Bridging the Skills Gap: Empowering Non-Coders to Automate Workflows in M365
Namstey Folks 🙏, As we look at digital transformation, one of the biggest bottlenecks is the skills gap in handling complex operational workflows. With the rise of modern M365 extensions and Power Platform capabilities, the barrier to entry is shifting. We can now build robust solutions directly inside SharePoint without needing heavy custom code. From what I’ve seen, the benefits of going the low-code/no-code route within the M365 ecosystem are clear: - Faster Deployment: Building internal workflows directly where teams already work cuts out weeks of standard dev cycles. - Empowered Teams: Operations teams can patch their own inefficiencies without waiting in a long IT queue. However, it also opens up real strategic questions around data governance, compliance, and keeping these citizen-developed solutions maintainable over time. How is your organization approaching upskilling for this? Are you training existing operational teams to build their own tools within the Microsoft ecosystem, or is IT still handling everything from the top down? Let's build robust solutions
Request to merge multiple Microsoft Learn certification IDs
Hello Microsoft Learn Support Team, I was advised by Pearson VUE and Microsoft Support to contact Microsoft Learn to request merging of my certification profiles. I have paid for the PL-900 exam, but the exam confirmation and status are not visible due to multiple Microsoft Learn IDs. The following Microsoft Learn IDs need to be merged: - ms1100781607 - ms1100998551 - ms1100999029 Kindly help merge these IDs and associate my PL-900 exam correctly. Thank you.Microsoft Power Platform Developers Blueprint Survey Opportunity
Greetings! Microsoft is updating the certification for Microsoft Power Platform Developers, and we need your input through our exam blueprinting survey. The blueprint determines how many questions each skill in the exam will be assigned. Please complete the online survey by May 27, 2026. Please also feel free to forward the survey to any colleagues you consider subject matter experts for this certification. If you have any questions, feel free to contact John Sowles at josowles@microsoft.com or Don Tanedo at dtanedo@microsoft.com. Microsoft Power Platform Developers blueprint survey link: https://www.starttest.com/starttest2/startsurvey?programid=187&guid=5E2B3AA4-0C24-43A1-99A2-F5BF6F5955E1New Idea
Hi Team, I have been an extensive user of Microsoft Teams and the broader Microsoft ecosystem for a significant period, and I genuinely appreciate the continuous innovation that enhances modern collaboration. From my experience in IT, especially while working with cross-functional stakeholders, I find the meeting recording and automated summary features extremely valuable. However, I would like to propose an enhancement based on real-world challenges. In meetings where both technical and non-technical stakeholders are present, discussions often become highly technical, making it difficult for business participants to fully understand. This can lead to reduced engagement and misalignment. Suggested Enhancement: It would be highly beneficial if Microsoft Teams could generate two types of meeting summaries: Technical Summary: Detailed and suitable for engineering teams Business Summary: Simplified and easy to understand for non-technical stakeholders Example: Technical: We are integrating multiple third-party APIs. Simplified: Think of it like an airport control tower. Different airlines operate independently, but the control tower coordinates everything to ensure smooth operations. Our system is improving that coordination to make things faster and more reliable. Technical: We optimized the rendering pipeline. Simplified: We improved the application speed, reducing wait time from several seconds to almost instant. Why this matters: Improves understanding across teams Enhances decision-making Reduces communication gaps Makes collaboration more effective I believe this feature would significantly enhance Microsoft Teams and create a more inclusive experience for all stakeholders. Thank you.Microsoft Power Platform Fundamentals Blueprint Survey Opportunity
Greetings! Microsoft is updating a credential for Microsoft Power Platform Fundamentals, and we need your input through our exam blueprinting survey. The blueprint determines how many questions each skill in the exam will be assigned. Please complete the online survey by April 23, 2026. Please also feel free to forward the survey to any colleagues you consider subject matter experts for this certification. You may send this to people external to Microsoft as well. If you have any questions, feel free to contact John Sowles at josowles@microsoft.com or Don Tanedo at dtanedo@microsoft.com. Microsoft Power Platform Fundamentals blueprint survey link: https://microsoftlearning.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_0HhsR39KQNuU2PQPlease clarify the numbering system in Microsoft exams
