Defining Your BATNA: Alternatives to Microsoft’s Deal

Introduction: Why a BATNA Matters with Microsoft

In any negotiation, BATNA – your Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement is essentially your Plan B. It’s the answer to “What will we do if we can’t reach a deal?”

In the context of Microsoft licensing, defining a strong BATNA is especially critical. Microsoft’s size and product dominance often make companies feel locked in, as if they have no choice but to accept whatever renewal terms are offered.

Without a BATNA, Microsoft holds all the leverage; they know you must sign, so they have little incentive to offer concessions.

This is why having credible alternative options is essential for leverage. Read our complete guide to building Leverage in Microsoft Negotiations: Frameworks and Buyer Strategies.

Think of a Microsoft Enterprise Agreement (EA) renewal: Microsoft might assume you’ll simply renew and absorb any price hikes or unfriendly terms because the business depends on their software. If you have no alternative plan, that assumption is true – you’re stuck.

However, the moment you introduce a viable fallback (whether it’s an alternate licensing route or even a competitor’s product), the power dynamic shifts. Suddenly, Microsoft has to work to keep your business.

A well-defined BATNA for Microsoft licensing negotiations means you aren’t forced to take a bad deal.

Instead, you can confidently push back on price increases or rigid conditions because you know you have a fallback.

This article will serve as a roadmap for creating a credible Microsoft BATNA strategy, a clear Plan B that ensures you won’t be left with “take it or leave it” as your only option.

Step 1: Understand Microsoft’s Leverage vs. Yours

The first step is recognizing the imbalance of leverage in a typical Microsoft negotiation. Microsoft sales representatives negotiate software contracts every day, and they are keenly aware of how reliant most organizations are on Microsoft’s ecosystem.

Many enterprises feel trapped by this reliance – productivity suites, cloud services, Windows OS, and other tools that have become deeply ingrained in daily operations. Microsoft often assumes you’re locked in for exactly this reason.

Without a BATNA, that assumption becomes reality. If you must renew to keep your business running, Microsoft can dictate terms (like annual uplifts or less flexibility), knowing you have no real alternative.

Consider what happens if you don’t prepare a fallback: you may end up accepting a steep price uplift or unfavorable terms (like a longer contract or bundled products you don’t need) simply because the business can’t afford a lapse in Microsoft licenses.

We’ve seen companies reluctantly agree to 20% cost increases or to buy additional products they weren’t planning on, solely due to this lack of alternatives. The key realization is that having a BATNA, even if you never actually use it, changes the dynamic.

When Microsoft knows (or senses) you have other options, for instance, the ability to shift some workloads elsewhere or delay certain deployments, the negotiation stops being one-sided.

You gain the power to walk away or at least seriously consider a Plan B, which forces Microsoft to take your demands more seriously.

In short, understanding the current leverage (Microsoft’s default upper hand) versus your potential leverage (with a strong BATNA in place) sets the stage for a much more balanced negotiation.

Step 2: Identify Alternative Microsoft Licensing Programs

One of the most straightforward BATNAs in a Microsoft deal is simply using Microsoft’s own alternative licensing programs.

If you’re coming off an Enterprise Agreement, you are not obliged to sign a new EA if the terms aren’t right – you have other routes to stay licensed.

The two main alternatives are the Cloud Solution Provider (CSP) program and the Microsoft Customer Agreement (MCA):

