WEBVTT NOTE Support Engineering Weekly — Episode 001 NOTE Timeline normalized to the uploaded audio duration. 1 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:10.040 Announcer: This is Support Engineering Weekly from the Support Engineering Blog, technical conversations for engineers who 2 00:00:10.040 --> 00:00:14.057 Announcer: troubleshoot, support, and operate Microsoft technologies. 3 00:00:14.057 --> 00:00:21.345 Speaker 1: So, on September 30th, 2026, a whole decade of enterprise project data, custom workflows, and 4 00:00:21.345 --> 00:00:27.176 Speaker 1: literally multi-million-dollar IT investments are going to effectively hit a brick wall. 5 00:00:27.176 --> 00:00:29.050 Speaker 2: Yeah, a massive, unyielding brick wall. 6 00:00:29.050 --> 00:00:33.829 Speaker 1: Right. Because Microsoft is officially pulling the plug on Project Online, and, you know, the 7 00:00:33.829 --> 00:00:38.609 Speaker 1: most dangerous part of this entire transition we're looking at, most IT directors and enterprise 8 00:00:38.609 --> 00:00:43.388 Speaker 1: architects currently think they can just, like, click an upgrade button to migrate their entire 9 00:00:43.388 --> 00:00:44.981 Speaker 1: organization to the new system. 10 00:00:44.981 --> 00:00:50.604 Speaker 2: Which is terrifying, honestly. Because they can't. I mean, that button simply does not exist. 11 00:00:50.604 --> 00:00:51.004 Speaker 1: It does not exist at all. 12 00:01:01.380 --> 00:01:04.267 Speaker 2: No, it is a really harsh awakening for a lot of these organizations. We are 13 00:01:04.267 --> 00:01:07.153 Speaker 2: looking at a scenario where companies are going to try and map these legacy, deeply 14 00:01:07.153 --> 00:01:10.040 Speaker 2: customized architectures onto a completely new cloud-native paradigm. And when those systems inevitably reject the 15 00:01:10.040 --> 00:01:12.157 Speaker 2: transplant—and they will—the operational disruption is just going to be massive. 16 00:01:12.157 --> 00:01:17.196 Speaker 1: Which is exactly why we are unpacking this today. If you are managing complex enterprise 17 00:01:17.196 --> 00:01:22.235 Speaker 1: portfolios right now, or, you know, if you're the architect responsible for keeping the lights 18 00:01:22.235 --> 00:01:27.274 Speaker 1: on when a major vendor forces a platform shift, you are staring down a transition 19 00:01:27.274 --> 00:01:29.962 Speaker 1: landscape that is completely reshaping how organizations operate. 20 00:01:29.962 --> 00:01:30.899 Speaker 2: Absolutely. 21 00:01:30.899 --> 00:01:35.467 Speaker 1: So, we've gone through a massive stack of source material for this deep dive today, 22 00:01:35.467 --> 00:01:40.036 Speaker 1: anchored pretty heavily by a really comprehensive engineering breakdown by Sadhan Chandra. And our mission 23 00:01:40.036 --> 00:01:43.081 Speaker 1: here is to decode the actual mechanics of this retirement. 24 00:01:43.081 --> 00:01:44.955 Speaker 2: Because there's a lot of noise out there right now. 25 00:01:44.955 --> 00:01:49.205 Speaker 1: So much noise. We need to look at the immediate deadlines, some of which are 26 00:01:49.205 --> 00:01:53.455 Speaker 1: going to hit way before 2026. And we have to dismantle this really pervasive myth 27 00:01:53.455 --> 00:01:57.138 Speaker 1: that Planner Premium is just, you know, a reskinned version of Project Online. 28 00:01:57.138 --> 00:01:59.012 Speaker 2: Right, the UI trap. 29 00:01:59.012 --> 00:02:03.951 Speaker 1: Exactly. We have to open up the hood on Microsoft Dataverse to understand why legacy 30 00:02:03.951 --> 00:02:08.890 Speaker 1: workflows are breaking, and then map out the three very specific, very different transition paths 31 00:02:08.890 --> 00:02:11.194 Speaker 1: Microsoft has actually engineered for survival here. 32 00:02:11.194 --> 00:02:14.438 Speaker 2: This isn't an optional software update where you can just, you know, cling to the 33 00:02:14.438 --> 00:02:16.817 Speaker 2: old version for another five years while you figure it out. 34 00:02:16.817 --> 00:02:17.754 Speaker 1: Oh, right. They are cutting the cord. 35 00:02:17.754 --> 00:02:23.673 Speaker 2: They really are. Microsoft is fundamentally altering the underlying philosophy of work management. They're moving 36 00:02:23.673 --> 00:02:29.591 Speaker 2: away from isolated, static project data and moving toward this integrated, AI-ready ecosystem. But to 37 00:02:29.591 --> 00:02:35.510 Speaker 2: grasp the magnitude of where we actually have to go, we first have to understand 38 00:02:35.510 --> 00:02:40.244 Speaker 2: the timeline that is actively constricting around legacy systems, like right now. 39 00:02:40.244 --> 00:02:45.767 Speaker 1: Right. So let's get right into that ticking clock. The hard, final end-of-service date for 40 00:02:45.767 --> 00:02:50.553 Speaker 1: Project Online is September 30, 2026. At that moment, the lights go out. 41 00:02:50.553 --> 00:02:51.490 Speaker 2: Totally dark. 42 00:02:51.490 --> 00:02:57.112 Speaker 1: The service is unsupported, and it's completely inaccessible. But if you're the IT architect listening 43 00:02:57.112 --> 00:03:02.735 Speaker 1: to this deep dive right now, your immediate headache is not 2026. You have these 44 00:03:02.735 --> 00:03:06.483 Speaker 1: severe constraints hitting much sooner, starting on October 1st, 2025. 45 00:03:06.483 --> 00:03:12.106 Speaker 2: Yeah, October 2025 is really the first major choke point, because on that date, Project 46 00:03:12.106 --> 00:03:15.854 Speaker 2: Online-only subscriptions will no longer be available for new customers. 47 00:03:15.854 --> 00:03:16.791 Speaker 1: Wow. 48 00:03:16.791 --> 00:03:20.540 Speaker 2: So if you have existing subscriptions, you know, your environment remains supported for another year. 49 00:03:20.540 --> 00:03:21.477 Speaker 1: Yeah. 50 00:03:21.477 --> 00:03:24.288 Speaker 2: But the gates to the legacy ecosystem are closed. 51 00:03:24.288 --> 00:03:29.467 Speaker 1: Okay, so think about the real-world implications of that for a second. Let's say you 52 00:03:29.467 --> 00:03:34.646 Speaker 1: are a global logistics company running absolutely everything on Project Online, and then in, say, 53 00:03:34.646 --> 00:03:37.408 Speaker 1: November 2025, you acquire a mid-sized regional distributor... 54 00:03:37.408 --> 00:03:38.345 Speaker 2: Which happens all the time. 55 00:03:38.345 --> 00:03:42.562 Speaker 1: Right. And you want to onboard their 500 project managers into your existing Project Online 56 00:03:42.562 --> 00:03:46.779 Speaker 1: environment just to, you know, maintain operational continuity while you figure out a long-term plan... 57 00:03:46.779 --> 00:03:47.716 Speaker 2: You can't do it. 58 00:03:47.716 --> 00:03:53.901 Speaker 1: You literally can't. You cannot buy the legacy licenses for that new subsidiary. You are 59 00:03:53.901 --> 00:03:58.024 Speaker 1: legally and technically walled off from expanding your legacy footprint. 60 00:03:58.024 --> 00:04:03.203 Speaker 2: Which forces you into this awful dual-operating environment. You suddenly have your core business on 61 00:04:03.203 --> 00:04:08.381 Speaker 2: a dying legacy platform, and your newly acquired subsidiary has to operate on modern tools, 62 00:04:08.381 --> 00:04:11.143 Speaker 2: and you have zero native bridge between them. 63 00:04:11.143 --> 00:04:13.018 Speaker 1: That sounds like an integration nightmare. 64 00:04:13.018 --> 00:04:18.518 Speaker 2: It is. The pressure to migrate just accelerates exponentially at that point. And then Microsoft 65 00:04:18.518 --> 00:04:21.451 Speaker 2: tightens the vise again on April 1st, 2026. 66 00:04:21.451 --> 00:04:22.389 Speaker 1: Right, the second milestone. 67 00:04:22.389 --> 00:04:28.307 Speaker 2: Exactly. On that date, the creation of new Project Web App sites—what we call PWA 68 00:04:28.307 --> 00:04:29.885 Speaker 2: sites—is completely blocked globally. 69 00:04:29.885 --> 00:04:33.966 Speaker 1: So even if you have the licenses, like even if you were an existing customer 70 00:04:33.966 --> 00:04:38.047 Speaker 1: paying your bills, as of April 1st, 2026, you cannot spin up a new PWA 71 00:04:38.047 --> 00:04:38.319 Speaker 1: environment. 72 00:04:38.319 --> 00:04:41.131 Speaker 2: No new sandboxes, no new departments coming online, nothing. 73 00:04:41.131 --> 00:04:46.309 Speaker 1: And the source material actually notes that existing PWA sites that don't contain active projects 74 00:04:46.309 --> 00:04:51.488 Speaker 1: are going to become inaccessible. So they are essentially freezing all new legacy deployments solid 75 00:04:51.488 --> 00:04:54.250 Speaker 1: a full six months before the final shutdown. 76 00:04:54.250 --> 00:04:59.189 Speaker 2: Yeah, it is a highly calculated throttling strategy. Because Microsoft knows that if they don't 77 00:04:59.189 --> 00:05:04.128 Speaker 2: physically block the creation of new legacy environments, enterprise teams will just continue to spin 78 00:05:04.128 --> 00:05:06.432 Speaker 2: them up right until the final hour. 79 00:05:06.432 --> 00:05:07.369 Speaker 1: Because it's comfortable, it's what they know. 80 00:05:07.369 --> 00:05:13.617 Speaker 2: Exactly. Human nature, right? So the April 2026 deadline is the point of no return 81 00:05:13.617 --> 00:05:14.866 Speaker 2: for legacy infrastructure. 