Share insights/feedback, ideas and requests related to the FRP Program.

  • 0

    Editing a CPOR Claims to remove a workload after approval

    Suggested by Chris Radcliffe – Completed  – 1 Comments

    It would be great if the CPOR Claim could be edited after approved or in the case of a Partner Conflict to allow the original claiming partner to remove a workload that might be in question.
     
    I've seen a few times now where multiple Teams workloads are claimed under one Association, however over time another partner has a competing claim for one of the many workloads included. 
     
    Rather than cancelling the entire original partner claim, it would be ideal if the Partner could evaluate and possibly deselect a workload if they believe in fact they are not driving adoption for it anymore. 
     
    That would save a TON of time, effort and likely cost to Microsoft if it didn't trigger a third unnecessary claim process that is trying to then re-claim the workloads that are still technically covered under the original association.  That's a waste of time and big annoyance for both the original Partner and Customers that are trying to figure out what all the claiming nonsense is all about.

  • 0

    Conflicting CPOR Claims

    Suggested by Chris Radcliffe – Completed  – 1 Comments

    These days, it seems like every week we are getting notified of another claim that is being contested as another partner has submitted a CPOR Association request for a workload we had previously secured. If I understand how it works, if the new partner shows adequate POE that is newer than the POE we provided, then we become disassociated and lose the AU growth for that customer and workload.  
     
    I'd like to suggest an alterative approach: AU Growth Sharing for 1-year to a maximum of two partners
     
    It seems crazy that two partners aren't both rewarded with AU Growth incentive and metrics if they both in fact helped the customer drive adoption.
     
    Rather than only having one Partner of Record, Microsoft should allow two partners to both share in the credit and track the AU growth accordingly for a period of at least 1-year from the time the original POE was accepted. That way, the Partner isn't negatively impacted with its Solutions Designation score if a new partner also joins into the mix to support the customer. 
     
    If two or three years has passed, its highly unlikely the partner is still engaged. But if it is within 1 year, then that original partner should still share in the benefit of the AU Growth attribution.
     
     

  • 0

    FRP Partner of the Year Awards.

    Suggested by Xavier Alegria – Completed  – 1 Comments

    Have had a few partners voice their concern on qualifying for the partner of the Year Award based on the requirements set forth. Specifically addressing the Badges, since they are not a requirement stated and/or noted in the T&Cs.

  • 0

    CPOR program feedback (submitted on behalf of FRP-Kraft Kennedy)

    Suggested by Lynda Mahabir – Rejected  – 0 Comments

    There is no discernible protection for a partner after you provide the benefit. If we execute a justification exercise for SCI, or migrating to Teams or Intune, we should be able to maintain the customer association for a period of time. We are being usurped by LARs as the Partner Center criteria for picking between contested associations is a mystery and decided by uneducated, non-Microsoft employees. Partner Support is terrible, staffed by a team that has no clue what they are doing or how partners need Partner Center.

  • 0

    RFA program feedback (submitted on behalf of FRP-Kraft Kennedy)

    Suggested by Lynda Mahabir – Rejected  – 0 Comments

    We have not seen a single referral to us that had an incentive behind it in our 2 years with the program. We have only had one non-customer referral that actually responded to our reply and despite being told by FastTrack that the educational institution was indeed eligible for partner incentive (we asked because we knew they were not), we found out after executing the benefit that no incentive would be paid. For the referrals coming from existing customers, it is obvious that Microsoft Sales teams (or CSAs in particular) just point everything to FastTrack partner for free work even when situations are clearly not FastTrack eligible. Microsoft is burdening partners since their technical teams continue to be less and less useful. The FastTrack team seems to be co-conspirators in this operation and seem to not want to protect their partners any more than the balance of the Microsoft program. 

  • 0

    I would like to be able to download knowledge badges by image size (resolution).

    Suggested by Miyuki Narita – Completed  – 3 Comments

    I am aware that the only badge that can be used now is the image that is displayed on the ExpertZone results screen after passing the exam. With only this image, for example, if you try to display the badge in a large size, the image will be rough. We think that if we can make it possible to download by size, like large, medium, and small, the badges will be more appealing to customers.

  • 0

    Unable to see FRP Payment Disputes opened by other team members

    Suggested by Sebastian Baca – Rejected  – 1 Comments

    When pending a dispute for FRP in the Partner Support site, we used to be able to see all tickets opened from all members of our team. Now that is not posible and this creates a mess trying to follow up on tickets. CAS-03276-W4N8L has been opened in regards of this for months.

  • 0

    RFA Reporting needed by FPMS

    Suggested by – New  – 1 Comments

    FBK-00010361 - submitted by Simon Rutgers

    As an FPM, it would be helpful to have insight into how my FRPs are performing against each RFA that they land. Can we build a report that presents the following:-

    - RFA Number, description, workload
    - which FRP it was assigned to
    - Last Status Note from FCU
    - Last edit date

     

    Impact:

    - As an FPM, we would then have insight into our FRPs projects, and recommend SME's where we feel it may be lagging. . 

    - This would also help us understand which FRPs are more mature in how they execute FastTrack, as we can see more regular activity on those who have embraced FastTrack into their business model. 

    - It would also help with understanding the quality of an RFA, as we could see what truly turns into a project, vs what was incorrectly raised. 

    - If we ran workload specific campaigns, we could also observe how successful they were. 

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    ;

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    impact

Suggest a new idea
    Please sign in to provide feedback in this idea forum.

    Search Ideas