• Enterprise Agreement (EA): The traditional EA is a 3-year contract covering your whole organization. It often yields good volume discounts but comes with rigid commitments. For instance, you usually need at least 500 users or devices, and you’re locked into that agreement term. Reductions in licenses can only happen at certain anniversary true-ups. Microsoft likes EAs because they guarantee revenue for multiple years, but this also means if your needs change, you have limited flexibility.
• Cloud Solution Provider (CSP): CSP is Microsoft’s partner-led licensing model that offers a viable Plan B if an EA renewal falters. Under CSP, you buy licenses through a Microsoft partner (reseller) on a subscription basis. The terms are much more flexible – you can often go month-to-month or annual, adjust quantities as needed at the end of a term, and there’s no large upfront commitment or minimum seat count. This means if you can’t get a reasonable deal via EA, you could move some or all of your users to CSP subscriptions. For example, instead of a single 3-year commitment, you might opt for a 12-month CSP contract for Office 365 or Azure, giving you breathing room and leverage. Pros: CSP can offer flexible, shorter terms and the ability to scale down if needed. Many CSP partners also bundle support or managed services, adding value. Risks/Cons: Discounts under CSP might be smaller than a well-negotiated EA discount, since pricing is often at set rates (partners may give some discount, but not as deep as a big EA might). Also, switching to CSP might involve transitioning how billing and support are handled (via the partner). It’s important to evaluate if the slight premium for flexibility is worth it (often it is if you need freedom from a strict contract).
• Microsoft Customer Agreement (MCA): The MCA is Microsoft’s newer direct purchasing agreement. It’s an evergreen contract (no expiration) that lets you buy cloud services (like Azure or Microsoft 365 subscriptions) directly from Microsoft on a pay-as-you-go or subscription basis, without an EA. Essentially, it’s Microsoft’s way to allow direct monthly or annual subscriptions, similar to CSP but directly managed. Pros: No fixed term – you can add or remove services as needed, and you are not tied into a multi-year cycle. It’s also digital and streamlined, so adding new services is quick. Risks/Cons: Pricing under MCA is generally at list price or at least without the custom volume discounts of an EA. If you had special pricing in your EA, moving to MCA could mean a cost increase unless you negotiate something. However, as a fallback, MCA ensures you won’t lose access to critical Microsoft services just because an EA deal wasn’t reached. Some large organizations use an MCA after an EA expires as a stopgap to continue service while negotiating, or as a permanent solution if they prefer flexibility over maximum discount.

When is moving to CSP or MCA a realistic fallback?

Suppose your EA renewal negotiations are not going well (e.g., Microsoft is pushing an unpalatable 25% price increase or forcing you to bundle additional products). In that case, you can prepare to let the EA expire and transition to CSP/MCA.

This may involve working with a licensing partner in advance to obtain CSP price quotes for your current usage. It’s a credible scenario: many mid-sized firms and even some enterprises have opted not to renew an EA and instead buy what they need via CSP on shorter terms.

Microsoft certainly prefers you renew the EA, but they know you can go to CSP – and that knowledge alone can give you bargaining power. It signals: “We have a Plan B for our licensing; if the EA terms aren’t acceptable, we won’t simply sign whatever is put in front of us.”

Just be sure to analyze the financial difference – perhaps your annual costs might be a bit higher under CSP, but that could be an acceptable trade-off for flexibility.

Also consider hybrid approaches: you might renew an EA for core products, but shift certain workloads (say, a chunk of Azure development environments or a subset of Office 365 seats for a branch subsidiary) to CSP to reduce your EA commitment.

Knowing these alternative licensing options in detail arms you with a negotiation fallback within the Microsoft ecosystem itself.

Do your homework, Should-Cost Modeling: Calculate What You Should Pay.

Step 3: Evaluate Non-Microsoft Substitutes

A powerful BATNA doesn’t always come from Microsoft’s catalogue – it can come from competitors.

Even if you ultimately don’t intend to switch vendors wholesale, exploring non-Microsoft alternatives for key products can dramatically strengthen your negotiation stance.

Microsoft is well aware of its main competitors, and it hates losing even a slice of its business to them.

Here are some substitute options to consider:

• Productivity Suite Alternatives (Microsoft 365 vs. Google Workspace): Microsoft 365 (formerly Office 365) is the de facto standard for email, documents, and collaboration in many enterprises. However, Google Workspace is a viable alternative for many organizations. If Microsoft is proposing a big price increase on your Office 365 Enterprise subscriptions, you could evaluate Google Workspace’s offerings and pricing. Perhaps run a pilot with a small department. Even a limited pilot sends a message: you can pivot to Google’s cloud productivity tools if needed. The mere fact that leadership is considering Google can make Microsoft more flexible on pricing or contract terms for M365. Pros of Google Workspace: Often simpler licensing, potentially lower costs, and it drives home the point that productivity tools aren’t a Microsoft monopoly. Cons/risks: Switching an organization off Outlook/Office is a significant change management undertaking. User retraining and data migration would be significant so that this BATNA might be more of a leverage play than a full switch. Still, some companies have done it, and even the possibility can be persuasive in negotiations.
• Cloud Infrastructure Alternatives (Azure vs. AWS/GCP): If a big part of your Microsoft spend is Azure, remember that Amazon Web Services and Google Cloud Platform are strong competitors. To build a BATNA here, you could get comparative quotes or run benchmarks for some of your Azure workloads on AWS or GCP. Cloud providers often offer incentive credits to attract new customers or expansions. For example, AWS might offer $100k in credits or discounted rates to lure a workload away from Azure. If Microsoft knows you’re comparing cloud providers, they may sharpen their pencil on your Azure pricing or throw in additional Azure credits to dissuade any move. Pros: Multi-cloud strategies can sometimes yield cost savings or at least negotiation leverage. Even moving a specific workload (say, backing up data to AWS S3 storage instead of Azure Blob storage) can save money and signal that you won’t put all your eggs in one basket. Cons: Migrating cloud workloads carries technical effort and risk. It might not be trivial to port an application from Azure to AWS, so you should only cite this alternative if it’s technically feasible for your team. Still, many organizations are already multi-cloud, which makes this BATNA quite credible.
• Business Applications (Teams/Dynamics vs. Other Vendors): Microsoft often bundles and upsells products such as Teams (collaboration and telephony), Dynamics 365 (CRM/ERP), and Power BI (analytics), among others. Identify where you have viable competitors: e.g., Zoom or Cisco Webex vs. Teams for conferencing, Slack vs. Teams for chat, Salesforce or SAP vs. Dynamics 365 for CRM, Tableau vs. Power BI for analytics, etc. You don’t need an exact one-to-one replacement for every Microsoft product. Still, if Microsoft is pushing you to adopt or renew something non-essential, you can remind them that alternative options exist. Maybe your company already uses Salesforce for CRM – that’s a strong BATNA against any Dynamics 365 pitch. Or if Teams Phone System licensing is too costly, you could stick with your current telephony provider or Zoom. Even partial alternatives create leverage: For instance, if you threaten to keep using Zoom for webinars instead of buying more Teams licensing, Microsoft might offer a discount on Teams to entice consolidation. The goal isn’t to run five different platforms for the same thing, but to show Microsoft that you are not afraid to stick with (or switch to) another vendor if their price isn’t right.

In evaluating substitutes, it’s important to be realistic. Don’t claim you’ll move everything to Linux and LibreOffice or shut down Azure completely unless those are genuinely on the table. However, even a hybrid approach (like moving 10% of your workloads or doing a dual-vendor strategy) can be effective.

It reminds Microsoft that its market share doesn’t equal total captivity of your account.