82 00:05:14.866 --> 00:05:15.266 Speaker 1: Yeah. 83 00:05:18.615 --> 00:05:20.957 Speaker 2: But, you know, while we are defining the parameters of this sunset, we really need 84 00:05:20.957 --> 00:05:22.363 Speaker 2: to be incredibly precise about the naming conventions here. 85 00:05:22.363 --> 00:05:24.237 Speaker 1: Oh man, the naming conventions are a total minefield. 86 00:05:24.237 --> 00:05:27.986 Speaker 2: They really are. It has caused so much unnecessary panic in the market. 87 00:05:27.986 --> 00:05:32.671 Speaker 1: So let's clarify exactly what is surviving this purge, based on the engineering documentation. Because 88 00:05:32.671 --> 00:05:35.483 Speaker 1: it's not everything with the word "Project" in it. 89 00:05:35.483 --> 00:05:35.883 Speaker 2: Right. 90 00:05:38.762 --> 00:05:41.352 Speaker 1: Microsoft Project desktop, you know, the localized application you actually install on your physical machine, 91 00:05:41.352 --> 00:05:42.042 Speaker 1: that is not retiring. 92 00:05:42.042 --> 00:05:42.979 Speaker 2: Still safe. 93 00:05:42.979 --> 00:05:50.008 Speaker 1: Project Server Subscription Edition, which is the massive on-premises heavyweight version, that is not retiring 94 00:05:50.008 --> 00:05:53.287 Speaker 1: either. And Microsoft Planner is aggressively expanding. 95 00:05:53.287 --> 00:05:54.225 Speaker 2: Oh, massively expanding. 96 00:05:54.225 --> 00:05:59.496 Speaker 1: Right. The only thing being ripped out of the infrastructure is the cloud-based Project Online 97 00:05:59.496 --> 00:05:59.847 Speaker 1: service. 98 00:05:59.847 --> 00:06:04.533 Speaker 2: Which leads directly into the most dangerous misconception we found across all the source material. 99 00:06:04.533 --> 00:06:06.407 Speaker 1: 1:1 myth. 100 00:06:06.407 --> 00:06:12.302 Speaker 2: Yes. Microsoft has been highly visible in their campaign to consolidate Microsoft To Do, the 101 00:06:12.302 --> 00:06:18.196 Speaker 2: basic Planner application, and Project for the web into a single, unified interface within Microsoft 102 00:06:18.196 --> 00:06:18.589 Speaker 2: Teams. 103 00:06:18.589 --> 00:06:22.952 Speaker 1: They merged all the menus together. You open Teams, you click the little Planner icon, 104 00:06:22.952 --> 00:06:27.023 Speaker 1: and theoretically all your tasks are just sitting there in one clean, beautiful view. 105 00:06:27.023 --> 00:06:32.429 Speaker 2: And from a user interface perspective, it is a brilliant piece of consolidation. It looks 106 00:06:32.429 --> 00:06:37.836 Speaker 2: completely seamless. But because of this UI unification, there is this widespread assumption across IT 107 00:06:37.836 --> 00:06:43.242 Speaker 2: departments that the new flagship product, which they call Planner Premium, is simply Project Online 108 00:06:43.242 --> 00:06:45.765 Speaker 2: with a fresh coat of UI paint. 109 00:06:45.765 --> 00:06:47.639 Speaker 1: They just think it's a rebrand. 110 00:06:47.639 --> 00:06:49.514 Speaker 2: Exactly. They believe it is a one-to-one replacement. 111 00:06:49.514 --> 00:06:53.028 Speaker 1: It is the ultimate trap of the graphical user interface. You see a Gantt chart 112 00:06:53.028 --> 00:06:56.542 Speaker 1: in the old software, and then you see a Gantt chart in the new software, 113 00:06:56.542 --> 00:06:58.885 Speaker 1: and you just assume the engine underneath them is identical. 114 00:06:58.885 --> 00:07:00.759 Speaker 2: And it couldn't be further from the truth. 115 00:07:00.759 --> 00:07:07.006 Speaker 1: But the source documentation makes a really harsh distinction here. Microsoft is actively divorcing collaborative 116 00:07:07.006 --> 00:07:12.004 Speaker 1: project execution from what they call mature project portfolio management, or PPM. 117 00:07:12.004 --> 00:07:17.359 Speaker 2: This is a huge philosophical shift. Historically, organizations used Project Online to do both of 118 00:07:17.359 --> 00:07:19.501 Speaker 2: those things at the same time. 119 00:07:19.501 --> 00:07:20.438 Speaker 1: Right, all in one bucket. 120 00:07:20.438 --> 00:07:26.061 Speaker 2: Right. They used it to manage the daily, collaborative tasks of their teams, who's doing 121 00:07:26.061 --> 00:07:31.683 Speaker 2: what on Tuesday, but they also used it to manage the complex, multi-year financial portfolios 122 00:07:31.683 --> 00:07:33.557 Speaker 2: of the entire global enterprise. 123 00:07:33.557 --> 00:07:37.306 Speaker 1: So high-level strategy and low-level task management all mixed together. 124 00:07:37.306 --> 00:07:45.338 Speaker 2: Exactly. But the new architecture totally rejects that dual purpose. Planner Premium is engineered explicitly—and 125 00:07:45.338 --> 00:07:48.551 Speaker 2: I mean exclusively—for collaborative project execution. 126 00:07:48.551 --> 00:07:55.009 Speaker 1: Wow. So if you've spent the last 10 years customizing Project Online to handle your 127 00:07:55.009 --> 00:08:01.468 Speaker 1: CapEx and OpEx amortization, mapping thousands of enterprise resources across global time zones, and running 128 00:08:01.468 --> 00:08:04.482 Speaker 1: these really complex portfolio demand management scenarios... 129 00:08:04.482 --> 00:08:05.419 Speaker 2: Which so many companies do. 130 00:08:05.419 --> 00:08:08.933 Speaker 1: Right. And you think you are going to just port that operating model over to 131 00:08:08.933 --> 00:08:11.979 Speaker 1: Planner Premium because the UI looks nice, the system is going to shatter. 132 00:08:11.979 --> 00:08:17.601 Speaker 2: It will fail at the structural level. The functionality isn't just missing; it is fundamentally 133 00:08:17.601 --> 00:08:19.475 Speaker 2: incompatible with the new philosophy. 134 00:08:19.475 --> 00:08:24.712 Speaker 1: Okay, so to understand why an enterprise PMO cannot just transplant their legacy data into 135 00:08:24.712 --> 00:08:29.949 Speaker 1: Planner Premium, we have to look past the user interface. We need to examine the 136 00:08:29.949 --> 00:08:35.186 Speaker 1: underlying technical architecture, because the sources reveal this massive, often misunderstood divide between the architecture 137 00:08:35.186 --> 00:08:37.280 Speaker 1: of basic Planner and Planner Premium. 138 00:08:37.280 --> 00:08:41.433 Speaker 2: Yeah, this is where it gets really technical, but it's so important. To the end 139 00:08:41.433 --> 00:08:45.586 Speaker 2: user, you know, Planner is just Planner. They have a Microsoft 365 E3 license, they 140 00:08:45.586 --> 00:08:49.463 Speaker 2: open the app, and they just drag a task card from to-do to done. 141 00:08:49.463 --> 00:08:50.400 Speaker 1: Smooth and easy. 142 00:08:50.400 --> 00:08:57.428 Speaker 2: Super easy. But structurally, basic Planner is incredibly lightweight and highly distributed across the back 143 00:08:57.428 --> 00:08:57.897 Speaker 2: end. 144 00:08:57.897 --> 00:09:00.708 Speaker 1: It is essentially just a visual aggregation layer. 145 00:09:00.708 --> 00:09:04.612 Speaker 2: Right, that's a great way to put it. When a user creates a task in 146 00:09:04.612 --> 00:09:08.517 Speaker 2: basic Planner, the raw telemetry of that task—so the title, the due date, the assignee—that 147 00:09:08.517 --> 00:09:10.079 Speaker 2: is written to an Azure database. 148 00:09:10.079 --> 00:09:11.016 Speaker 1: Okay, Azure. 149 00:09:11.016 --> 00:09:16.422 Speaker 2: But then, when that same user attaches a PDF specification document to that exact same 150 00:09:16.422 --> 00:09:21.829 Speaker 2: task, the PDF does not go to Azure. It is routed to the connected SharePoint 151 00:09:21.829 --> 00:09:25.073 Speaker 2: document library associated with that specific Microsoft 365 Group. 152 00:09:25.073 --> 00:09:29.368 Speaker 1: And when the team starts arguing in the comments section of that task about, you 153 00:09:29.368 --> 00:09:33.663 Speaker 1: know, why the deadline was missed, that conversation data isn't in Azure or SharePoint; it's 154 00:09:33.663 --> 00:09:35.381 Speaker 1: being logged in an Exchange mailbox. 155 00:09:35.381 --> 00:09:41.472 Speaker 2: Exactly. Basic Planner is basically an illusion of centralization. The visual layer is pulling from 156 00:09:41.472 --> 00:09:47.563 Speaker 2: Azure, SharePoint, and Exchange simultaneously just to render a simple Kanban board on your screen. 157 00:09:47.563 --> 00:09:52.524 Speaker 1: It's a patchwork quilt. But I mean, it's highly efficient for what it does. If 158 00:09:52.524 --> 00:09:57.485 Speaker 1: you are a marketing team tracking collateral deliverables or like an HR team onboarding new 159 00:09:57.485 --> 00:10:02.446 Speaker 1: hires, that distributed architecture is fast, it's super cheap for Microsoft to host, and it 160 00:10:02.446 --> 00:10:07.407 Speaker 1: scales infinitely because the data is just flat records resting in these disparate silos. There 161 00:10:07.407 --> 00:10:10.053 Speaker 1: is no heavy logic required to connect them. 162 00:10:10.053 --> 00:10:15.676 Speaker 2: But you cannot run a $50 million engineering portfolio on a distributed illusion. 