Introduction
This interactive tool is based upon “The Total Economic Impact™ Of Microsoft Mission Critical Services,” a commissioned study conducted by Forrester Consulting on behalf of Microsoft in May 2026.
Forrester interviewed seven decision-makers and surveyed 50 respondents with experience using Mission Critical Services (MCS) to identify and quantify potential key benefits of investing in the service offering.
Use the inputs on the left to customize the analysis and estimate the potential impact that an investment in Microsoft Mission Critical Services can have on your organization.
Inputs
You provided the following information about your organization’s environment.
Select currency
Name of your organization
Annual revenue
Employees
Industry
Average employee annual salary (fully burdened)
Average IT employee annual salary (fully burdened)
Reliability
Customer-facing downtime events affecting Azure workloads per month
Average length of a customer-facing downtime event in hours
Percentage of revenue dependent on Azure production workloads
Technical Enablement
New product or service offerings released annually
Time to market for a new product or service offering in weeks
Proactive Monitoring
Average internal-facing downtime events per month
Average percentage of employees impacted during an internal-facing downtime event
IT team size
IT team members involved in diagnostics and monitoring
Accelerated Resolution
Average IT support tickets submitted per employee per year
Total IT support tickets per year that are mission-critical and Microsoft-related
Average time to resolve a support ticket in hours
Costs
Price for Mission Critical Services (Year 1)
Price for Mission Critical Services (Year 2)
Price for Mission Critical Services (Year 3)
Results for:
Benefits (Three-Year)
Financial Summary
Consolidated Three-Year, Risk-Adjusted Metrics for
Return on investment (ROI)
Benefits PV
Net present value (NPV)
Payback
Cash Flow Chart (Risk-Adjusted)
Cash Flow Analysis (Risk-Adjusted)
| Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total costs | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Total benefits | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Net benefits | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| ROI | ||||||
| Payback period (months) |
Quantified benefit data as applied to
Total Benefits
| Ref. | Benefit | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atr | Improved business continuity due to reduced customer-facing downtime | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Btr | Accelerated time to market | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Ctr | Improved operational efficiency due to reduced internal-facing downtime | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Dtr | Faster adoption of Microsoft features/services | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Etr | Reduced IT effort for diagnostics and monitoring | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Ftr | Accelerated cloud adoption for IT teams | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Gtr | Improved IT productivity due to reduced support ticket volume | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Htr | Optimized Azure infrastructure spend | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Total benefits (risk-adjusted) | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
Improved Business Continuity Due To Reduced Customer-Facing Downtime
Mission Critical Services can help protect revenue and operational continuity by reducing downtime across mission‑critical, Azure‑hosted production workloads. Without Mission Critical Services, outages in these environments can often cause cascading operational delays, customer penalties, and lost revenue due to tightly coupled workflows and time‑sensitive processes. However, Mission Critical Services can reduce the frequency and duration of incidents through proactive monitoring, architecture reviews, resiliency patterns, and direct escalation to experienced Microsoft engineers. Regular engineering reviews can help identify configuration risks, capacity bottlenecks, and dependency issues before they escalate into outages, while accelerated escalation paths can reduce mean time to resolve (MTTR) when incidents occur. Recurring, structured engagement with Microsoft engineers can also improve readiness for high‑risk scenarios and reduce the likelihood of repeat incidents. Together, fewer outages and faster recovery can translate into meaningful revenue protection and less disruption for Azure‑hosted, customer‑facing systems.
