The shared Excel file becomes a source of conflict
Three people edit it, versions circulate and nobody knows which one is authoritative.
We start with a concrete process — an approval, a shared file or reporting — then select the right Microsoft building blocks.
A process is worth assessing when it is frequent, repetitive, measurable and sufficiently stable. These pain points are often good starting signals.
Three people edit it, versions circulate and nobody knows which one is authoritative.
The request remains in an inbox because the manager is absent or travelling.
Data is copied, reconciled and corrected before it can be presented.
Field information arrives late, sometimes incomplete, and has to be checked again.
Do you recognise one of these situations?The best first project is not necessarily the most visible. It is often the one with a repetitive workload and rules that are already known.
Start by measuring the annual workload. The result is not a guaranteed saving; it only quantifies the effort currently spent on the process.
20 × 5 × 10 × 47 ÷ 60 = 783 hours
This estimate measures gross workload. The realistically automatable share is validated during scoping.
Power Apps, Forms, Excel, SharePoint, Teams, APIs or an ERP feed the process. Power Automate, Azure Logic Apps and Azure Functions orchestrate processing; Dataverse can centralize and secure the data, then Power BI, Copilot Studio and business applications present information and trigger useful actions.

Cost does not depend only on the number of screens. It also depends on data sources, flow type, how the flow is triggered and the users who run it.
SQL, Dataverse, some HTTP actions or a custom connector can move the scenario into premium licensing. This must be identified before the build, not after the invoice.
Standard, premium, on-premises gateway, API or custom connector.
Automated, scheduled, instant or application-triggered flow.
Flow owner, users who trigger it and the population covered.
User licence, existing entitlements or Process licence depending on the scenario.
The final recommendation is based on the exact scenario and the licences already held by the company.
The aim is to launch a useful, maintainable scope without hiding dependencies that could expand the project.
Process, people, rules, exceptions and data.
Application, flow or reporting for the selected scope.
Business scenarios, permissions, errors and user validation.
Documentation, knowledge transfer and points of attention.
Ease of creation does not guarantee ownership, maintenance or data quality. Governance should remain proportionate to the project, but it should not be postponed.
One team saves time and wants to expand usage quickly.
Owners, data and connections become difficult to track.
Maintenance becomes risky and every change costs more.
A 30-minute conversation to check the process, volume, people, data and licensing constraints.