163 00:10:15.676 --> 00:10:16.613 Speaker 1: No, definitely not. 164 00:10:16.613 --> 00:10:22.532 Speaker 2: You cannot apply complex mathematical logic to task data in Azure if the metadata you 165 00:10:22.532 --> 00:10:28.450 Speaker 2: need is stranded over in SharePoint. And this is exactly why Planner Premium abandons that 166 00:10:28.450 --> 00:10:31.607 Speaker 2: distributed architecture entirely and relies on Microsoft Dataverse. 167 00:10:31.607 --> 00:10:36.292 Speaker 1: Okay, Dataverse. We have to break this down, because it is thrown around in marketing 168 00:10:36.292 --> 00:10:40.978 Speaker 1: materials constantly as a buzzword. For the architect trying to build a resilient system here, 169 00:10:40.978 --> 00:10:44.726 Speaker 1: what is the actual mechanical reality of moving project data into Dataverse? 170 00:10:44.726 --> 00:10:50.514 Speaker 2: Well, the trap is thinking of Dataverse as just another SQL database sitting in the 171 00:10:50.514 --> 00:10:56.302 Speaker 2: cloud. It's not. It is a really comprehensive, highly secure data foundation and application platform 172 00:10:56.302 --> 00:10:57.846 Speaker 2: all rolled into one. 173 00:10:57.846 --> 00:10:58.783 Speaker 1: Okay. 174 00:10:58.783 --> 00:11:05.342 Speaker 2: When you instantiate a project inside Dataverse, you are operating within unified, relational data models. 175 00:11:05.342 --> 00:11:09.586 Speaker 1: Meaning the system inherently understands the relationship between things. Like it knows a task is 176 00:11:09.586 --> 00:11:13.829 Speaker 1: connected to a human resource, and it knows the cost of that resource and the 177 00:11:13.829 --> 00:11:18.073 Speaker 1: calendar availability of that resource, all at the core data layer rather than trying to 178 00:11:18.073 --> 00:11:20.336 Speaker 1: calculate it way up in the application layer. 179 00:11:20.336 --> 00:11:26.537 Speaker 2: Precisely. And that relational awareness is governed by strict role-based access control, or RBAC, built 180 00:11:26.537 --> 00:11:32.739 Speaker 2: directly into the foundation itself. It provides this level of enterprise governance that basic Planner 181 00:11:32.739 --> 00:11:34.393 Speaker 2: simply cannot mathematically support. 182 00:11:34.393 --> 00:11:36.267 Speaker 1: Right, because it's scattered everywhere. 183 00:11:36.267 --> 00:11:42.827 Speaker 2: Exactly. Because the data in Dataverse is structured and relational, Planner Premium can actually execute 184 00:11:42.827 --> 00:11:49.386 Speaker 2: advanced scheduling algorithms. It can manage complex, multi-tiered task dependencies—you know, where Task C has 185 00:11:49.386 --> 00:11:55.946 Speaker 2: a finish-to-start relationship with Task A, but it has a start-to-start relationship with Task B. 186 00:11:55.946 --> 00:11:56.883 Speaker 1: It can handle the math. 187 00:11:56.883 --> 00:12:02.154 Speaker 2: Yes. It can render interactive timelines and integrate completely seamlessly with the Power Platform, so 188 00:12:02.154 --> 00:12:05.317 Speaker 2: Power BI for reporting and Power Automate for logic. 189 00:12:05.317 --> 00:12:10.002 Speaker 1: Which makes total sense for an enterprise upgrade. You want that robust, relational integrity. But 190 00:12:10.002 --> 00:12:14.688 Speaker 1: this leads us to what I think is the most counterintuitive technical reality in the 191 00:12:14.688 --> 00:12:19.373 Speaker 1: whole stack of source material, and it's something that is going to give procurement officers 192 00:12:19.373 --> 00:12:20.311 Speaker 1: a massive headache. 193 00:12:20.311 --> 00:12:22.185 Speaker 2: Ah, the scale paradox. 194 00:12:22.185 --> 00:12:28.745 Speaker 1: The scale paradox. We just established that Planner Premium is the heavy-duty, Dataverse-backed powerhouse, and 195 00:12:28.745 --> 00:12:35.304 Speaker 1: basic Planner is the lightweight, scattershot tool for marketing teams. Yet the engineering blog explicitly 196 00:12:35.304 --> 00:12:41.864 Speaker 1: notes that basic Planner can hold up to 9,000 tasks per plan, but Planner Premium 197 00:12:41.864 --> 00:12:48.424 Speaker 1: imposes a hard limit of 3,000 tasks, 300 resources, and 2,000 successor links per project. 198 00:12:48.424 --> 00:12:54.212 Speaker 2: It is such a brilliant paradox to explore, honestly, because it forces an understanding of 199 00:12:54.212 --> 00:12:54.983 Speaker 2: computational complexity. 200 00:12:54.983 --> 00:12:59.401 Speaker 1: Because how do you explain to a CFO that they need to pay a premium 201 00:12:59.401 --> 00:13:03.819 Speaker 1: licensing fee for a system that basically has one-third the raw storage capacity of the 202 00:13:03.819 --> 00:13:05.291 Speaker 1: free version? That sounds insane. 203 00:13:05.291 --> 00:13:10.914 Speaker 2: You explain the difference between storage and processing. Think about the mechanical nature of a 204 00:13:10.914 --> 00:13:16.537 Speaker 2: task in basic Planner. Like we said, it is a flat, isolated record. Storing 9,000 205 00:13:16.537 --> 00:13:22.159 Speaker 2: disconnected flat records in Azure requires almost zero computational overhead. There's no heavy lifting involved 206 00:13:22.159 --> 00:13:25.908 Speaker 2: in just rendering a visual list of 9,000 isolated items. 207 00:13:25.908 --> 00:13:30.476 Speaker 1: It's like having a massive warehouse floor. You can dump 9,000 cardboard boxes on the 208 00:13:30.476 --> 00:13:35.044 Speaker 1: floor; it holds a ton of volume, but the boxes don't interact with each other. 209 00:13:35.044 --> 00:13:38.090 Speaker 1: Box number one doesn't care what is inside box 8,999. 210 00:13:38.090 --> 00:13:44.429 Speaker 2: That's a perfect analogy. Now apply relational logic to that warehouse. Planner Premium is not 211 00:13:44.429 --> 00:13:50.768 Speaker 2: just storing the boxes; it is mathematically linking them together with bungee cords. When you 212 00:13:50.768 --> 00:13:57.108 Speaker 2: have 3,000 tasks in Planner Premium, they are bound tightly by dependencies, resource allocations, calendar 213 00:13:57.108 --> 00:13:59.643 Speaker 2: exceptions, and lead and lag times. 214 00:13:59.643 --> 00:14:04.162 Speaker 1: So if a project manager shifts the due date of task number 12 by, say, 215 00:14:04.162 --> 00:14:08.077 Speaker 1: two weeks, the system doesn't just quietly update one record in a database. 216 00:14:08.077 --> 00:14:13.444 Speaker 2: No, it has to instantly calculate the cascading impact on tasks 13 through 3,000. It 217 00:14:13.444 --> 00:14:18.811 Speaker 2: has to check the calendar availability of the 300 resources assigned to those downstream tasks. 218 00:14:18.811 --> 00:14:24.178 Speaker 2: It has to identify any resource over-allocations, recalculate the entire critical path of the whole 219 00:14:24.178 --> 00:14:27.756 Speaker 2: project, and then redraw the Gantt chart in real time. 220 00:14:27.756 --> 00:14:29.631 Speaker 1: That's a huge amount of math happening in milliseconds. 221 00:14:29.631 --> 00:14:36.020 Speaker 2: The relational processing power required to maintain the structural integrity of 3,000 interconnected nodes, along 222 00:14:36.020 --> 00:14:42.409 Speaker 2: with 2,000 specific successor links, inside a highly governed Dataverse environment is just immense. That 223 00:14:42.409 --> 00:14:43.687 Speaker 2: is the premium. 224 00:14:43.687 --> 00:14:44.624 Speaker 1: Right. That makes total sense. 225 00:14:44.624 --> 00:14:49.159 Speaker 2: You are paying for the structural integrity of the relational logic and the APIs that 226 00:14:49.159 --> 00:14:53.693 Speaker 2: allow you to query that logic securely. You are not just paying for flat storage 227 00:14:53.693 --> 00:14:53.995 Speaker 2: space. 228 00:14:53.995 --> 00:14:59.824 Speaker 1: And that structural integrity is also what allows the Power Platform to interact with the 229 00:14:59.824 --> 00:15:05.652 Speaker 1: project data safely, right? Which is a massive operational shift, because the source material explicitly 230 00:15:05.652 --> 00:15:09.926 Speaker 1: calls out the death of legacy automation, specifically SharePoint 2013 workflows. 231 00:15:09.926 --> 00:15:15.653 Speaker 2: Yes. Microsoft has entirely deprecated SharePoint 2013 workflows. And for over a decade, these workflows 232 00:15:15.653 --> 00:15:20.234 Speaker 2: basically functioned as the central nervous system for thousands of enterprise PMOs. 233 00:15:20.234 --> 00:15:27.803 Speaker 1: Oh, yeah. Organizations built incredibly elaborate, deeply nested approval processes, stage-gate routing rules, custom email 234 00:15:27.803 --> 00:15:33.354 Speaker 1: alerts—all of it inside Project Online using this legacy SharePoint engine. 