Improved Business Continuity Due To Reduced Customer-Facing Downtime
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A1 | Customer-facing downtime events affecting Azure workloads per month in prior environment | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| A2 | Reduction in customer-facing downtime events with MCS | Interviews and survey | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| A3 | Customer-facing downtime events avoided with MCS | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| A4 | Average length of a customer-facing downtime event in prior environment (hours) | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| A5 | Reduction in MTTR customer-facing downtime events with MCS | Interviews and survey | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| A6 | Time reclaimed per customer-facing downtime event with MCS (hours) | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| A7 | Subtotal: Additional uptime with MCS (hours) (rounded) | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| A8 | Revenue | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| A9 | Percentage of revenue dependent on Azure production workloads | 0% | 0% | 0% | ||
| A10 | Revenue generated per hour of uptime | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| A11 | Revenue recaptured with MCS | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| A12 | Operating margin | 0% | 0% | 0% | ||
| At | Improved business continuity due to reduced customer-facing downtime | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| Risk adjustment | ↓15% | |||||
| Atr | Improved business continuity due to reduced customer-facing downtime (risk-adjusted) | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| Three-year total: $0 | Three-year present value: $0 | |||||
Accelerated Time To Market
Mission Critical Services can help accelerate time to market for new customer‑facing offerings launched on Azure‑hosted production workloads, particularly during periods of significant change such as new platform deployments or major capability introductions. Proactive architecture reviews, release readiness guidance, and dedicated engineering engagement across design, pre-deployment, and post-deployment phases through Mission Critical Services can enable teams to identify risks earlier in the lifecycle, reduce rework, and resolve issues faster during deployment. This support can apply to a variety of offerings, including platform enhancements (e.g., upgraded APIs, monitoring dashboards), product features (e.g., new modules, workflow capabilities), and service capabilities (e.g., faster onboarding, automated compliance tools). As a result, organizations can shorten launch timelines for select mission-critical initiatives and begin capturing expected revenue from new offerings sooner.
Accelerated Time To Market
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B1 | New offerings released | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| B2 | Time to market per offering before MCS (weeks) | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| B3 | Reduction in time to market per offering with MCS | Interviews and survey | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| B4 | Time reclaimed from faster offering per release (weeks) | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| B5 | Revenue | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| B6 | Average percentage of annual revenue impact per offering released | TEI study | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| B7 | Revenue impact per release per week | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| B8 | Revenue recaptured from faster offering release | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| B9 | Operating margin | 0% | 0% | 0% | ||
| Bt | Accelerated time to market | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| Risk adjustment | ↓15% | |||||
| Btr | Accelerated time to market (risk-adjusted) | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| Three-year total: $0 | Three-year present value: $0 | |||||
Improved Operational Efficiency Due To Reduced Internal-Facing Downtime
Mission Critical Services can improve operational efficiency by reducing the frequency and duration of internal‑facing downtime for core productivity systems, including Microsoft 365 (e.g., Teams, Exchange, SharePoint), GitHub, and internal administrative portals. Without Mission Critical Services, outages in these systems can disrupt internal communication, development workflows, and coordination with external partners, which can large portions of operations and require significant manual effort to recover. However, Mission Critical Services can provide faster engagement, proactive governance, and deeper familiarity with organizational environments that can help teams identify issues earlier and respond more effectively. Proactive monitoring and architecture guidance can reduce repeat issues from misconfigurations, while accelerated escalation paths can shorten MTTR during major incidents. Employees subsequently may experience less disruption from internal outages and can return to productive work faster, ultimately improving day‑to‑day operational efficiency.
Improved Operational Efficiency Due To Reduced Internal-Facing Downtime
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | Employees | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| C2 | Average percentage of employees impacted per internal-facing downtime event | 0% | 0% | 0% | ||
| C3 | Average employees impacted per downtime event | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| C4 | Average internal-facing downtime events per month in the prior environment | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| C5 | Reduction in internal-facing downtime events with MCS | Interviews and survey | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| C6 | Average internal-facing downtime events avoided with MCS (rounded) | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| C7 | Average internal-facing downtime duration per event in the prior environment (hours) | TEI study | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| C8 | Reduction in MTTR internal-facing downtime events with MCS | Interviews and survey | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| C9 | Average internal-facing downtime reclaimed per event with MCS (hours) | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| C10 | Subtotal: Additional internal uptime with MCS (hours) (rounded) | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| C11 | Fully burdened hourly rate for an affected employee | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| C12 | Productivity recapture | TEI methodology | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| Ct | Improved operational efficiency due to reduced internal-facing downtime | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| Risk adjustment | ↓10% | |||||
| Ctr | Improved operational efficiency due to reduced internal-facing downtime (risk-adjusted) | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| Three-year total: $0 | Three-year present value: $0 | |||||
Faster Adoption Of Microsoft Features/Services
Mission Critical Services can help accelerate the internal adoption of Microsoft capabilities, including Microsoft 365 features, security services, GitHub capabilities, and Azure platform features used for internal operations. Without Mission Critical Services, adopting new capabilities can often require navigating complex architecture decisions, governance requirements, and integration challenges, which can slow rollouts and delay the productivity gains associated with new capabilities. However, with Mission Critical Services, proactive architecture reviews, configuration guidance, and direct engagement with Microsoft engineers can help IT teams validate designs earlier, remove adoption barriers, and move forward with greater confidence. This support can reduce friction during implementations, enable faster acceptance of new features by internal teams, and shorten the time required for employees to become productive with new capabilities. As a result, organizations may be able to realize productivity benefits from Microsoft features sooner and more consistently across their enterprises.
