that only one partner can be associated to a workload. What if by design, rather than by exception, multiple partners could be assigned to a workload? That would remove some of the friction that customers face accepting a new request.

2. What if there was a simpler way to confirm a partner is engaged? Currently, we need to either have a customer sign a document or we need to submit a signed SOW as POE. As a partner, we often don't feel comfortable submitting an entire SOW as it contains a lot of detail that is under NDA.

Secondly, we worry that if we just submitted the SOW without first talking to the customer, they would be upset receiving the email notification from Microsoft as it is confusing and possibly triggers the multi-partner association issue. Instead of it being a "notification of partner association", perhaps it could be reworded to "Confirmation of Partner Engagement" and the language could say, "Congratulations, we understand you have retained the support of <partner name> and in your work together you may be driving the adoption of the following areas: <list the areas> 
To support your work together, we will provide limited adoption data of these workloads with your partner. If you would prefer not to disclose this data, or have the partner associated in our records as providing support, please click here. Otherwise, nothing is required in response.  

3. Another great option would be for Microsoft CSM or Modern Workplace Specialist to be allowed to "vouch" for our engagement. Perhaps the partner could request someone on the Account Team to confirm that the partner is engaged and is driving adoption/MAU. 

4. I'd recommend that any MCAP POE count as CPOR POE for key workloads that relate to the engagement. We've had many MCAP engagements that were influential at moving a customer forward, but for various reasons we weren't able to get associated to that customer for the workloads in question. 
 

When opening a case we are required to enter a lot of redundant data that already exists in the system, like: chose program, enter MPN ID, enter claim ID, customer tenant ID, workload etc. and also our contact details. All this information is time consuming and could be automatically populated if a specific start a dispute or clarification button would be available at that specific Workload line in Partner Center.

Additional small remarks:
1. when the case is generated has the name "Case 5-0000xxxxxx has been opened for your request" instead of the issue or claim id that would help easier identify the emails. It would be useful if the case name would also be generated automatically or contain the problem summary
2. if an incentive has been payed it would be easier if it would be listed as payed or earned at workload level with the respective earned amount so that we do not need to open a case just to find out this has been calculated. It would also help track all past earnings at customer level. The orange vs blue color that appears now only indicates if milestone was reached and not that we met program terms (ie. if it was reached and we claimed at 30% or 50% I think it shows the same as if we would have claimed it at 5%)

Thank you!

It would be great if we could select multiple workloads when we raise a customer association claim request in Partner Center. Currently there's a cap at 4 workloads, meaning that sometimes we need to raise up to 4 claim requests for just 1 customer. This is quite time consuming. 

Is there a way to automate the eligible workloads in the Customer Contact section w/i FTOP for CPOR approved workloads? 
To update the Customer Contact field in FTOP FRPs have to manually add the workloads eligible for survey.  Is it possible to have automation put in place that would auto-populate these workloads based upon approved CPOR? 
OR...... can the survey team pull the workloads from the CPOR Partner Information field (the FRP stamp) found w/i each workload under the Services tab of FTOP?  The query could look for fields not null & add those workloads to the survey eligibility report.

HI All,

For FastTrack ready payments on Home Page - FastTrack Ready Support there is an option to query payments if you believe you have hit the milestones.

When raising a ticket in the PC for CPOR payments they don't confirm if OSU has been hit.

Would it be possible to get the same type of format for OSU CPOR payments so we can forecast easier?

It would be nice to have the ability to edit or delete/cancel a CPOR claim prior to approval.  Currently, once we submit a claim it cannot be edited until it has been approved.  There are times we may need to correct a claim or add additional documentation after we have submitted it.  As of current, we have to open an OCP Support ticket if changes are needed before the claim is approved.  There are times I would prefer to delete the claim and start over because it is a lot faster than waiting for the issue to be addressed via support.
To me, it would make a lot more sense to lock a claim AFTER it has been approved not before.  This seems a little backwards to me.
 

Hi!
It's a known issue, I know...
But the paid available units and the time it takes to show - that's horrible!
We have a customer with around 200 seats of M365 E3, they signed an EA in March 31st, 1200 M365 E3 seats.
It doesn't show in the portal due to the reason that the invoice has not yet been paid.
Now - I happen to be the one person in the company to centralize everything that is Microsoft-ish, I know the invoice has been fully paid in Mid-May.
Having a ping-pong support emails going with the PartnerCenter incentive support about whether it has been paid or not, while I know it has been fully paid.

What's up with that?
Someone should shake that OCP team, make things to smoother & flawless.
It just looks like they make everything difficult for no real reasons.
It has been easier when OCP wasn't involved...

Thanks for hearing me out, hope we have something new around this.

Avi