Bauer Automate - Blog

The Rebrand Tax: What It Really Costs to Re-Skin Client Work by Hand

Thu, 08 Oct 2026 10:00:00 -0600

If your firm re-skins deliverables across a roster of clients, you already know the drain. A proposal goes out for Client A, then the same template gets manually rebranded for Client B, then someone reuses last quarter's version with Client A's colours still in the footer. Every handoff is a chance for the wrong brand to slip through, and every fix is time you cannot bill.

That is the rebrand tax. It is small per document and large across a year, and it is paid in exactly the hours you would rather sell.

"We Have Templates" is NOT The Same as Enforcement

Templates help right up until a human has to remember to use the right one. Brand consistency that depends on willpower decays, quietly, on every desktop that still has an old file saved. The brand you delivered to a client can sit on a shelf while their team keeps reaching for whatever opens fastest.

The fix is not another PDF guide. It is making the on-brand path the easy path, so off brand becomes a conscious act rather than the default accident.

Enforced, Not Shelved

On Brand reinforces a brand at the operating system, every application, and identity, so consistency stops depending on memory.

Defaults replaced and the gallery curated, so a blank document already carries the brand and the built-in templates are out of reach.
The surfaces most setups miss: server-side email signatures applied as the mail leaves, branded Teams and Zoom backgrounds with a meeting-invite footer, brand fonts pushed to every device through Intune, and managed browsers carrying the homepage, theme, and bookmarks.
A branded Power BI report template shortcut (client-supplied or Bauer-hosted .pbit), right-click New menu templates, and a Clipchamp video brand kit, so reports and video are on brand too.
A branded sign-in screen that doubles as a phishing tell: when staff expect the logo on the real login page, a spoofed one without it stands out.

For a firm running this across many clients, the consistency risk on every handoff is the real cost, and enforced defaults are what take it off the table.

License the Method, Output for Your Own Clients

Here is where it gets interesting for an agency. The same machinery can be licensed to you. You own the creative, the logo, the palette, the voice. We license the method, the tooling, and the On Brand enforcement deployment, and you produce branded Microsoft 365 packages for your own clients, under your own banner.

The point that lands with clients: the brand they paid for is actually adopted, enforced into Microsoft 365, rather than copy-edited away by someone reusing a seven-year-old template. That is a new revenue line, faster package output, and a promise you can actually keep.

The Agency License is quote-based; there is no list price, because no two agency arrangements look the same. It is governed by a proper Agency License Agreement that sets out the IP split between your creative and our method and tooling, the enforcement and deployment terms, and a clean wind-down if you ever want one.

The Short Version

Re-skinning by hand is a recurring drain and a consistency risk on every handoff. Enforcement removes it at the source, and licensing the method lets you sell that same outcome to your own clients as enforced, not shelved.

If that sounds like a line your agency should be offering, get in touch and we will scope it with you.

Book A FREE Discovery Call

The Time Tracker IT Never Has to Install

Tue, 06 Oct 2026 10:00:00 -0600

A time-tracking rollout usually lands on your desk as a project. There is a vendor security questionnaire to fill in, an Entra app registration asking for consent to scopes somebody has to actually read, a provisioning connector to stand up, and at the end of it, a new pipe carrying your organisation's working data to a cloud you do not run. All of that for a tool whose job is writing down hours.

It is worth asking why the ceremony exists at all. It exists because the tool lives outside your tenant, so identity has to be bridged in and data has to be piped out. Remove that one architectural decision and most of the project disappears with it.

What zero setup actually means

ProjectPoint's time-entry surface is a browser extension for Edge and Chrome, and its requirements from IT are, precisely: nothing. No Entra app registration. No admin consent. No API permissions to review. It never reads cookies; it rides the user's existing signed-in SharePoint session, the one governed by the conditional-access and MFA policies you already enforce. This is not a marketing rounding of "almost nothing": the claim was verified on a vanilla tenant, with a normal user account holding only list-level permissions, with no admin action taken anywhere.

It can only see what they can already see

The extension writes time entries as rows in a SharePoint list, using the user's own permissions. It has no service account, no elevated identity, and no reach beyond *.sharepoint.com. If a person cannot edit the list, the extension cannot either. There is no new permission surface to audit, because no new permissions exist. Under Manifest V3 it runs no remotely hosted code, and its browser permission set is short enough to read in one breath: storage, alarms, the side panel, and SharePoint itself.

The record stays in the tenant

Because entries are ordinary SharePoint list items in your own site, everything you already do to SharePoint data applies to them automatically. Your retention policies, your backup posture, your eDiscovery scope, your audit trail: all of it covers the timesheet record with no extra configuration, because the record never left. There is no vendor copy to reason about, and nothing to repatriate if the relationship ends. Deleted entries go to the site recycle bin, where a site owner can restore them.