235 00:15:33.354 --> 00:15:38.341 Speaker 2: IT departments spent literal millions of dollars consulting with developers to write these custom SharePoint 236 00:15:38.341 --> 00:15:43.329 Speaker 2: workflows. It was the duct tape that kept complex business logic attached to the project 237 00:15:43.329 --> 00:15:43.662 Speaker 2: data. 238 00:15:43.662 --> 00:15:47.410 Speaker 1: And now that duct tape is chemically degrading. It is completely unsupported. 239 00:15:47.410 --> 00:15:53.434 Speaker 2: It's gone. When you migrate away from Project Online, those legacy workflows simply do not 240 00:15:53.434 --> 00:15:59.459 Speaker 2: translate. You cannot just export a SharePoint 2013 workflow and import it into Planner Premium. 241 00:15:59.459 --> 00:16:05.483 Speaker 2: The new architecture is completely alien to it. Organizations are being forced to modernize their 242 00:16:05.483 --> 00:16:09.901 Speaker 2: automation via Power Automate and the project scheduling APIs within Dataverse. 243 00:16:09.901 --> 00:16:14.074 Speaker 1: So let's talk about those project scheduling APIs, because they seem crucial to this whole 244 00:16:14.074 --> 00:16:18.247 Speaker 1: modernization effort. In the old SharePoint days, a workflow might just, you know, brute-force a 245 00:16:18.247 --> 00:16:22.420 Speaker 1: change to a list item, like just overwrite the cell. But in Dataverse, you can't 246 00:16:22.420 --> 00:16:26.593 Speaker 1: just overwrite a date field on a task if that task is part of a 247 00:16:26.593 --> 00:16:27.706 Speaker 1: complex dependency chain, right? 248 00:16:27.706 --> 00:16:33.669 Speaker 2: Precisely. If a Power Automate flow tries to independently change the date of a task 249 00:16:33.669 --> 00:16:39.632 Speaker 2: in Dataverse without respecting the underlying scheduling logic, it would instantly corrupt the critical path 250 00:16:39.632 --> 00:16:40.825 Speaker 2: of the project. 251 00:16:40.825 --> 00:16:41.225 Speaker 1: It would break the math. 252 00:16:50.665 --> 00:16:53.166 Speaker 2: Exactly. That is why Microsoft mandates the use of the project scheduling APIs. The automation 253 00:16:53.166 --> 00:16:55.668 Speaker 2: has to hand the request to the API, like knocking on a door. Then the 254 00:16:55.668 --> 00:16:58.169 Speaker 2: API runs the calculation through the central scheduling engine, and only if the logic holds—if 255 00:16:58.169 --> 00:17:00.504 Speaker 2: it doesn't break the rules—does the API write the change to the Dataverse tables. 256 00:17:00.504 --> 00:17:05.580 Speaker 1: It is a highly, highly regulated transaction, which means IT departments aren't just moving data 257 00:17:05.580 --> 00:17:10.656 Speaker 1: from server A to server B; they are entirely rewriting their business logic to interact 258 00:17:10.656 --> 00:17:12.686 Speaker 1: with a highly structured API gateway. 259 00:17:12.686 --> 00:17:19.301 Speaker 2: It's a fundamental rebuild. And because Dataverse and Planner Premium are so aggressively engineered for 260 00:17:19.301 --> 00:17:25.916 Speaker 2: modern, collaborative execution and these regulated workflows, they simply cannot handle the sheer, unregulated sprawl 261 00:17:25.916 --> 00:17:27.680 Speaker 2: of legacy portfolio management. 262 00:17:27.680 --> 00:17:33.830 Speaker 1: Right. Microsoft realized that they could not build a single, magical cloud platform that accommodates 263 00:17:33.830 --> 00:17:39.980 Speaker 1: both modern, lightweight collaborative work and the massive, heavy-duty, highly customized portfolio structures of these 264 00:17:39.980 --> 00:17:40.799 Speaker 1: legacy enterprises. 265 00:17:40.799 --> 00:17:43.611 Speaker 2: The architectures are just fundamentally at odds with each other. 266 00:17:43.611 --> 00:17:49.233 Speaker 1: Which is why the source documentation lays out three very distinct transition paths. I mean, 267 00:17:49.233 --> 00:17:54.856 Speaker 1: they aren't telling every single Project Online customer to just move to Planner Premium. They've 268 00:17:54.856 --> 00:18:00.479 Speaker 1: engineered this enterprise decision framework to essentially force organizations to categorize their actual operational realities. 269 00:18:00.479 --> 00:18:02.353 Speaker 2: And thank goodness they did. 270 00:18:02.353 --> 00:18:06.678 Speaker 1: Yeah, so let's dig into these three paths, because making the wrong choice here is 271 00:18:06.678 --> 00:18:09.850 Speaker 1: going to be a multi-million-dollar mistake for a lot of companies. 272 00:18:09.850 --> 00:18:15.028 Speaker 2: The framework outlined in the engineering blog is actually very pragmatic. It guides decision-makers through 273 00:18:15.028 --> 00:18:16.409 Speaker 2: a pretty logical flow. 274 00:18:16.409 --> 00:18:17.346 Speaker 1: Okay, walk us through it. 275 00:18:17.346 --> 00:18:22.859 Speaker 2: Well, the first step is assessing your overall business need and the complexity of your 276 00:18:22.859 --> 00:18:28.371 Speaker 2: actual projects. Then, the second step evaluates the size and the distribution of your teams. 277 00:18:28.371 --> 00:18:33.884 Speaker 2: But the third step—this is the critical fork in the road—is asking, "Does your organization 278 00:18:33.884 --> 00:18:36.088 Speaker 2: require advanced resource and financial management?" 279 00:18:36.088 --> 00:18:42.937 Speaker 1: Okay, so let's start with path one, which we've been circling around: Planner Premium. The 280 00:18:42.937 --> 00:18:49.785 Speaker 1: source defines this path for organizations focused on collaborative, organization-wide project execution, real-time planning, and 281 00:18:49.785 --> 00:18:53.893 Speaker 1: portfolio visibility. This feels like the path for agility. 282 00:18:53.893 --> 00:19:00.570 Speaker 2: It is. If an organization's primary objective is coordinating tasks across departments, managing dependencies within 283 00:19:00.570 --> 00:19:07.247 Speaker 2: cross-functional teams, visualizing work on a modern timeline, and just deeply integrating with the Microsoft 284 00:19:07.247 --> 00:19:11.698 Speaker 2: Teams communication layer, Planner Premium is the absolute optimal destination. 285 00:19:11.698 --> 00:19:12.635 Speaker 1: It's sleek. 286 00:19:12.635 --> 00:19:17.501 Speaker 2: Very sleek. The engineering blog assesses Planner Premium's capability for task management and collaboration as 287 00:19:17.501 --> 00:19:21.069 Speaker 2: excellent. They give it a 9 or 10 out of 10. 288 00:19:21.069 --> 00:19:25.116 Speaker 1: It is the undisputed king of getting the actual work done efficiently. But you know, 289 00:19:25.116 --> 00:19:29.163 Speaker 1: the source material is also brutally honest about its limitations. It analyzes the gaps. For 290 00:19:29.163 --> 00:19:33.209 Speaker 1: resource management, Planner Premium is rated only as moderate, like a 4 to 5 out 291 00:19:33.209 --> 00:19:37.256 Speaker 1: of 10. And for financial management, it drops all the way down to basic, a 292 00:19:37.256 --> 00:19:38.874 Speaker 1: 2 to 3 out of 10. 293 00:19:38.874 --> 00:19:45.660 Speaker 2: And this is exactly why the migration requires brutal self-awareness from leadership. If an enterprise 294 00:19:45.660 --> 00:19:52.446 Speaker 2: PMO relies on Project Online to maintain a centralized global resource pool of, say, 5,000 295 00:19:52.446 --> 00:19:59.232 Speaker 2: engineers, track their fractional utilization down to the quarter hour, forecast capacity bottlenecks six months 296 00:19:59.232 --> 00:20:05.113 Speaker 2: in advance, and manage multi-million-dollar project budgets with strict CapEx and OpEx segregation... 297 00:20:05.113 --> 00:20:05.513 Speaker 1: Yeah. 298 00:20:07.924 --> 00:20:10.144 Speaker 2: Planner Premium, out of the box, simply lacks the mechanical depth to execute those functions. 299 00:20:10.144 --> 00:20:10.736 Speaker 2: It will fall over. 300 00:20:10.736 --> 00:20:15.756 Speaker 1: So what happens to that enterprise PMO? I mean, Microsoft can't just abandon their biggest 301 00:20:15.756 --> 00:20:20.107 Speaker 1: clients. That is where path two comes into play: Project Server Subscription Edition. 302 00:20:20.107 --> 00:20:20.507 Speaker 2: Right. 303 00:20:26.667 --> 00:20:29.009 Speaker 1: Let's rethink our analogy here for a second. Rather than trains or warehouses, let's think 304 00:20:29.009 --> 00:20:31.352 Speaker 1: about this transition like a massive update to a city's power grid. In the legacy 305 00:20:31.352 --> 00:20:33.226 Speaker 1: Project Online days, every company essentially had its own localized gas generator. 306 00:20:33.226 --> 00:20:34.163 Speaker 2: Oh, I like this. 307 00:20:34.163 --> 00:20:39.292 Speaker 1: Yeah. It was messy, you could customize the pipes however you wanted, and you could 308 00:20:39.292 --> 00:20:44.421 Speaker 1: bolt on all sorts of weird custom machinery to make it run your specific factory. 