Please submit all support and access issues to https://aka.ms/PXPartnerSupport.
-
Including Forecast Dates in Service Usage Reports
Suggested by Samer Haque – Rejected – 2 Comments
Hi team,
It would be great if you could include the forecast date in the Service usage report for any workload an FRP has a CPOR claim on. Currently we have to export multiple reports and then join them together to get a view on 15 and 40% forecast dates.
Having this information in the service usage would be useful as it will help with making sure forecast dates are accurate and will allow us to focus on bringing the adoption dates forward.
Cheers, -
Custom fields in FTOP - Services Usage report
Suggested by Leslie Dunlop – Rejected – 0 Comments
For our customers in FTOP, we'd like the ability to add a couple of custom fields where Partners are able to enter information specific to our organization. For example, customer IDs that is specific to our organization, region, sales rep, etc. and the ability to include that that information with the service usage report. This would simplify the process to run targeted campaigns within our organization. -
Customer Contact OSU-M365 to FCU
Suggested by Jami Styx – Rejected – 3 Comments
As Microsoft looks to transition to PC (FastTrack Ready) is there a way to automatically update the customer contact to be the same as the customer contact listed in the OSU-M365 claim submission? -
Ability to see Claim ID on the FRP Dashboard reports.
Suggested by Sebastian Baca – Rejected – 2 Comments
Claim IDs are not visible in the PowerBI FRP Dashboard.
The dashboard is a great tool; however it lacks the Claim ID which is as important in order to fully reconcile the registrations.
-
1-hour timeout in FTOP
Suggested by LeeAnne Hughes – Rejected – 2 Comments
The new 1-hour timeout feature in FTOP is a killer. I understand the security reason behind this change, but the timeout session is just too short; same w/ the PBI timeout session. Is it possible to have the timeout sessions for both FTOP & PBI extended to at least 2 hours? -
MCI workshop approvals and exceptions
Suggested by John Francis – Rejected – 0 Comments
the engine that you run behind the scenes when we as partners submit a client for workshop eligibility is great.. but when it comes back with a workshop as being ineligbile, it would be great if partners could submit for an exception to the rejection. sometimes the numberic analysis you do and the customer requirements dont make good sales sense.. for example, we couldnt get a client a Secuirty worshiop for intune deployement because they didnt have any exchange installed... well they are a gmail client, and want to deploy intune first, and then eventually move gmail over...would be great if we as partners could submit our own exceptions -
Customer Success Manager
Suggested by ELZI KRISPEL – Rejected – 2 Comments
Hello, I see when customer reached the millstone, the "potential earnings" becomes zero, Processing begins but, We don't see any processing data in any reports. -
Option to flag CPOR claim to not show up in FTOP
Suggested by Stefan Haffner – Rejected – 0 Comments
For some CPOR claims we would like to have the option to set a flag that the claim/customer should not be moved into FTOP. Sometime we have customer where we provide services but are not providing any Fast Track services and it does not make much sense to track those customer in FTOP. -
Child Tenants of S2500 Customers
Suggested by Samer Haque – Rejected – 0 Comments
Previous Post on Yammer:
We thought we should share this with the rest of the partner community. We have raised a ticket in relation to this issue with FRPhelp and the data and Tools team is reviewing the following.We have found that the S2500 customers are being identified or tracked using TPID. The problem is in a scenario where multiple customers share the same TPID, all of these customers are being flagged as S2500 customer. For example, we currently have one S2500 customer in an industry vertical and as it shares the same TPID with 15 other tenants, they are all being flagged as an S2500. We have reached out to most of the accounts team and got confirmation from them that not all of them are considered S2500 customers, rather the parent tenant is the S2500 customer.
We know we are not being measured on this currently, however, the non S2500 customers are skewing the data health results and also creating a bit of confusion on who the actual S2500 customers. In our opinion, FTOP should not be flagging child tenants of S2500 customers as a 'S2500' customer.
-
New CPOR Claim Process feedback
Suggested by LeeAnne Hughes – Rejected – 0 Comments
The new process is pretty simple and I am happy w/ the changes that were made. It is a huge improvement over the previous process. Kudos on that.
My only feedback is that if the partner already has some workloads claimed for a customer and they are claiming additional workloads, the workloads claimed previously shows as claimed by another partner, when the other partner is themselves. In my opinion, if the partner already has claimed workloads, it should just show the CLAIM ID by those services. If a DIFFERENT PARTNER has claims for those workloads, then the previous statement would be accurate.