Introduction
Have you ever been tasked with performing a fit-gap analysis? And what is it anyway?
By definition, a fit-gap analysis is a business tool used to identify the differences (gaps) between current business processes and system functionalities versus the desired outcomes or requirements.
It sounds straightforward, right?
However, when it comes to D365 or Power Platform fit-gap, the process is slightly different.
It involves an analysis between business requirements and specific D365 CE modules or Power Platform in general.
While it may seem simple, I often find that performing this type of fit-gap analysis can be more challenging than expected.
In this post, I'll dive into the different "flavours" of a fit-gap analysis, how I approach its various aspects and share some real-world examples to bring it to life.
Over the years, I've had to conduct fit-gap analyses across several contexts, and each situation taught me something new. Let's explore what I learnt!
Requirements Mapping
Let’s assume this scenario: we just completed a workshop and we have a set of high-level requirements. Our customer previously saw some D365 demos, so is eager to adopt it as their new system, perhaps for sales or case management.
The beauty of D365 CE is that it comes packed with pre-built features and a robust Dataverse, including standard tables for typical scenarios. But how do we align these existing features with the customer's unique needs?
We can map them together by undertaking a fit-gap analysis. In this context, we identify which existing system features meet (fit) the business requirements and where they fall short (gap).
For example, take a customer who is a professional training provider that needs to:
Capture incoming training requests,
Maintain a list of the business clients and their contacts,
Manage a catalogue of training offerings and prices,
Create training proposals for clients,
Maintain a list of trainers,
Send notifications to both clients and trainers.
We can map our tables as follows:
* We can either convince our customer to apply the new table terminology or use the Translator tool from XrmToolBox to rename the tables and respective forms, views, etc.
Mapping these requirements to existing tables/features is usually a smooth process - until it isn't.
The final requirement, notifications, can sometimes be tricky. Often, our customers expect that an out-of-the-box solution to meet their needs exactly. Since they're investing in expensive software, they are hesitant to any additional implementation or customisation costs as it usually also leads to ongoing support expenses.
Power Platform offers various means of implementing the notifications starting from the classic emails (that no one seems to read after a while) to the more modern, in-app notifications.
But is this a “fit” if we need to build a custom workflow or Power Automate Flow? Can we confidently call it a fit when it requires a week of development effort we need to implement some complex logic? These grey areas can leave even the most experienced professionals questioning their approach. So, if you've found yourself in this boat, you're not alone!
The Concept of a Partial Fit
To overcome this, I often use the concept of a "partial fit."
I explain to customers that while their requirements can be met, they will require the use of e.g. Power Automate to fully deliver the required outcome. This approach reassures them that Power Platform is a solid investment, while also being transparent about the need for some extra development to meet their unique needs.
How do you handle this? Do you label it as a fit, a gap, or something in between?
The Competitive Fit-Gap Analysis
In other scenarios, the fit-gap analysis isn’t just about labelling features – it becomes a competition, especially when customers are still in the decision-making phase.
Why? Some customers might use the fit-gap analysis to evaluate and compare multiple options, such as D365, Power Platform, and non-Microsoft products.
In these cases, my goal is to ensure that D365/Power Platform comes out on top - or at least holds its own - by having the most "fit" for the requirements where possible.
I usually achieve that by explaining some alternative approaches to deliver the same outcome – all the customers I worked with so far were always open to the new ways of working and to the proposed process improvements!
Unavoidable Gaps
But on the other hand, some “gaps” cannot be avoided…
For instance, one customer wanted users to have the ability to set their own preferences for notifications when e.g. a case status changes.
While tools like Azure DevOps offer this as a standard feature, it is not easily possible with D365/Power Platform. Yes, we can build it, but it would require custom development. This is one of those requirements where even a “partial fit” feels like a stretch.
Integration requirements often fall into the grey category too.
My approach? If a custom connector or plugin is required, I usually consider it as a gap. However, if I can leverage Power Automate and existing connectors, I would classify it as a partial gap.
But if the customers need integration with less common software, it's more likely that other platforms will face similar challenges. Nonetheless, it feels like marking something as a gap can still weigh heavily on the customers’ final decision, doesn’t it?
The “Fit Percentage” Dilemma
Also, please be aware that some customers can be really “number-driven” and they will make their decisions based purely on which solution has the highest percentage of “fit,” which yes… It can be frustrating!
While D365 and Power Platform usually score well, losing a prospect makes you wonder if it was the fit-gap score, the cost, or something else that tipped the scales.
Conclusion: A Tool, Not Just Validation
At the end of the day, the fit-gap analysis is a powerful tool that helps in the early design stages, ensuring our solutions align with a “product-first principle”.
However, when comparing different options, it’s crucial to go beyond a simple checkbox exercise. The real goal is to give customers a long-term vision of how investing in Power Platform will benefit their business and add tangible value.
With Microsoft continuously adding new features and enhancements, I can see more “fits” than ever before, making the future of fit-gap analysis even more exciting!