309 00:20:44.421 --> 00:20:49.550 Speaker 1: Now, Planner Premium is like plugging into the new, modern, highly regulated commercial power grid. 310 00:20:49.550 --> 00:20:54.678 Speaker 1: It's clean, it's super efficient, it runs your modern office building perfectly, but you cannot 311 00:20:54.678 --> 00:20:59.465 Speaker 1: attach your old, leaky, custom gas pipes to it. The grid will reject you. 312 00:20:59.465 --> 00:21:04.619 Speaker 2: It will short-circuit. And Project Server Subscription Edition, which is path two, is for the 313 00:21:04.619 --> 00:21:09.773 Speaker 2: organization that realizes they cannot move their massive legacy industrial plant onto the commercial grid. 314 00:21:09.773 --> 00:21:10.710 Speaker 1: Right. 315 00:21:10.710 --> 00:21:18.520 Speaker 2: The source explicitly positions Project Server for on-premises control, proven enterprise-grade PPM, deep customization, and 316 00:21:18.520 --> 00:21:20.081 Speaker 2: strict data residency. 317 00:21:20.081 --> 00:21:25.704 Speaker 1: It is the heavy-duty, isolated bunker. But I have to ask the obvious question here: 318 00:21:25.704 --> 00:21:31.327 Speaker 1: we are operating in an era where Microsoft's entire corporate messaging is obsessively focused on 319 00:21:31.327 --> 00:21:33.201 Speaker 1: cloud-native architecture and artificial intelligence... 320 00:21:33.201 --> 00:21:34.138 Speaker 2: Cloud-first, mobile-first. 321 00:21:34.138 --> 00:21:40.033 Speaker 1: Right. So why is Microsoft offering an on-premises subscription edition where you actually have to 322 00:21:40.033 --> 00:21:45.927 Speaker 1: install the software on your own local bare-metal servers? Doesn't that entirely contradict their strategic 323 00:21:45.927 --> 00:21:46.320 Speaker 1: vision? 324 00:21:46.320 --> 00:21:53.122 Speaker 2: Well, it contradicts the marketing vision, sure. But it acknowledges the immovable realities of enterprise 325 00:21:53.122 --> 00:21:59.923 Speaker 2: IT. Microsoft understands that there are two massive, concrete roadblocks to cloud adoption for certain 326 00:21:59.923 --> 00:22:00.377 Speaker 2: sectors. 327 00:22:00.377 --> 00:22:01.314 Speaker 1: Okay, what's the first one? 328 00:22:01.314 --> 00:22:05.999 Speaker 2: The first is non-negotiable data residency and compliance mandates. 329 00:22:05.999 --> 00:22:11.622 Speaker 1: Ah. So we're talking defense contractors, federal agencies, big healthcare conglomerates. 330 00:22:11.622 --> 00:22:18.211 Speaker 2: Correct. You have organizations operating under ITAR compliance or really strict FedRAMP regulations, whose core 331 00:22:18.211 --> 00:22:24.800 Speaker 2: project portfolio data contains classified operational details, or proprietary defense schematics, or just heavily regulated 332 00:22:24.800 --> 00:22:25.678 Speaker 2: financial models. 333 00:22:25.678 --> 00:22:26.616 Speaker 1: Stuff that cannot leak. 334 00:22:26.616 --> 00:22:32.444 Speaker 2: Right. Their governance frameworks legally prohibit that data from resting in a multi-tenant public cloud 335 00:22:32.444 --> 00:22:38.272 Speaker 2: environment, no matter how secure Dataverse claims to be. They physically require isolated, on-premises control 336 00:22:38.272 --> 00:22:42.546 Speaker 2: over their data layer. It's not a preference; it's the law. 337 00:22:42.546 --> 00:22:44.421 Speaker 1: That makes total sense. And what's the second roadblock? 338 00:22:44.421 --> 00:22:46.295 Speaker 2: Crushing legacy technical debt. 339 00:22:46.295 --> 00:22:47.232 Speaker 1: Of course. 340 00:22:47.232 --> 00:22:54.260 Speaker 2: Over the past 15 years, massive global enterprises have integrated Project Online deeply into sprawling 341 00:22:54.260 --> 00:23:00.351 Speaker 2: on-premises ERP systems, like SAP or Oracle, and these totally bespoke financial engines. 342 00:23:00.351 --> 00:23:01.288 Speaker 1: Oh, I've seen those. They're monsters. 343 00:23:01.288 --> 00:23:06.560 Speaker 2: They are. And these integrations are the central nervous system of their revenue recognition. Untangling 344 00:23:06.560 --> 00:23:11.831 Speaker 2: a global ERP integration just to move the project management module to the cloud could 345 00:23:11.831 --> 00:23:15.345 Speaker 2: take five years and cost hundreds of millions of dollars. 346 00:23:15.345 --> 00:23:18.156 Speaker 1: It would just paralyze the business operations. They'd freeze. 347 00:23:18.156 --> 00:23:24.138 Speaker 2: Exactly. So Project Server Subscription Edition acts as the vital lifeline here. It allows these 348 00:23:24.138 --> 00:23:30.119 Speaker 2: highly complex, heavily regulated organizations to maintain their bespoke on-premises integrations while still receiving modern 349 00:23:30.119 --> 00:23:36.101 Speaker 2: security updates and support from Microsoft. It essentially prevents a catastrophic disruption of their core 350 00:23:36.101 --> 00:23:36.898 Speaker 2: operating model. 351 00:23:36.898 --> 00:23:43.288 Speaker 1: Okay, so if Planner Premium is the modern commercial grid for agile teams, and Project 352 00:23:43.288 --> 00:23:49.677 Speaker 1: Server is the isolated heavyweight bunker for legacy and compliance, what is path three: Dynamics 353 00:23:49.677 --> 00:23:50.955 Speaker 1: 365 Project Operations? 354 00:23:50.955 --> 00:23:57.648 Speaker 2: Dynamics 365 represents the most comprehensive evolution of work management in the entire Microsoft ecosystem 355 00:23:57.648 --> 00:24:04.342 Speaker 2: right now. The source highlights this path specifically for end-to-end, project-centric business management. This is 356 00:24:04.342 --> 00:24:09.697 Speaker 2: designed for organizations where the project itself is the core revenue-generating product. 357 00:24:09.697 --> 00:24:16.022 Speaker 1: Okay, so we are talking about professional services, like global consulting firms, large-scale engineering contractors, 358 00:24:16.022 --> 00:24:18.131 Speaker 1: IT service providers, architecture firms... 359 00:24:18.131 --> 00:24:22.212 Speaker 2: Exactly. For these organizations, a project isn't just an internal initiative to, you know, update 360 00:24:22.212 --> 00:24:26.293 Speaker 2: a website or launch a marketing campaign. The project is what they sell to a 361 00:24:26.293 --> 00:24:26.565 Speaker 2: client. 362 00:24:26.565 --> 00:24:27.502 Speaker 1: Right, it's the product. 363 00:24:27.502 --> 00:24:33.526 Speaker 2: So Dynamics 365 Project Operations bridges that entire lifecycle. It starts at the CRM level 364 00:24:33.526 --> 00:24:35.936 Speaker 2: with sales quoting and pipeline management... 365 00:24:35.936 --> 00:24:37.810 Speaker 1: So before the project even starts? 366 00:24:37.810 --> 00:24:43.834 Speaker 2: Yes. Then it handles the complex resource staffing, mapping consultant skills against project demands. It 367 00:24:43.834 --> 00:24:49.858 Speaker 2: manages the actual task delivery, tracking every single billable hour and expense incurred by the 368 00:24:49.858 --> 00:24:55.883 Speaker 2: delivery team on the road. And crucially, it feeds all of that directly into the 369 00:24:55.883 --> 00:25:01.907 Speaker 2: financial engine to generate client invoices, recognize revenue based on completion milestones, and provide real-time 370 00:25:01.907 --> 00:25:03.112 Speaker 2: profit margin analytics. 371 00:25:03.112 --> 00:25:08.132 Speaker 1: Wow. So it's essentially a full-scale ERP system explicitly built for project-based economies. You aren't 372 00:25:08.132 --> 00:25:13.152 Speaker 1: just tracking when a task is due; you are tracking the exact financial impact of 373 00:25:13.152 --> 00:25:17.168 Speaker 1: that task being late on the overall profitability of the client contract. 374 00:25:17.168 --> 00:25:22.244 Speaker 2: Precisely. When you look back at the decision flowchart in the source documentation, the logic 375 00:25:22.244 --> 00:25:27.320 Speaker 2: becomes really clear. If you answered yes to needing advanced resource and financial management, you 376 00:25:27.320 --> 00:25:29.350 Speaker 2: lean away from Planner Premium immediately. 377 00:25:29.350 --> 00:25:29.750 Speaker 1: Right. 378 00:25:35.910 --> 00:25:38.570 Speaker 2: If you just need to maintain massive internal portfolios, you look at Project Server. But 379 00:25:38.570 --> 00:25:41.229 Speaker 2: if you answer yes plus we need end-to-end project business operations and billable revenue tracking, 380 00:25:41.229 --> 00:25:42.470 Speaker 2: you absolutely must migrate to Dynamics 365. 381 00:25:42.470 --> 00:25:47.982 Speaker 1: And this really exposes why the whole upgrade button myth is so lethal. If a 382 00:25:47.982 --> 00:25:53.495 Speaker 1: 2,000-person consulting firm tries to run its entire resource utilization and revenue recognition pipeline through 383 00:25:53.495 --> 00:25:59.007 Speaker 1: Planner Premium simply because they both feature nice-looking Gantt charts, they will literally lose the 384 00:25:59.007 --> 00:26:01.212 Speaker 1: ability to bill their clients accurately. 385 00:26:01.212 --> 00:26:06.835 Speaker 2: They'd go bankrupt. The tools are mechanically engineered for entirely different operational realities. 386 00:26:06.835 --> 00:26:11.754 Speaker 1: But you know, identifying the correct path is merely the theoretical phase. The true crisis 387 00:26:11.754 --> 00:26:16.674 Speaker 1: for enterprise IT departments begins when they actually attempt to pack up a decade of 388 00:26:16.674 --> 00:26:19.954 Speaker 1: legacy data and physically move it to the new architecture. 