Often, just having done the homework on alternatives, getting quotes, doing trials, consulting reference cases of other companies who switched, gives you the confidence to say “No” to a bad deal, knowing your business won’t grind to a halt.

It’s the classic negotiation principle: the side with more credible options wins a better deal.

Step 4: Leverage Internal Flexibility as a BATNA

Not every BATNA has to involve a different supplier or contract.

Sometimes, the best alternative is an internal strategy – adjusting your own plans and usage to reduce dependence on Microsoft’s proposed deal.

Essentially, you create breathing room by being flexible with timing, scope, or consumption of Microsoft products.

Here are some internal “Plan B” moves that strengthen your position:

• Delaying Upgrades or New Deployments: Microsoft sales teams love to upsell customers on the latest product editions or add-ons (e.g,. moving from Office 365 E3 to E5, or adopting a new security bundle). If you find those upgrades valuable, by all means negotiate for them – but if the terms are too costly, be willing to delay. For example, if you can’t get a reasonable price on an upgrade to Microsoft 365 E5 or the new AI-powered add-ons, your BATNA could be not adopting them this year. Stick with your current edition longer, or postpone that project. By planning for this internally, you’re not bluffing; you truly can tell Microsoft, “If we can’t get this within budget, we will hold off until later.” Delaying a big spend is a credible fallback that doesn’t rely on any vendor – it’s your own decision.
• Staggering or Phasing License Additions: Similar to delaying, you might plan to phase your license increases or rollouts. Let’s say your company is growing and you anticipate needing 1,000 more Office 365 seats next year. Instead of committing all upfront in a renewal, your BATNA could be phasing them 250 per quarter or as needed. If Microsoft’s offer isn’t favorable, you can add licenses gradually under your current agreement or via month-to-month subscriptions until a better deal is found. This way, Microsoft doesn’t have the pressure point of “You need all these on day 1 of the renewal.” You have a fallback approach to add capacity in smaller chunks on your terms.
• Audit and Cut “Shelfware”: A highly effective internal BATNA is the removal of unnecessary licenses altogether. Before negotiations, do a thorough usage audit of your Microsoft licenses – identify unused or under-utilized ones (often called shelfware). You might discover, for instance, that 15% of your purchased licenses aren’t being used (common with things like Visio, Project, or even Office 365 accounts for ex-employees). If Microsoft won’t offer a fair price, one alternative is to simply reduce your purchase volume to only what you actually need. This is essentially saying, “We won’t buy 1,000 licenses at this price – in fact, we might only renew 800 because that’s all we use.” It’s a fallback because if negotiation fails, you can follow through and cut that 200. Microsoft loses out on that business, which they obviously want to avoid – thereby motivating them to find a compromise so you feel comfortable renewing a higher amount. Internally, this strategy also saves money regardless of Microsoft’s response (because you’re not wasting budget on unused licenses).
• Optimizing Existing Entitlements: Look at ways you can reconfigure or make do with what you have. For instance, maximize the use of included features or free alternatives. If you have Software Assurance benefits or credits, plan to use them to extend the life of certain products rather than buying new ones. If Microsoft is pushing a new product, consider if an existing tool you own can cover that need temporarily. By consolidating entitlements – e.g., using Teams for a function instead of buying a separate tool, or vice versa – you can create an internal fallback scenario: you won’t spend on Product X because Product Y (already paid for) is “good enough” for now.

