We used to have visibility on Fast Track earning potential, account-wise on Partner Center per tenant. Would like to have this functionality back, forecasting right now is quite difficult without the same. 

As a FastTrack Ready Partner, we would like to see certain workloads like M365 Copilot, Microsoft Entra ID incentivized under the Modern Work & Security Usage Incentive program. We get a plethora of RFAs for these workloads and readily assist the customers. But incentivizing these workloads for this fiscal will lead to more skin in the game for the partners and, justify the time and effort the partners put in to deliver these FastTrack benefits.

For the MW Deployment Offer is there a way to consolidate the paperwork?  Right now, partners must enter (copy & paste) some of the customer information 4 times (voucher #, entity name, tenant ID, email etc.)

For example:
1) I generate info into the initial SOW 
2) Then I have to submit the initial SOW into the portal.  The portal requires that I enter the voucher #, customer name and tenant ID # that is already in the SOW.  Additionally, I have to populate the Program Membership, why can’t it just auto populate?  I only have one program?
3) Then I copy and paste the same information from the SOW over to POE 
4) Then for the 4^th time I required to re-enter information (voucher #, entity name, tenant ID, email etc.) into portal coping and pasting the info again from the SOW and POE for final submissions.   

A lot of coping and pasting of the same information over and over. 

Is there any way this can flow into Partner Center (PC) where it can be more automated like other program such as AMM or the MCI offers.  Yes, we may have to submit the initial information, but the tool would allow us to add information such as voucher #, entity name, tenant ID, email & load SOW initially to a claim.  Then when engagements is completed, like other programs such as AMM and MCI it allows partners to send consent emails (directly from PC) as POE which would be great replacement for the final POE document.

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:

Endorsement model: Smaller partners are not able to obtain as many Endorsements even though they may be qualified to do the work. Steeves and Associates is an example of this where they have strong competencies and can deliver in many workloads, however they only qualify for ACM. 

 

Having to submit all vouchers via the M365 Portal creates a HUGE bottleneck for a company the size of Avanade.

We have sellers al over that need to utilize these vouchers, and we cannot grant access to the portal to everyone (as the process is not very straight forward and requires additional approval from both sides).

 

 

Are there plans to revert back to the old way of using the form to submit?