389 00:26:19.954 --> 00:26:21.828 Speaker 2: Yeah, that's where the theory meets the road. 390 00:26:21.828 --> 00:26:27.295 Speaker 1: Which brings us to the most labor-intensive part of this deep dive. The engineering blog 391 00:26:27.295 --> 00:26:32.761 Speaker 1: makes it abundantly clear: there is no native, one-click migration path to convert a legacy 392 00:26:32.761 --> 00:26:38.227 Speaker 1: Project Web App project into a Planner Premium plan or a Dynamics 365 environment. You 393 00:26:38.227 --> 00:26:41.507 Speaker 1: cannot just right-click and hit "Export to modern platform." 394 00:26:41.507 --> 00:26:47.657 Speaker 2: Because, as we detailed with Dataverse earlier, you are moving data from a flat, visually 395 00:26:47.657 --> 00:26:53.807 Speaker 2: aggregated architecture into a highly structured relational database that enforces strict mathematical rules on every 396 00:26:53.807 --> 00:26:54.627 Speaker 2: single entry. 397 00:26:54.627 --> 00:26:55.564 Speaker 1: Right. 398 00:26:55.564 --> 00:27:01.714 Speaker 2: The legacy data structures are just fundamentally incompatible with the modern schema without really rigorous 399 00:27:01.714 --> 00:27:02.124 Speaker 2: transformation. 400 00:27:02.124 --> 00:27:10.491 Speaker 1: The source material actually outlines an eight-stage migration journey, and it is a punishing, deeply 401 00:27:10.491 --> 00:27:18.858 Speaker 1: technical process. The stages are: Current Environment Assessment, Assessment Analysis, Data Analysis, Governance Review, Platform 402 00:27:18.858 --> 00:27:25.551 Speaker 1: Selection, Migration Planning, Adoption and Change Management, and finally, the Modernized Environment. 403 00:27:25.551 --> 00:27:25.951 Speaker 2: Yeah. 404 00:27:33.985 --> 00:27:36.860 Speaker 1: It sounds like standard, boring corporate methodology, right? But the reality of executing this is 405 00:27:36.860 --> 00:27:39.735 Speaker 1: a minefield of technical debt. Let's look at stage two: Assessment. In the real world, 406 00:27:39.735 --> 00:27:42.419 Speaker 1: what happens when an enterprise architect actually starts assessing a 10-year-old Project Online environment? 407 00:27:42.419 --> 00:27:47.573 Speaker 2: Oh, it's a nightmare. They almost always uncover a staggering amount of shadow IT and 408 00:27:47.573 --> 00:27:52.727 Speaker 2: broken logic. Because an environment assessment is not just a simple inventory of active projects... 409 00:27:52.727 --> 00:27:53.664 Speaker 1: Like counting rows in a spreadsheet. 410 00:27:53.664 --> 00:27:59.287 Speaker 2: Right, it's not that simple. It requires a forensic audit of the entire legacy ecosystem. 411 00:27:59.287 --> 00:28:04.909 Speaker 2: Architects have to dissect the custom project templates. They have to analyze every single custom 412 00:28:04.909 --> 00:28:08.658 Speaker 2: enterprise field, every lookup table, and every resource pool configuration. 413 00:28:08.658 --> 00:28:10.532 Speaker 1: They're basically hunting for the ghosts in the machine. 414 00:28:10.532 --> 00:28:15.592 Speaker 2: They are. They're looking for legacy dependencies that will critically fail the moment they touch 415 00:28:15.592 --> 00:28:18.966 Speaker 2: Dataverse. For example, they have to audit every OData feed. 416 00:28:18.966 --> 00:28:20.840 Speaker 1: Oh, tell me about the OData feeds. 417 00:28:20.840 --> 00:28:26.159 Speaker 2: So, many organizations have built highly complex Power BI dashboards that ingest data directly from 418 00:28:26.159 --> 00:28:31.478 Speaker 2: Project Online via OData feeds. If you just migrate the project data over to Dataverse, 419 00:28:31.478 --> 00:28:33.960 Speaker 2: those legacy OData feeds will instantly break. 420 00:28:33.960 --> 00:28:35.834 Speaker 1: The dashboard just goes dark for the executive. 421 00:28:35.834 --> 00:28:41.622 Speaker 2: Completely dark. The architect must map every single API connection, every third-party application tied into 422 00:28:41.622 --> 00:28:47.410 Speaker 2: the tenant, and every legacy SharePoint workflow we talked about. Because all of it—100% of 423 00:28:47.410 --> 00:28:48.953 Speaker 2: it—must be completely rebuilt. 424 00:28:48.953 --> 00:28:53.762 Speaker 1: And then they hit stages three and four: Data Analysis and Governance Review. This is 425 00:28:53.762 --> 00:28:58.571 Speaker 1: where the translation really gets difficult, doesn't it? Moving from the way SharePoint handled permissions 426 00:28:58.571 --> 00:29:01.136 Speaker 1: to the way Dataverse handles role-based access control. 427 00:29:01.136 --> 00:29:03.010 Speaker 2: It is a massive conceptual leap. 428 00:29:03.010 --> 00:29:03.947 Speaker 1: Yeah. 429 00:29:03.947 --> 00:29:07.695 Speaker 2: In the legacy environment, security was often managed at the SharePoint site level. 430 00:29:07.695 --> 00:29:08.095 Speaker 1: Right. 431 00:29:09.569 --> 00:29:11.049 Speaker 2: If you had access to the site, you generally just had access to all the 432 00:29:11.049 --> 00:29:11.444 Speaker 2: project data within it. 433 00:29:11.444 --> 00:29:12.381 Speaker 1: Very broad strokes. 434 00:29:12.381 --> 00:29:18.847 Speaker 2: Very broad. Dataverse, on the other hand, enforces security at the entity and row level 435 00:29:18.847 --> 00:29:25.313 Speaker 2: within the database itself, governed by highly granular security roles and business units. So mapping 436 00:29:25.313 --> 00:29:31.779 Speaker 2: messy, decentralized SharePoint permissions into strict Dataverse security models requires a complete overhaul of the 437 00:29:31.779 --> 00:29:33.934 Speaker 2: organization's entire data governance strategy. 438 00:29:33.934 --> 00:29:40.260 Speaker 1: And the source material flashes a massive warning sign over this entire process. They explicitly 439 00:29:40.260 --> 00:29:42.368 Speaker 1: warn against the lift-and-shift mentality. 440 00:29:42.368 --> 00:29:46.761 Speaker 2: Yes. The lift-and-shift is the single most expensive mistake an organization can make during this 441 00:29:46.761 --> 00:29:47.054 Speaker 2: transition. 442 00:29:47.054 --> 00:29:52.932 Speaker 1: And the psychological friction here is just immense. I mean, think about it: an IT 443 00:29:52.932 --> 00:29:58.810 Speaker 1: department has spent countless budget cycles meticulously customizing Project Online to execute highly specific, often 444 00:29:58.810 --> 00:30:04.688 Speaker 1: overly complicated business processes. When faced with a migration, the intense human urge is to 445 00:30:04.688 --> 00:30:08.607 Speaker 1: demand that the new system replicate the old system perfectly. 446 00:30:08.607 --> 00:30:09.544 Speaker 2: They do it all the time. 447 00:30:09.544 --> 00:30:09.944 Speaker 1: Yeah. 448 00:30:12.355 --> 00:30:14.575 Speaker 2: They tell the developers, "I want Planner Premium to look and act exactly like our 449 00:30:14.575 --> 00:30:15.167 Speaker 2: customized Project Online environment." 450 00:30:15.167 --> 00:30:19.445 Speaker 1: They want to bring all their legacy baggage into the modern architecture. It's like buying 451 00:30:19.445 --> 00:30:23.723 Speaker 1: a state-of-the-art electric vehicle, but insisting the mechanics rip out the battery and install the 452 00:30:23.723 --> 00:30:28.001 Speaker 1: leaky gas engine from your old sedan just because you were comfortable with how it 453 00:30:28.001 --> 00:30:28.286 Speaker 1: idles. 454 00:30:28.286 --> 00:30:29.223 Speaker 2: It's crazy. 455 00:30:29.223 --> 00:30:31.097 Speaker 1: You completely destroy the efficiency of the new machine. 456 00:30:31.097 --> 00:30:38.339 Speaker 2: You really do. It actively degrades the performance and stability of the Dataverse environment. Forcing 457 00:30:38.339 --> 00:30:45.580 Speaker 2: modern cloud-native platforms to execute inefficient legacy business logic through complex workarounds just creates a 458 00:30:45.580 --> 00:30:47.028 Speaker 2: fragile, unmaintainable architecture. 459 00:30:47.028 --> 00:30:47.965 Speaker 1: Yeah. 460 00:30:47.965 --> 00:30:53.503 Speaker 2: The engineering source is blunt about this: redesign reporting instead of rebuilding old dashboards. You 461 00:30:53.503 --> 00:30:59.040 Speaker 2: must simplify the operating model to align with the strengths of the new platform. Don't 462 00:30:59.040 --> 00:31:00.147 Speaker 2: fight the platform. 463 00:31:00.147 --> 00:31:05.180 Speaker 1: But, okay, I'm putting myself in the shoes of the IT director who actually has 464 00:31:05.180 --> 00:31:10.213 Speaker 1: to sell this to the executive board. Telling the C-suite that you need a massive 465 00:31:10.213 --> 00:31:15.245 Speaker 1: budget allocation to redesign everything from scratch just to replace a software platform that is 466 00:31:15.245 --> 00:31:20.278 Speaker 1: being forcibly retired by the vendor—that sounds like a catastrophic disruption. How does an IT 467 00:31:20.278 --> 00:31:25.310 Speaker 1: leader justify completely re-engineering their core operational processes when the board thinks they are just 468 00:31:25.310 --> 00:31:27.323 Speaker 1: buying a new tasks management app? 469 00:31:27.323 --> 00:31:33.129 Speaker 2: The justification lies in the broader market research cited in the source material. This isn't 470 00:31:33.129 --> 00:31:38.935 Speaker 2: just Microsoft being difficult with a software update; this is an aggressive, industry-wide pivot. The 471 00:31:38.935 --> 00:31:44.741 Speaker 2: article references insights from Gartner and Forrester that contextualize why this painful redesign is absolutely 472 00:31:44.741 --> 00:31:45.128 Speaker 2: mandatory. 