Faster Adoption Of Microsoft Features/Services
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D1 | Employees | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| D2 | Average end-user productivity gain from faster adoption of Microsoft features (hours) | Interviews and survey | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| D3 | Fully burdened hourly rate for an affected employee | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| D4 | Productivity recapture | TEI methodology | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| Dt | Faster adoption of Microsoft features/services | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| Risk adjustment | ↓10% | |||||
| Dtr | Faster adoption of Microsoft features/services (risk-adjusted) | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| Three-year total: $0 | Three-year present value: $0 | |||||
Reduced IT Effort For Diagnostics And Monitoring
Mission Critical Services can help reduce the amount of time organizations’ IT teams spend on diagnostics, monitoring, and issue investigation across Microsoft environments, including security, identity, and Azure subscription services. Without Mission Critical Services, IT resources involved in these activities may spend a meaningful portion of their time repeatedly documenting environments, reexplaining configurations, and manually monitoring systems before effective analyses can begin. However, with Mission Critical Services, knowledge continuity, proactive monitoring, and direct access to engineers familiar with organizations’ environments can reduce this ongoing diagnostic overhead. Microsoft engineers maintain an understanding of customer architectures over time, which limits repeat discovery and can enable faster root‑cause isolation. Proactive health assessments and standardized engagement models can further reduce organizations’ reactive monitoring effort. As a result, IT resources involved in diagnostics and monitoring may spend less time on those activities and can redirect recovered time toward higher‑value work, such as configuration improvements, security hardening, and platform optimization.
Reduced IT Effort For Diagnostics And Monitoring
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E1 | IT team | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| E2 | IT resources involved in diagnostics and monitoring | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| E3 | Average percentage of time devoted to diagnostics and monitoring | TEI study | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| E4 | Reduction in time spent on diagnostics and monitoring with MCS | Interviews and survey | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| E5 | Fully burdened annual salary for an IT resource | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| E6 | Productivity recapture | TEI methodology | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| Et | Reduced IT effort for diagnostics and monitoring | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| Risk adjustment | ↓10% | |||||
| Etr | Reduced IT effort for diagnostics and monitoring (risk-adjusted) | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| Three-year total: $0 | Three-year present value: $0 | |||||
Accelerated Cloud Adoption For IT Teams
After upgrading to Mission Critical Services, organizations may be able to accelerate cloud adoption by reducing the time and effort required for IT teams to migrate and modernize systems using Azure and related Microsoft cloud services. Without Mission Critical Services, large‑scale migrations, such as moving from on‑premises identity, messaging, or directory services to cloud‑based platforms, can often be delayed due to limited internal expertise, uncertainty in architecture decisions, and concerns with the risk and duration of migration activities. However, with Mission Critical Services, direct access to Microsoft engineers, proactive architecture guidance, and proven migration patterns can help teams remove roadblocks and execute migrations more efficiently. Early engagement with Microsoft specialists can allow organizations to validate designs quickly, address issues as they arise, and move forward with greater confidence. IT teams, in turn, may be able to complete cloud migration activities faster and accelerate overall cloud adoption without needing to scale internal resources.
Accelerated Cloud Adoption For IT Teams
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F1 | IT resources devoted to cloud migration, as a percentage of IT team | Interviews and survey | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| F2 | IT resources devoted to cloud migration | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| F3 | Average percentage of time spent on cloud migration | TEI study | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| F4 | Reduction in time spent on cloud migration with MCS | Interviews and survey | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| F5 | Fully burdened annual salary for an IT resource | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| F6 | Productivity recapture | TEI methodology | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| Ft | Accelerated cloud adoption for IT teams | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| Risk adjustment | ↓10% | |||||
| Ftr | Accelerated cloud adoption for IT teams (risk-adjusted) | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| Three-year total: $0 | Three-year present value: $0 | |||||
Improved IT Productivity Due To Reduced Support Ticket Volume
Without Mission Critical Services, organizations may be bogged down by high volumes of mission‑critical support tickets affecting business‑critical Microsoft workloads, including Azure production applications, Microsoft 365 services (such as Exchange, Teams, and SharePoint), and Dynamics 365 modules used in operational workflows. Recurring issues, configuration gaps, and limited visibility into platform use can drive frequent escalations and require IT teams to spend time managing and coordinating support cases.