The beauty of an internal BATNA is that it’s entirely under your control.

You’re not dependent on negotiating a new deal with a third party; you are simply adjusting your own consumption or timing.

This can sometimes be the most credible alternative of all because you absolutely can execute it if needed.

For instance, telling Microsoft, “Our backup plan is to defer that Dynamics 365 rollout and use our legacy system one more year,” is very believable – it might not be ideal for you long-term. Still, it’s doable, and Microsoft knows it.

Use this internal flexibility to strengthen your negotiating stance: make it clear that while you’d prefer to partner with Microsoft for new initiatives, you are prepared to slow down or scale back if the deal isn’t right.

No vendor likes the prospect of less revenue, so this approach can push Microsoft to offer more palatable terms to keep your projects on track.

Step 5: Timing and Making Your BATNA Credible

Defining a BATNA is one thing; having Microsoft take it seriously is another.

For your alternative to influence negotiations, it must be both credible and well-timed.

A bluff or vague threat won’t cut it – Microsoft has heard plenty of customers say “We might go elsewhere” without any follow-through. To avoid being dismissed, here’s how to build and communicate a credible BATNA:

• Start Early and Gather Evidence: Credibility comes from preparation. Begin developing your BATNA well in advance of your Microsoft agreement expiring – ideally 6 to 12 months before renewal. This lead time lets you collect evidence supporting your Plan B. For example, issue a request for proposal (RFP) or get quotes from a few CSP partners for the licenses in your EA. Or get a cost estimate from AWS for hosting a representative workload. Perhaps run a small pilot on Google Workspace with 50 users and document the results. Also compile internal data, such as usage reports, to show which licenses you could cut if needed. By the time you sit down with Microsoft, you should have a dossier of sorts: alternative pricing, technical feasibility studies, and internal analyses. You likely won’t show all of this to Microsoft, but it underpins your confidence. If push comes to shove, you can cite specifics (“We have a quote in hand from a CSP that would save us 15% on Azure costs”), which is far more convincing than general talk.
• Make Your BATNA Actionable (Not Just a Bluff): A BATNA has power only if you’re genuinely willing to execute it. Ensure that upper management has approved, in principle, the idea of going with your alternative plan if Microsoft won’t deal. If the CIO or CFO isn’t actually on board with switching vendors or cutting licenses, then it’s not a real BATNA. Part of making it actionable is clearing any internal hurdles: for instance, if your Plan B is to use CSP, line up a partner and get the paperwork ready in case you need to flip the switch. If your Plan B is moving to AWS, identify which applications would move and have your IT architects validate that migration path. These actions make your fallback much more than theoretical. Microsoft will sense the difference – for example, if you say “We’re prepared to shift 20% of our workloads to AWS and we’ve already migrated a pilot project successfully,” that carries weight. It tells Microsoft that if they don’t accommodate you, they truly risk losing a portion of your business.
• Choose the Right Moment to Communicate Your BATNA: Timing is delicate. You don’t want to walk into the first meeting with Microsoft shouting about your Plan B – that can sour the tone. Instead, engage in discovery and see what Microsoft offers. As negotiations progress, if you hit an impasse or if Microsoft’s proposals remain unsatisfactory, that’s the time to remind them of your alternatives. For instance, after a couple of rounds of back-and-forth on price, you might say, “We have serious budget constraints, and we have explored other licensing options if we can’t get closer to our target.” This puts them on notice politely. As you near your decision deadline, you can get more specific: “At this point, if we can’t agree on a maximum 5% increase, we will likely opt to transition 500 users to month-to-month CSP licensing as an interim measure.” Notice this statement isn’t threatening in tone; it’s positioned as a matter-of-fact business decision. The earlier groundwork (quotes, pilots, etc.) means you can say this confidently. It’s not a bluff – it’s a contingent plan you’re ready to execute.
• Be Strategic in What You Reveal: You don’t necessarily have to lay all your cards on the table. Sometimes, hinting at alternatives is enough. Microsoft reps are skilled at gauging how serious a customer is. If you mention, “Our leadership has asked us to compare the EA renewal with a plan B, including offers from other cloud providers and even the possibility of splitting off some services to a CSP,” that alone might prompt Microsoft to seek approvals for better discounts. They realize you’re doing due diligence. However, if they don’t budge, be prepared to show some evidence. You might share, for example, an anonymized quote or mention, “We’ve received a proposal that would cost us $X less over the next year outside of an EA.” Being able to reference a specific number or alternative path shows that you’re not just posturing.
• Leverage Timing Against Microsoft’s Deadlines: Keep in mind, Microsoft has its own timelines (quarterly targets, fiscal year-end pressures). A credible BATNA used at the right time can play into those. Suppose Microsoft knows you’re willing to extend negotiations past the EA end date (using an interim alternative like a short extension or monthly subscriptions). In that case, the sales team loses the ability to pressure you with “the clock is ticking.” They might be the ones facing a ticking clock for their quota. In some cases, if you convey “We’re prepared to take a few months on CSP if needed and revisit this next quarter,” Microsoft may respond with a better offer rather than let the deal slip past their fiscal quarter.

To sum up, a BATNA only helps you if Microsoft believes it’s real. Build that belief by doing your homework and introducing your alternative plan into discussions with tact and timing.

When done right, you won’t come off as combative – you’ll appear as a savvy negotiator with a well-considered backup plan.

That impression alone can make Microsoft more flexible, as they’ll treat you as a customer who won’t simply accept the status quo.

BATNA Options in Microsoft Negotiations:

To visualize how different BATNA scenarios stack up, here’s a quick reference table of common alternatives and their pros and cons:

This table isn’t exhaustive, but it highlights that you have multiple “fallback” paths.

Even combining a couple of these (e.g., cutting some licenses and moving a workload to AWS) could be part of your BATNA mix.

The best option depends on your business’s priorities and capabilities, but any credible option is better than none.

Step 6: Building the BATNA into Your Negotiation Strategy

Having a BATNA is empowering, but you also need to weave it smartly into your negotiation strategy. The goal is to use your BATNA as a source of strength without unnecessarily souring the relationship or bluffing beyond your means.

Here are strategies to integrate your BATNA into the negotiation:

• Negotiate with Confidence (But Stay Professional): Knowing you have a fallback gives you confidence in discussions. You can approach Microsoft without the fear of “we have to sign at any cost.” This confidence should come across positively – for example, you can firmly say “That price doesn’t work for us, we’ve analyzed our options and need to see a better number,” instead of pleading for a discount. You’re effectively signaling that you’re prepared to walk if needed, but you’re also giving Microsoft a chance to respond. Maintaining a calm, business-like demeanor is key; you want to convey that it’s not personal, it’s just that your company has alternatives and must do what’s best financially.
• Time Your Reveal: If you show your BATNA too early, Microsoft might simply decide you’re a lost cause or try to preemptively mitigate it. If you show it too late (or not at all), you miss the benefit. One approach is to hold your BATNA in reserve as a “trump card” in case talks stall. For instance, if after several meetings Microsoft isn’t moving on a critical issue (say, they won’t budge on a 10% price increase), you can then say, “We were hoping not to have to consider other avenues, but at this point we have to ensure business continuity. We have a parallel plan to proceed with an alternate licensing program if we can’t reach an agreement.” This often gets their attention. It’s a moment of truth; you may even see the Microsoft rep escalate your deal to a higher approval level once they understand you’re ready to implement your fallback. By timing it right, you preserve a cordial negotiation atmosphere and then use the BATNA at the pivotal moment to break any deadlock.
• Phrasing Matters – Don’t Threaten, Express Alternatives: There’s a big difference between saying “If you don’t cut the price, we’re going to Google!” (which sounds adversarial and could put the salesperson on the defensive) versus “We have been evaluating alternatives to ensure we find the best fit for our needs, and we do have other options on the table.” The latter phrasing is more palatable and professional. It reminds Microsoft that you’re a savvy customer looking at all options, not an angry customer making empty threats. When you outline specific asks in negotiation, you can tie them to your alternatives in a constructive way. For example: “We’re requesting a 15% discount on these licenses. That figure is important because we’ve benchmarked alternatives, and if we can’t achieve ~15% in savings here, some of those alternative routes become more attractive to our CFO.” Here, you’ve indirectly communicated your BATNA (alternatives exist that save money) and linked it to a concrete ask (15% discount). It gives Microsoft a clear incentive: meet this request or risk the customer exploring the alternative. This approach can be very effective in getting concessions on pricing, renewal caps, or contract terms.
• Integrate BATNA Scenarios into Deal Scoping: Another tactic is to actually include your “alternative” scenario as part of the negotiation scope. For instance, suppose your BATNA is using CSP for certain licenses. You could tell Microsoft, “Quote us both options – a full EA renewal and a scenario where we drop 300 licenses to buy via CSP. We need to compare the total cost.” By doing this, you make Microsoft work through the implications of your BATNA alongside you. They might come back with an aggressive offer for the full EA to dissuade you from the mixed approach. Either way, you’ve made your fallback a tangible part of the conversation. Similarly, if considering AWS for some Azure workloads, you might say, “We’d like pricing for an Azure commitment of X (our full usage) and also see pricing if we only commit to 0.7X (assuming we move some to AWS).”* This signals that you will move that 30% if needed, unless they make it worth your while to keep it on Azure.
• Know When to Walk: The hardest part of using a BATNA is being ready to actually use it. In a worst-case scenario, if Microsoft simply won’t meet your minimum requirements, you must be prepared to implement your alternative – even if temporarily. This might mean actually going month-to-month on a CSP for a few months, or not renewing that module and finding a workaround. Walking away from a negotiation (even briefly) can be a powerful statement. Many companies never reach this point because, usually, Microsoft will concede something rather than lose you. But you should predefine your walk-away points (e.g., “If they won’t keep the price increase to single digits, we will not sign”). If that line is crossed, you either execute Plan B or at least pause the negotiation. Sometimes, refusing a bad deal and actually starting down the BATNA path will bring Microsoft back to the table quickly with a better offer. Since you’ve planned for it, your business can continue operating smoothly while the negotiations take a timeout.

Using a BATNA in negotiation is an art. It’s about balance: you want to be confident but not cocky, firm but not inflexible.

By skillfully deploying your alternatives as a negotiating tool, you encourage a more collaborative problem-solving vibe – Microsoft will be looking for ways to win you back or win you over, rather than just assuming you’ll say yes.

The result should be a better deal, whether that’s in price, contract terms, or both, and a deal you feel good about signing because you know you didn’t leave better options on the table.

Common Mistakes in BATNA Planning

Even savvy IT procurement teams can stumble when formulating a fallback plan for Microsoft negotiations.

Avoid these common pitfalls when developing your BATNA:

• Relying on Empty Threats: Simply telling Microsoft, “We might switch to someone else,” without a concrete plan is a classic mistake. Vague threats are easily spotted and often ignored by Microsoft’s sales team. If you haven’t actually assessed or prepared the alternative, your bluff will be called. Always ground your BATNA in reality – empty posturing can damage your credibility for this and future negotiations.
• Not Getting Real Quotes or Data: Another mistake is failing to invest in real alternative quotes or scenarios. Saying “AWS could be cheaper” means little unless you know how much cheaper. Likewise, claiming you’ll cut 20% of licenses rings hollow if you haven’t identified which ones. Do the homework: get actual price quotes from CSPs, competing vendors, or have internal numbers on what downsizing looks like. It’s work upfront, but it pays off by giving weight to your stance.
• Overestimating Your Ability to Switch: Overconfidence can be dangerous. Some companies threaten massive moves (“We’ll move everything to Google!”) without considering the practicality. In reality, switching large systems or many users is complicated and time-consuming. Overstating your willingness or ability to switch vendors can trap you – Microsoft might call your bluff. Then you could be stuck either rushing a migration you aren’t ready for or capitulating. It’s better to define more nuanced, achievable alternatives (like moving a subset or a particular project) that you could execute well if needed.
• Waiting Until the Last Minute: A BATNA isn’t something you conjure a week before your contract expires. A last-minute scramble to find alternatives will be obvious and usually not credible. Plus, you won’t have time to properly evaluate them. This mistake leaves you in the very position BATNA is meant to avoid: up against a deadline with no choice. The remedy is to start preparing your BATNA months in advance (we recommend at least 9-12 months ahead of renewal for large deals). Early preparation gives you the luxury of time – time to gather information, test assumptions, and slowly signal to Microsoft that you’re exploring options.
• Lack of Internal Alignment: Sometimes the negotiation team might develop a brilliant BATNA, but if key internal stakeholders (like your CIO, CFO, or business unit leaders) aren’t fully on board, it can crumble. For example, the IT team might be ready to move to AWS, but if the app owners or finance aren’t supportive, you won’t actually pull that trigger. Ensure that the alternative plans are discussed and agreed upon internally. Mistaking internal wishful thinking for an approved plan is a recipe for failure. Microsoft will sense hesitation or internal division and might exploit it.

By steering clear of these missteps, you significantly increase the chances that your BATNA will serve its purpose – giving you real leverage.

Remember, a weak or poorly executed BATNA can be worse than none at all, because it can undermine your credibility.

A strong BATNA, on the other hand, is like an insurance policy for negotiations: you hope not to use it, but it’s there to back you up.

FAQs

Q: Can smaller companies realistically use a BATNA with Microsoft?
A: Yes, absolutely. A BATNA is not only for Fortune 500 enterprises. Smaller organizations might not have the same clout in dollar terms, but they often have more agile options. For instance, a company of 200 employees might find it easier to switch to Google Workspace or to use a CSP partner, compared to a 50,000-employee enterprise. In fact, Microsoft’s sales approach to smaller firms often assumes even more that “you’ll just renew” because they think you lack the resources to explore alternatives. By breaking that mold – say, getting a couple of competitive quotes or trying out an alternative solution – a smaller company can punch above its weight in negotiations. Even if you don’t have dedicated procurement staff, you can work with a third-party licensing advisor or use online calculators to see your options. Your BATNA might be as simple as downgrading to a smaller bundle or using open-source tools for certain tasks. The key is demonstrating that you are not an automatic renewal; you have a fallback plan, modest as it may be, and you’re prepared to use it. Microsoft, not wanting to lose a growing customer, may become more flexible on pricing or terms once they see you’re a savvy negotiator, regardless of size.

Q: Do we need to actually switch vendors or execute the BATNA to benefit from it?
A: In many cases, no – the power of a BATNA is often in the option, not the execution. The ideal scenario is that simply having a credible BATNA convinces Microsoft to offer a deal that makes switching unnecessary. Think of it like this: if Microsoft meets your requirements (price, flexibility, etc.), then your BATNA did its job without you having to invoke it. However, you must be willing to follow through if push comes to shove. A BATNA that you’re terrified to use isn’t a true BATNA. So, you don’t always have to actually switch, but you should be prepared to. Sometimes, going partway is enough – for example, you might not switch your whole company to Google, but you might actually move one department or one workload to prove a point (and benefit from it). In some negotiations, the customer does temporarily execute their BATNA, like taking a 3-month CSP agreement after an EA lapses, just to not sign a bad deal. That’s not the end of the world; you can continue negotiating in that interim. In summary, you don’t always have to walk away to gain the benefit, but you have to convince the other side (and yourself) that you could and would walk away if necessary.