473 00:31:45.128 --> 00:31:46.065 Speaker 1: Right, the divergence of the market. 474 00:31:46.065 --> 00:31:54.372 Speaker 2: Exactly. Forrester highlights that collaborative work management—which is what Planner Premium exemplifies—is rapidly maturing and 475 00:31:54.372 --> 00:31:58.248 Speaker 2: diverging entirely from traditional project portfolio management. 476 00:31:58.248 --> 00:31:59.185 Speaker 1: They are two different beasts now. 477 00:31:59.185 --> 00:32:04.958 Speaker 2: They are. The market itself has split into distinct operational philosophies. Attempting to force an 478 00:32:04.958 --> 00:32:10.731 Speaker 2: organization into a hybrid legacy model is just a dead end. So the IT director 479 00:32:10.731 --> 00:32:16.505 Speaker 2: justifies the redesign by explaining to the board that they aren't just replacing a tool; 480 00:32:16.505 --> 00:32:20.738 Speaker 2: they are deciding the future operational agility of the entire company. 481 00:32:20.738 --> 00:32:24.838 Speaker 1: You tell the C-suite, "We have to modernize the architecture now because the old way 482 00:32:24.838 --> 00:32:27.298 Speaker 1: of working is mathematically incapable of supporting the future." 483 00:32:27.298 --> 00:32:32.569 Speaker 2: And you validate the massive expense of the redesign by focusing on the ultimate return 484 00:32:32.569 --> 00:32:37.840 Speaker 2: on investment. The C-suite is not interested in the nuances of task management software. They 485 00:32:37.840 --> 00:32:41.355 Speaker 2: are intensely focused on one thing right now: artificial intelligence. 486 00:32:41.355 --> 00:32:42.292 Speaker 1: AI, of course. 487 00:32:42.292 --> 00:32:47.733 Speaker 2: The IT director's core argument is this: you must undergo this painful data modernization and 488 00:32:47.733 --> 00:32:53.174 Speaker 2: migration to Dataverse today, or you will be permanently locked out of the AI revolution 489 00:32:53.174 --> 00:32:53.537 Speaker 2: tomorrow. 490 00:32:53.537 --> 00:32:58.035 Speaker 1: Which brings us to the true endgame of this entire transition. Microsoft isn't retiring Project 491 00:32:58.035 --> 00:33:01.034 Speaker 1: Online just to, you know, tidy up their product catalog. 492 00:33:01.034 --> 00:33:01.971 Speaker 2: No, not at all. 493 00:33:01.971 --> 00:33:06.105 Speaker 1: They are doing it to pave the highway for AI, specifically Copilot and the new 494 00:33:06.105 --> 00:33:06.656 Speaker 1: Planner agent. 495 00:33:06.656 --> 00:33:13.424 Speaker 2: Artificial intelligence is the driving force behind this entire architectural shift to Dataverse. The source 496 00:33:13.424 --> 00:33:18.839 Speaker 2: documentation outlines three massive, overarching themes for the future of work management. 497 00:33:18.839 --> 00:33:19.776 Speaker 1: Let's hear them. 498 00:33:19.776 --> 00:33:28.210 Speaker 2: One: AI-assisted project management becomes the default standard. Two: unified, integrated platforms completely replace standalone, 499 00:33:28.210 --> 00:33:36.644 Speaker 2: siloed applications. And three: strict data governance becomes the absolute non-negotiable foundation for AI deployment. 500 00:33:36.644 --> 00:33:41.631 Speaker 1: So let's look at the mechanical capabilities of the Planner agent integrated with Microsoft 365 501 00:33:41.631 --> 00:33:46.619 Speaker 1: Copilot. What is this AI actually doing that makes the pain of this migration worth 502 00:33:46.619 --> 00:33:46.952 Speaker 1: it? 503 00:33:46.952 --> 00:33:50.905 Speaker 2: We are witnessing a transition from a system of record to a system of action. 504 00:33:50.905 --> 00:33:54.858 Speaker 2: In legacy platforms, the software just recorded what a human typed into it, right? It 505 00:33:54.858 --> 00:33:55.386 Speaker 2: was passive. 506 00:33:55.386 --> 00:33:57.260 Speaker 1: Just a digital filing cabinet. 507 00:33:57.260 --> 00:34:02.882 Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly. Copilot operates as an active intelligence layer. It can ingest a rough project 508 00:34:02.882 --> 00:34:06.631 Speaker 2: charter document and automatically generate a comprehensive work breakdown structure. 509 00:34:06.631 --> 00:34:07.568 Speaker 1: Wow. 510 00:34:07.568 --> 00:34:13.659 Speaker 2: It can continuously analyze the real-time state of a project plan, cross-reference it with resource 511 00:34:13.659 --> 00:34:19.750 Speaker 2: availability across the tenant, and automatically produce nuanced status reports. And crucially, it can identify 512 00:34:19.750 --> 00:34:25.841 Speaker 2: subtle scheduling risks—like, say, a critical path dependency slipping by two days long before a 513 00:34:25.841 --> 00:34:31.933 Speaker 2: human project manager would even notice it—and recommend specific, actionable steps to mitigate that risk. 514 00:34:31.933 --> 00:34:37.307 Speaker 1: It is shifting from historical reporting to predictive navigation. But here's the critical connection back 515 00:34:37.307 --> 00:34:42.682 Speaker 1: to the architecture we're discussing: none of that predictive navigation is possible on the old 516 00:34:42.682 --> 00:34:44.115 Speaker 1: Project Online architecture, right? 517 00:34:44.115 --> 00:34:50.096 Speaker 2: It is technically impossible. Think back to our discussion about the difference between flat files 518 00:34:50.096 --> 00:34:56.078 Speaker 2: in Azure and relational structures in Dataverse. For an AI agent to accurately read a 519 00:34:56.078 --> 00:35:02.059 Speaker 2: project's health, identify risks, and suggest viable actions, it requires highly structured, governed, and mathematically 520 00:35:02.059 --> 00:35:02.857 Speaker 2: interconnected data. 521 00:35:02.857 --> 00:35:07.542 Speaker 1: Right. If your project data is siloed in legacy databases, or your metadata is scattered 522 00:35:07.542 --> 00:35:12.228 Speaker 1: across loosely governed SharePoint sites, the AI cannot piece together the true context of the 523 00:35:12.228 --> 00:35:16.913 Speaker 1: project. It's like asking a GPS to calculate a route from New York to LA, 524 00:35:16.913 --> 00:35:21.599 Speaker 1: but instead of a digital map, you just hand the system a shoebox full of 525 00:35:21.599 --> 00:35:23.473 Speaker 1: loose Polaroids of different street corners. 526 00:35:23.473 --> 00:35:24.410 Speaker 2: That's a great image. 527 00:35:24.410 --> 00:35:27.222 Speaker 1: It has no idea how the data connects. It can't route you. 528 00:35:27.222 --> 00:35:33.915 Speaker 2: It can't. And honestly, the risk profile of deploying AI on ungoverned data goes far 529 00:35:33.915 --> 00:35:40.609 Speaker 2: beyond it simply failing to work. If an organization's permissions and data governance aren't flawlessly 530 00:35:40.609 --> 00:35:45.964 Speaker 2: structured—which Dataverse inherently enforces through RBAC—the AI becomes a massive security vulnerability. 531 00:35:45.964 --> 00:35:49.980 Speaker 1: Because the AI will just surface whatever data the user technically has access to, even 532 00:35:49.980 --> 00:35:51.586 Speaker 1: if they really shouldn't see it. 533 00:35:51.586 --> 00:35:56.525 Speaker 2: Exactly. If you point Copilot at a legacy ungoverned SharePoint architecture, and say a junior 534 00:35:56.525 --> 00:36:01.464 Speaker 2: developer asks the chatbot, "Hey, what is the biggest financial risk to the Q4 release?", 535 00:36:01.464 --> 00:36:03.769 Speaker 2: the AI will scour the entire tenant. 536 00:36:03.769 --> 00:36:04.169 Speaker 1: Uh-oh. 537 00:36:07.048 --> 00:36:09.508 Speaker 2: And if a project manager accidentally left a confidential budget cuts spreadsheet in an open 538 00:36:09.508 --> 00:36:10.328 Speaker 2: SharePoint folder two years ago... 539 00:36:10.328 --> 00:36:11.265 Speaker 1: The AI finds it. 540 00:36:11.265 --> 00:36:15.219 Speaker 2: Copilot might pull that unstructured document and casually inform the junior developer that the biggest 541 00:36:15.219 --> 00:36:19.172 Speaker 2: risk to the project is that half their team is scheduled to be laid off 542 00:36:19.172 --> 00:36:19.699 Speaker 2: in November. 543 00:36:19.699 --> 00:36:24.385 Speaker 1: That is a catastrophic data breach executed by your own productivity tool. 544 00:36:24.385 --> 00:36:30.103 Speaker 2: And that is precisely why the source material emphasizes over and over that strict data 545 00:36:30.103 --> 00:36:35.821 Speaker 2: governance is the prerequisite for AI. You cannot deploy intelligent, secure AI without a strictly 546 00:36:35.821 --> 00:36:41.539 Speaker 2: governed data foundation. Dataverse provides that foundation. Project Online's legacy architecture simply could not support 547 00:36:41.539 --> 00:36:46.875 Speaker 2: the security, the relational logic, and the scale required to run enterprise AI safely. 