However, with Mission Critical Services, proactive monitoring, architecture and design reviews, and direct access to experienced Microsoft engineers can help address underlying issues before they result in repeat tickets. Ongoing production environment reviews, configuration guidance, and earlier root‑cause identification may reduce the number of high‑severity cases that escalate into support tickets. In addition, more consistent escalation paths can help prevent tickets from stalling or reopening, which can further reduce overall ticket volume.
Furthermore, these improvements can be especially meaningful as organizations’ use of Microsoft cloud services expands. Even as environments became more complex, organizations may observe that mission‑critical ticket volumes decline or remain stable, which means that IT teams can spend less time managing reactive support requests and more time focused on higher‑value, planned IT activities.
Improved IT Productivity Due To Reduced Support Ticket Volume
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| G1 | Mission-critical Microsoft-related IT support tickets before MCS | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| G2 | Reduction in mission-critical Microsoft IT ticket volume with MCS | Interviews and survey | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| G3 | Support tickets eliminated with MCS | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| G4 | Average time to resolve each support ticket before MCS (hours) | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| G5 | Reduction in time to resolve Microsoft-related support ticket with MCS | Interviews and survey | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| G6 | Time reclaimed per support ticket (hours) | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| G7 | Total time reclaimed (hours) | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| G8 | Fully burdened hourly rate for an IT resource | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| G9 | Productivity recapture | TEI methodology | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| Gt | Improved IT productivity due to reduced support ticket volume | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| Risk adjustment | ↓10% | |||||
| Gtr | Improved IT productivity due to reduced support ticket volume (risk-adjusted) | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| Three-year total: $0 | Three-year present value: $0 | |||||
Optimized Azure Infrastructure Spend
Without Mission Critical Services, organizations may find that rapid growth and evolving workloads often lead to overprovisioning, suboptimal resource placement, and limited visibility into the effect of infrastructure decisions on long‑term cost efficiency. Through Mission Critical Services architecture reviews, capacity‑planning guidance, and recurring resource utilization evaluation, organizations can better deploy workloads using the most appropriate configurations and cost tiers. Microsoft engineers can provide recommendations on right‑sizing virtual machines, selecting appropriate storage options, optimizing chipset and regional placements, and aligning production and disaster recovery environments to cost‑efficient patterns. These reviews can also help identify and address consumption‑related issues earlier, thereby helping prevent unnecessary spend from persisting over time. Optimizations with Mission Critical Services can produce durable cost improvements since infrastructure changes are typically embedded into standard operating practices rather than applied as one‑time corrections.
Optimized Azure Infrastructure Spend
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H1 | Annual revenue | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| H2 | Total IT spend, as a percentage of annual revenue | 0% | 0% | 0% | ||
| H3 | Azure-related infrastructure spend, as a percentage of total IT spend | Interviews and survey | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| H4 | Reduction in Azure-related infrastructure spend with MCS | Interviews and survey | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| Ht | Optimized Azure infrastructure spend | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| Risk adjustment | ↓10% | |||||
| Htr | Optimized Azure infrastructure spend (risk-adjusted) | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| Three-year total: $0 | Three-year present value: $0 | |||||
Quantified cost data as applied to
Total Costs
| Ref. | Cost | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Itr | Fee to Microsoft for Mission Critical Services | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Jtr | Internal management effort | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Total costs (risk-adjusted) | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
Fee To Microsoft For Mission Critical Services
Organizations incur an annual fee for Microsoft Mission Critical Services as part of their broader Microsoft support investments, with fee structures and cost drivers varying by the type and scope of Mission Critical Services adopted. For Mission Critical for Platform, this fee is structured as a percentage of an organization’s overall Microsoft spend and may grow year over year as reliance on Microsoft cloud platforms increases and environments expand. For Mission Critical for Workload offerings, pricing is based on the defined solution scope, activities delivered, and geographic coverage required.
Note: Pricing may vary. Contact Microsoft for additional details.