Q: How far in advance should we prepare a BATNA for a Microsoft negotiation?
A: The earlier the better. For a large Microsoft EA renewal, starting 9–12 months in advance is a best practice. That might sound early, but consider everything involved: you need to audit your current usage, research alternatives, possibly run pilot programs or get pricing quotes, socialize the plan internally, and go through internal decision-making. That can easily take several months. For smaller agreements or less complex environments, you might get away with a shorter timeline (say, 3–6 months ahead), but you never want to be formulating a BATNA at the last minute. Early preparation also gives you the chance to subtly let Microsoft know you’re preparing. For instance, some companies inform their Microsoft rep 6+ months out that they will be reviewing all options for the upcoming renewal – this sets the expectation that the deal isn’t automatic. Additionally, many Microsoft contracts have notice periods if you plan not to renew certain elements, so knowing those deadlines is crucial (e.g., some cloud subscriptions need a notice of 30-60 days before expiry to reduce quantities – if you miss that, you’re stuck for another year). In short: start early, mark your calendar with critical dates, and treat BATNA development as a project parallel to the negotiation itself.

Q: Which BATNA is most effective for an Azure-heavy enterprise?
A: For organizations heavily invested in Azure, the most impactful BATNA usually involves cloud competition or consumption flexibility. In practice, this means evaluating AWS or Google Cloud for at least a portion of your workloads. Even if you have no intention of a wholesale cloud migration, identify some workloads that could transition (or new projects that could launch on a different cloud) and get an estimate of cost and effort. Cloud providers are often eager to make inroads – an AWS rep might help analyze your Azure environment and highlight potential savings or provide credits. This information becomes a potent BATNA because Azure is a significant growth area for Microsoft, and they fiercely compete with AWS/GCP. If Microsoft knows you’re considering moving, say, your disaster recovery environment or a data lake to AWS, they may respond with better pricing on Azure or more favorable terms (like larger Azure credits or flexible cancellation terms) to secure your commitment. Another effective BATNA for an Azure-heavy shop is leveraging hybrid cloud or on-prem alternatives – for example, reminding Microsoft that you could choose to invest in on-premises infrastructure or other vendors’ solutions instead of expanding Azure. Internally, you might prepare by cleaning up Azure usage (to show you won’t overpay for unused cloud resources) and even planning a brief pause on new Azure projects if needed. So, the short answer: multi-cloud (using AWS/GCP) is the go-to BATNA for Azure dominance, often complemented by an internal optimization strategy to avoid over-reliance on Azure. This two-pronged approach (external alternative + internal efficiency) gives you both a pricing lever and a consumption lever in negotiations.

Five Expert Recommendations for BATNA Success

To wrap up, here are five expert tips to ensure your Microsoft BATNA strategy delivers results:

1. Start preparing alternatives 9–12 months before renewal. Early planning is critical. This timeframe allows you to thoroughly explore options, get approvals, and not be rushed. By the time Microsoft sends that first renewal quote, you should already have Plan B (and C) mapped out.
2. Always document quotes and options – credibility matters. Keep a paper trail of all your alternative evaluations. Save emails from other vendors, written quotes from CSP partners, cost comparison spreadsheets, etc. This documentation not only solidifies your case internally but also provides effective talking points during negotiations. If Microsoft’s team challenges the feasibility of your BATNA, you’ll have facts and figures to back it up.
3. Use CSP or MCA as your default fallback if EA negotiations stall. These Microsoft-native options are typically the most reliable safety net. Let Microsoft know (subtly) that you’re comfortable going month-to-month if needed. Having a CSP lined up means you won’t lose service, which greatly reduces Microsoft’s leverage of the ticking clock.
4. Don’t bluff – only present alternatives you’re willing to act on. Honesty and realism are the foundation of a strong BATNA. If you claim an alternative, be ready to execute it. It’s better to have a modest but real BATNA than a grandiose bluff. Empty bluffs can sour the relationship and hurt your credibility in future dealings.
5. Revisit and update your BATNA annually. Your business needs and Microsoft’s offerings both evolve. Don’t just define a BATNA once and forget it. Perhaps new competitors emerge, or Microsoft changes licensing programs. Continually scan the market and assess your usage so that by the next negotiation cycle, you have fresh options to consider. An outdated BATNA can be as bad as none at all.

By following these steps and recommendations, you’ll be far better equipped heading into your next Microsoft negotiation.

Instead of feeling trapped or reactive, you’ll have a proactive plan and the confidence that comes with having a real fallback.

In the end, defining your BATNA isn’t about being combative; it’s about ensuring you get a fair deal and mitigating risks for your organization.

With a solid BATNA in your back pocket, you can approach Microsoft deals as a savvy, balanced negotiator – and that’s exactly what leads to the best outcomes.

Read about our Microsoft Negotiation Services

Do you want to know more about our Microsoft Services?

Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.

Name *

Email *

Company

Message *

Submit