548 00:36:46.875 --> 00:36:52.301 Speaker 1: So this migration is truly a forced evolution. Microsoft is tearing down the old infrastructure 549 00:36:52.301 --> 00:36:57.726 Speaker 1: because it is quite literally a hazard to the AI future they are building. And 550 00:36:57.726 --> 00:37:03.151 Speaker 1: the market data backs up this aggressive pivot. The source quotes IDC forecasting that the 551 00:37:03.151 --> 00:37:07.491 Speaker 1: project and portfolio management software market will reach $13.6 billion by 2029. 552 00:37:07.491 --> 00:37:14.520 Speaker 2: Yeah, that represents a 12.8% compound annual growth rate. That financial forecast clearly indicates that 553 00:37:14.520 --> 00:37:20.611 Speaker 2: this cloud-native, AI-driven, highly integrated approach to work management is an industry-wide inevitability. 554 00:37:20.611 --> 00:37:21.548 Speaker 1: You can't hide from it. 555 00:37:21.548 --> 00:37:27.937 Speaker 2: You can't. Organizations that resist modernizing their data architecture now, clinging to legacy on-premises workflows, 556 00:37:27.937 --> 00:37:34.327 Speaker 2: will simply be outmaneuvered and outcompeted by organizations whose delivery teams are augmented by AI. 557 00:37:34.327 --> 00:37:35.605 Speaker 2: It's that simple. 558 00:37:35.605 --> 00:37:40.733 Speaker 1: But this massive injection of AI raises a very real existential question for the people 559 00:37:40.733 --> 00:37:45.862 Speaker 1: actually doing the work. I mean, if Copilot is generating the work breakdown structure, assigning 560 00:37:45.862 --> 00:37:50.991 Speaker 1: the tasks based on capacity, monitoring the critical path for slippage, and automatically producing the 561 00:37:50.991 --> 00:37:56.119 Speaker 1: weekly status reports for the executive steering committee... what is the human project manager actually 562 00:37:56.119 --> 00:38:00.906 Speaker 1: doing? Are they just sitting there clicking "Approve" on the AI's suggestions all day? 563 00:38:00.906 --> 00:38:06.589 Speaker 2: It is a very valid anxiety, but I think it misinterprets the function of the 564 00:38:06.589 --> 00:38:12.271 Speaker 2: role. The role of the project manager isn't disappearing; it's being aggressively elevated. The fundamental 565 00:38:12.271 --> 00:38:17.954 Speaker 2: shift is moving away from data entry and chasing status updates towards strategic governance and 566 00:38:17.954 --> 00:38:18.711 Speaker 2: human alignment. 567 00:38:18.711 --> 00:38:23.397 Speaker 1: Think about the day-to-day reality of a traditional project manager right now. They spend an 568 00:38:23.397 --> 00:38:28.082 Speaker 1: absurd amount of their week just nagging developers for status updates on Slack, manually dragging 569 00:38:28.082 --> 00:38:32.768 Speaker 1: bars on a Gantt chart when someone calls in sick, and, you know, formatting PowerPoint 570 00:38:32.768 --> 00:38:36.516 Speaker 1: slides so the font sizes match for the Friday steering committee meeting. 571 00:38:36.516 --> 00:38:43.004 Speaker 2: It's exhausting. And that is all operational friction. It is low-value administrative overhead. The AI 572 00:38:43.004 --> 00:38:49.491 Speaker 2: handles the operational friction. By offloading the mechanical tracking and reporting to Copilot, the human 573 00:38:49.491 --> 00:38:53.384 Speaker 2: project manager is freed to actually manage the strategy. 574 00:38:53.384 --> 00:38:54.321 Speaker 1: They can do what humans are good at. 575 00:38:54.321 --> 00:39:01.349 Speaker 2: Right. They can focus on negotiating with difficult stakeholders, managing the complex portfolio priorities, and 576 00:39:01.349 --> 00:39:08.378 Speaker 2: navigating the nuanced, unquantifiable human elements of team dynamics and organizational politics that AI just 577 00:39:08.378 --> 00:39:09.315 Speaker 2: cannot process. 578 00:39:09.315 --> 00:39:13.707 Speaker 1: The human becomes the strategic pilot. You rely on the AI autopilot to handle the 579 00:39:13.707 --> 00:39:18.100 Speaker 1: micro-adjustments of the wind and the altitude, so you can focus entirely on navigating the 580 00:39:18.100 --> 00:39:18.686 Speaker 1: storm ahead. 581 00:39:18.686 --> 00:39:25.714 Speaker 2: Exactly. The human manages the vision and the relationships; the AI manages the mechanical execution. 582 00:39:25.714 --> 00:39:32.742 Speaker 2: But—and this is the key—that synergy only materializes if the underlying data foundation—the Dataverse architecture, 583 00:39:32.742 --> 00:39:39.302 Speaker 2: the strict governance, the Power Platform integrations—is built correctly during this narrow migration window. 584 00:39:39.302 --> 00:39:54.636 Speaker 1: This has been an incredibly dense, highly technical deep dive. Let's synthesize the absolute core 585 00:39:54.636 --> 00:40:01.792 Speaker 1: takeaways for anyone staring down this transition: 586 00:40:01.792 --> 00:40:06.904 Speaker 2: Absolutely. Do not expect Planner Premium to be a reskinned version of your legacy environment. 587 00:40:06.904 --> 00:40:12.015 Speaker 2: You must understand the profound architectural shift from flat tasks storage to the relational, governed 588 00:40:12.015 --> 00:40:13.038 Speaker 2: power of Dataverse. 589 00:40:13.038 --> 00:40:28.433 Speaker 1: You have to choose your modernization path based on your actual operational reality, not just 590 00:40:28.433 --> 00:40:34.591 Speaker 1: feature parity. Use the decision framework: 591 00:40:34.591 --> 00:40:40.838 Speaker 2: And if you are running an end-to-end, billable professional services operation, you must adopt Dynamics 592 00:40:40.838 --> 00:40:42.088 Speaker 2: 365 Project Operations. 593 00:40:42.088 --> 00:40:47.325 Speaker 1: And above all, you must treat this transition as an opportunity to aggressively clean house. 594 00:40:47.325 --> 00:40:52.561 Speaker 1: Do not succumb to the lift-and-shift mentality. Audit your environment, redesign your reporting, establish strict 595 00:40:52.561 --> 00:40:57.798 Speaker 1: Dataverse governance, and shed the legacy technical debt. Don't try to plug your leaky gas 596 00:40:57.798 --> 00:40:59.893 Speaker 1: pipes into the new smart grid. 597 00:40:59.893 --> 00:41:00.830 Speaker 2: Very well said. 598 00:41:00.830 --> 00:41:06.009 Speaker 1: I want to leave you with one final, provocative concept to mull over as you 599 00:41:06.009 --> 00:41:11.187 Speaker 1: begin mapping out your new architecture today. We spent a lot of time discussing how 600 00:41:11.187 --> 00:41:16.366 Speaker 1: Copilot reads the structured data in Dataverse—you know, the task durations, the dependencies, the resource 601 00:41:16.366 --> 00:41:21.545 Speaker 1: costs—to predict a project's health. But if Microsoft's ecosystem is truly unifying all enterprise data 602 00:41:21.545 --> 00:41:26.723 Speaker 1: under the Microsoft 365 umbrella, what happens when the AI starts factoring in the unstructured 603 00:41:26.723 --> 00:41:27.069 Speaker 1: data? 604 00:41:27.069 --> 00:41:28.943 Speaker 2: Oh, the behavioral layer. 605 00:41:28.943 --> 00:41:33.982 Speaker 1: Exactly. What happens when Copilot is trained to factor in the tone of your development 606 00:41:33.982 --> 00:41:39.021 Speaker 1: team's Teams chats? What happens when it analyzes the frequency of panicked emails sent after 607 00:41:39.021 --> 00:41:44.060 Speaker 1: 10:00 PM, or the sudden increase in muted microphones during weekly standup meetings, and feeds 608 00:41:44.060 --> 00:41:46.748 Speaker 1: that telemetry into a project's risk assessment algorithm? 609 00:41:46.748 --> 00:41:47.685 Speaker 2: That changes everything. 610 00:41:47.685 --> 00:41:53.966 Speaker 1: If the platform connects absolutely everything, are we rapidly moving toward a future where the 611 00:41:53.966 --> 00:42:00.246 Speaker 1: health of a multi-million-dollar project is measured not just by whether the tasks are checked 612 00:42:00.246 --> 00:42:06.527 Speaker 1: off, but by the digital behavioral footprint of the team executing it? If the AI 613 00:42:06.527 --> 00:42:12.807 Speaker 1: senses the team's internal chat sentiment turning deeply negative and fragmented, does it automatically flag 614 00:42:12.807 --> 00:42:19.088 Speaker 1: the project to the C-suite as "at risk," even if the Gantt chart is perfectly 615 00:42:19.088 --> 00:42:25.368 Speaker 1: green? It is a fascinating, slightly terrifying frontier to consider as you build the foundation 616 00:42:25.368 --> 00:42:27.043 Speaker 1: for this intelligence today. 617 00:42:34.043 --> 00:42:38.000 Announcer: You've been listening to Support Engineering Weekly from the Support Engineering Blog. For the full 618 00:42:38.000 --> 00:42:46.050 Announcer: articles, references, and technical resources from today's discussion, visit the URL blog.sadhan.ch.