Fee To Microsoft For Mission Critical Services
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I1 | Fee for Mission Critical Services | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | |
| It | Fee to Microsoft for Mission Critical Services | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↑5% | |||||
| Itr | Fee to Microsoft for Mission Critical Services (risk-adjusted) | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | |
| Three-year total: $0 | Three-year present value: $0 | |||||
Internal Management Effort
In addition to paying direct fees to Microsoft for Mission Critical Services, organizations may also incur internal management costs related to the following:
-
System and configuration management. IT teams may dedicate effort to initial setup and ongoing operational management of mission-critical environments, including Azure workloads, Microsoft 365, Security Cloud, and GitHub. During initial onboarding, Mission Critical Services engineers provide guidance on environment architecture, scaling, storage and networking optimization, and initial configuration, which IT teams can actively apply to set up their environments. After onboarding, IT teams may engage in ongoing management, including interpreting alerts from Mission Critical Services-monitored systems, implementing recommended performance or scaling adjustments, and following Mission Critical Services guidance on potential risks or inefficiencies. These interactions educate internal teams on best practices and prepare them to manage environments independently over time.
-
Vendor management. IT teams may also dedicate effort to managing ongoing interactions with Microsoft through Mission Critical Services distinct from hands-on IT operations. These activities include coordinating with Mission Critical Services engineers and account teams, scheduling and participating in regular review meetings, following up on open incidents or performance recommendations, and ensuring service-level commitments are met.
Internal Management Effort
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| J1 | Time spent on internal management activities (weeks) | Interviews and survey | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| J2 | Average percentage of IT resources involved in system and configuration management | TEI study | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| J3 | IT resources involved in system and configuration management | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| J4 | Time spent on system and configuration management per week (hours) | Interviews and survey | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| J5 | Fully burdened hourly rate for an IT resource | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | |
| J6 | Subtotal: System and configuration management | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | |
| J7 | Average percentage of IT resources involved in vendor management | TEI study | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| J8 | IT resources involved in vendor management | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| J9 | Time spent on vendor management per quarter (hours) | Interviews and survey | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| J10 | Subtotal: Vendor management | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | |
| Jt | Internal management effort | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↑10% | |||||
| Jtr | Internal management effort (risk-adjusted) | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | |
| Three-year total: $0 | Three-year present value: $0 | |||||
Risk-adjusted calculations for
With Mission Critical Services, organizations can avoid recurring losses from business downtime, delayed product releases, and Azure infrastructure overspending. In Forrester’s financial model, the benefits of doing so are calculated within other benefits (e.g., gains in employee productivity). However, some readers may wish to know the potential impact of avoiding these costs on their own.
Without Mission Critical Services, an organization could incur the aforementioned costs on an ongoing basis. Together, the costs of downtime, slow releases, and infrastructure overspending can be thought of as the “costs of inaction.” By staying in a steady state without Mission Critical Services, an organization would forgo the opportunity to avoid these costs in a forward-looking financial model.
Opportunity Costs Of Prior State
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OC1 | Losses from potential downtime incidents avoided with MCS | Atr+Ctr | $0 | $0 | $0 | |
| OC2 | Delayed profits recaptured with MCS | Btr | $0 | $0 | $0 | |
| OC3 | Azure infrastructure overspending avoided with MCS | Htr | $0 | $0 | $0 | |
| OCt | Opportunity costs of prior state | OC1+OC2+OC3 | $0 | $0 | $0 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓5% | |||||
| OCtr | Opportunity costs of prior state (risk-adjusted) | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| Three-year total: $0 | Three-year present value: $0 | |||||
From the information provided in the interviews, Forrester constructed a Total Economic Impact™ framework for those organizations considering an investment in Mission Critical Services.
The objective of the framework is to identify the cost, benefit, flexibility, and risk factors that affect the investment decision. Forrester took a multistep approach to evaluate the impact that Mission Critical Services can have on an organization.
Due Diligence
Interviewed Microsoft stakeholders and Forrester analysts to gather data relative to Mission Critical Services.
Interviews
Interviewed seven representatives at organizations using Mission Critical Services to obtain data about costs, benefits, and risks.
Financial Model Framework
Constructed a financial model representative of the interviews using the TEI methodology and risk-adjusted the financial model based on issues and concerns of the interviewees.
ROI Calculator
Constructed a calculator based on the model in the associated study and in accordance with Forrester and TEI standards. Forrester’s aim is to clearly show all calculations and assumptions used in the analysis.