I am trying to make sense of exam numbers in Microsoft Certification poster. https://arch-center.azureedge.net/Credentials/Certification-Poster_en-us.pdf. For example I notice most azure exam numbers start with 1xx. That gives me the impression that 1xx could be related to Infrastructure. But I am not sure if that is the correct understanding. For example all fundamental exams are numbered 9xx. So are exams numbered differently in role based certifications? What is the numbering pattern and practice in role based certifications? Again one might assume that all architect exams may have the same number pattern but they don’t. Some patterns emerge when it comes to Windows certification - 8xx. Collaboration and communication - 7xx except MB 700. So it appears even under role based certifications the numbering pattern may be different depending on the technology or platform or product. I have not found any authoritative material on the internet form anyone in Microsoft or an MVP on this topic. Some clarification on this topic will help to put at rest years of curiosity and confusion in the community. Thank you.Per certification designed badges
Hi First Microsoft opted out from awesome Credly (awesome, as learners collected “all” personal certifications in one place, no matter the vendor - easy to share the Credly profile link for various reasons) And now you have quit creating “per certification branded badge”s, and only provide standard “Associate” & “Expert” badges with a “Learn diploma) showing the name of the certification “in text” (the new Fabric exam as example) For us globally in roles like “Alliance Managers”, “Partner Managers”, driving and summarizing partners excellence in the area of Microsoft + pushing with marketing us and Microsoft- this is bad! Example on how we earlier are using the per certification badges Is it just by mistake you have taken this path? Or is it just me and my learners that have missed where they can download per exam branded badges for newer certifications now? Regards GabrielIntelligent App Builder Blueprint Survey Opportunity
Greetings! Microsoft is considering a certification for the Intelligent App Builder role, and we need your input through our exam blueprinting survey. The blueprint determines how many questions each skill in the exam will be assigned. Please complete the online survey by February 10 th , 2026. Please also feel free to forward the survey to any colleagues you consider subject matter experts for this certification. If you have any questions, feel free to contact John Sowles at josowles@microsoft.com or Don Tanedo at dtanedo@microsoft.com. Intelligent App Builder blueprint survey link: https://microsoftlearning.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8cyBB5RmAQ9EF8O Thank you!
How to Send POS Sales Data from Power Apps to Corporate API via Power Automate Using Static IP
I am currently using a POS system built with Power Apps, where sales transaction data is saved into SharePoint using Power Automate Cloud. From the Power App, users explicitly click a button to trigger a Power Automate flow, which then sends the sales data to an external corporate company’s database through an HTTP API. The corporate system enforces strict security policies and only accepts incoming requests from a whitelisted static public IP address. Since Power Automate Cloud runs in a Microsoft-managed multi-tenant environment, its outbound traffic originates from dynamic and shared IP addresses, which cannot be directly whitelisted. Due to security and compliance requirements, the solution must remain 100% cloud-based, and the use of Power Automate Desktop, on-premises data gateway, or any locally executed components is not permitted. I understand that Power Automate Cloud alone cannot provide a static outbound IP, and that the recommended pattern is to route outbound API calls through an Azure-hosted intermediary (such as Logic Apps single-tenant or a similar service) configured with a static public IP, which Power Automate Cloud can call via HTTP. I would appreciate confirmation that this is the correct and supported architecture, and any guidance on the simplest cloud-only approach for this scenario. Thank you in advance for your support.Copilot Studio Agent Developer Blueprint Survey Opportunity
Microsoft is considering a credential for Copilot Studio Agent Developer, and we need your input through our exam blueprinting survey. The blueprint determines how many questions each skill in the exam will be assigned. Please complete the online survey by January 7, 2026. Please also feel free to forward the survey to any colleagues you consider subject matter experts for this certification. If you have any questions, feel free to contact John Sowles at josowles@microsoft.com or Don Tanedo at dtanedo@microsoft.com. Copilot Studio Agent Developer blueprint survey link: https://microsoftlearning.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_0koFUKnBUrHsKRo