Governed from a list, not a console

Central control, where you want it, comes from a plain SharePoint Settings list on the site rather than a vendor console living in your tenant. A row can be a rule, enforced for every user and shown locked in their preferences, or a starting point that seeds new installs and then leaves people alone. The same list carries your brand colours, so both surfaces render in company colours before first paint. You govern the tool with list permissions you already understand, and there is nothing else installed to govern.

One component of a suite that thinks this way

The extension ships as the time-entry surface of ProjectPoint, and its setup story is the suite's philosophy in miniature: a user pastes the ProjectPoint site address, clicks Connect, and the extension finds the lists ProjectPoint installs by itself. The full ProjectPoint solution is a complete project management suite on SharePoint, the governed project workspace, the registry, the project registers, and time and budget capture, built on as much vanilla Microsoft 365 as possible, precisely so that questions like "where does the data live" and "what did we just consent to" keep having boring answers.

Two honest notes for this audience. Distribution today is a team install, with the store listing in preparation, so deployment is a sideload your desktop team runs rather than a store click. And the extension speaks to *.sharepoint.com only: vanity SharePoint domains and GCC tenants are out of scope for v1, and we will say so rather than let you discover it.

Get in touch, and we will show you the whole setup. It fits in one sentence.

Book A FREE Discovery Call

Most Branding Stops At A Logo. Here is What Comprehensive Actually Looks Like.

Thu, 01 Oct 2026 10:00:00 -0600

Most branding projects end where they should start. You get a logo, a colour palette, a couple of templates, and a tidy PDF guide. Then everyone goes back to work, and staying on brand quietly becomes everyone's job to remember, on every file, forever. That is not a plan; that is hope with a style guide attached.

The difference with On Brand is simple to say and harder to do: we do not hand you a brand and trust willpower to keep it. We configure the tools your team already uses so the brand shows up on its own, and going off brand takes deliberate effort.

Make Off-Brand the Hard Path

Three moves do most of the work, and they all push in the same direction.

Defaults are replaced, not suggested. The blank document your team opens already carries your brand, because the default template itself was swapped.
The gallery is curated. Built-in Office templates are hidden, and your styles become the ones people actually reach for.
Off brand becomes a conscious act. Between replaced defaults, a curated gallery, and paste controls, breaking the brand takes real effort instead of being the easy accident it is today.

Everywhere Your Team Works, Including the Parts People Forget

This is where "comprehensive" stops being a slogan. Branding does not live only in Word and PowerPoint, so neither does the enforcement.

Email signatures applied server-side as the message leaves, so the brand reaches the inbox and not just the attachment, and never drifts machine to machine.
Teams and Zoom backgrounds, plus a Teams meeting-invite footer that can carry your logo and a link to your AI use policy.
Brand fonts pushed to every device through Intune, so files render correctly on the new starter's laptop, not just the designer's machine.
Managed browsers, with Edge and Chrome carrying your homepage, theme colour, and bookmarks on a sensible security baseline.
A branded Power BI report template shortcut (client-supplied or Bauer-hosted .pbit), so a report is rebranded in minutes rather than rebuilt.
Your file and folder templates wired straight into the Windows right-click New menu, so starting a new branded document takes one click.
Video too, through a Clipchamp brand kit with your colours, fonts, logos, and intro and outro stingers.

Most "we already have templates" setups touch one or two of these. The value is in the whole stack reinforcing the same brand at once.

The Sign-In Screen That is Also a Security Tell

Your login screen carries your logo, and that is more than cosmetic. When staff learn to expect the company logo on the real sign-in screen, a spoofed login page on a phishing link, missing that logo, becomes a visible tell. Branding and a small, quiet security win in the same setting.

The Cost Nobody Puts On An Invoice

There is a tax you are already paying and never see itemised: the reformatting tax. Without enforcement, the whole team retypes fonts, fixes bullets, and rebuilds headers and footers on file after file. That time is billable, and it is gone. Enforced defaults and a curated gallery remove the tax at the source, so it simply stops being charged.

And it stays current. One change to your central library propagates to every connected device, so the brand does not quietly decay back to whatever someone had saved on their desktop three years ago.

The Short Version

A logo is the start of a brand, not the finish. On Brand reinforces yours at the operating system, every application, and identity, so consistency stops depending on memory. If your documents, decks, emails, meetings, reports, and even video all look like they came from one confident company, that is not luck. That is the system working the way it should.

Want to see how deep it goes for your setup? Get in touch and we will walk you through it.

Book A FREE Discovery Call

The Column You Add Without Calling IT

Tue, 29 Sep 2026 10:00:00 -0600

Someone on your delivery team wants one more column on the risk register: an owner field, say, so every project captures who is carrying each risk. On most provisioning setups that one-line request is not a one-line change. It is a ticket, a scheduled release, and a person with elevated rights regenerating and republishing the template the whole organization provisions from. A field a project manager could describe in a sentence becomes a change only IT can make.

