-
GTM Feedback — Turnkey Content Lacks Practical Value for Security Plays
Suggested by Josh Elmore – Accepted – 0 Comments
Problem: Microsoft-provided turnkey content for security programs lacks actionable depth and requires heavy customization. Context: Feedback from Alison and team indicated that current materials do not support effective customer engagements and lack updated enablement documentation.Impact: Reduces partner efficiency and slows time-to-value in security engagements.Idea: Co-develop modular, scenario-based content with partners that includes real-world use cases and flexible templates.Business Impact: Improves partner enablement, accelerates security solution adoption, and supports strategic OKRs. -
POE template for CPOR naming
Suggested by Omar Zeine – New – 0 Comments
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. -
Add Viva Workloads to M365 Voucher
Suggested by Jens Paape – Rejected – 3 Comments
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
You’re offline. This is a read only version of the page.