It works that way because of what the template actually is. In the classic SharePoint provisioning route the template is a generated artifact, a package of scripted instructions produced by a tool and run with PowerShell. You do not edit it the way you edit a site. You regenerate it, and the regenerated version arrives as a new artifact with a new identifier and freshly generated code, so anything pointing at the old one has to be repointed. The cost of the change is not the column. It is the machinery that has to move to carry the column.

The template that is really a program

This is the part worth being clear-eyed about, because it stays invisible until you need to change something. A scripted template is software. Updating a single list column means someone opens the tooling, changes the definition, regenerates the package, tests it, and republishes

it, and until they do, every new project keeps provisioning the old shape. The people who feel the gap, your project managers, are not the people who can close it. So the column waits, or the register quietly grows a fifth spreadsheet nobody provisioned at all.

Ours is a site you open and edit

ProjectPoint takes the opposite approach, and it is the load-bearing design decision in the whole product. The golden template is not a package. It is a real, live SharePoint site, sitting in your own tenant, that your project manager maintains like any other site they own. Want another column on the risk register, a different default folder structure, a new content type, a tidier set of libraries? Change it on the golden site the way you would change any site. There is no build step, because there is nothing to build. The site is the template.

When the next project asks for a workspace, the provisioning engine copies that golden site, as it stands that day, into the new project's own site. The improved register is simply there, because it was there on the golden site when the copy ran. No ticket, no republish, no new identifier to repoint, and no waiting for a release window. Editing a site is something a project manager already knows how to do, and that is precisely the skill the design leans on.

Who holds the pen

The quiet shift here is about ownership, not features. On the scripted route, the shape of every future project site is held by whoever owns the provisioning code, which is almost always IT. On this one, it is held by whoever maintains the golden site, which is your PMO. The people
who actually run projects decide what a project workspace contains, and they change it themselves, in the tool they already use, on the afternoon they decide to, without anyone re-architecting a provisioning engine because a column moved.

That is why the list of what the golden site carries is worth knowing: its site features, its permissions, its content types and site columns, its lists and libraries, its navigation, and its default folder content. Every one of those is edited the same way, on the golden site, by the same person, and it is cloned into the next project exactly as it stands. The column is just the smallest example of a much larger pen you are being handed.

The one limit we will not dress up

There is a real boundary here and you should hear it from us rather than find it in month nine. Improving the golden site changes every project provisioned after the change. It does not reach back. A site created in month one does not receive month nine's new column, and there is no drift detection and no re-apply to already-provisioned sites today. If a change has to land in sites that already exist, that is manual work, project by project, and it is the largest structural limit in the current design.

The honest other half is the half this post is about: making the change itself is trivial and takes effect on the very next provisioning run. The gap is retroactive application to old sites, not the cost of holding the pen. Most teams edit the template often in the first months and rarely once it settles, which is exactly the shape this design handles well.

Get in touch, and we will show you the golden site, and let you add the column yourself.

Book A FREE Discovery Call

What the On Brand Package Actually Automates

Thu, 24 Sep 2026 10:00:00 -0600

When we say we will get your Microsoft 365 to "do your branding for you," it is fair to ask what that actually means. Here is the plain version: instead of policing your brand by hand, we configure the tools your team already uses so the brand shows up automatically and stays current. No new app to learn, no third-party agent watching over your shoulder.

The Surfaces We Automate

Templates in File and New. Branded Word, PowerPoint, Excel, and Outlook templates appear on every machine, so the right starting point is one click away.
On-brand defaults. Every new document opens on brand. Formatting that would break the brand becomes harder to do by accident.
Central sync. Update one SharePoint library and the change propagates to every connected machine in minutes, not a memo nobody reads.
Signatures and meetings. Email signatures are applied server-side as the message leaves, so they are always current and never differ machine to machine, alongside branded Teams backgrounds and a branded meeting footer, set once and applied for everyone.
Devices and sign-in. Wallpaper, lock screen, and the Microsoft 365 sign-in page all carry your brand.
Your AI, on voice. One brand system prompt, set per platform (Copilot, Claude, ChatGPT, and Gemini), so AI-generated drafts arrive sounding like you, not like a generic robot.

Product-themed visuals use each Microsoft product's own colour, so a SharePoint banner reads as SharePoint and a Power BI card reads as Power BI at a glance.

Pick How Far to Take It

The service comes in three sizes so you only buy what fits:

On Brand Ready: your brand is available. Templates and the basics are in place.
On Brand Pro: your brand is the default, and off brand is hard. Defaults replaced, formatting guardrails on. This is where most teams land.
On Brand 365: every file-creation path on every surface leads to your brand, on every device. It also includes our top-tier AI Business Enablement package, AIBE Complete, free for our first 100 top-tier clients.

Template design is the one piece that is creative rather than configured, so we always quote that separately and never hide it in the tier price.

Curious which size fits your team? That is a short conversation.

Book A FREE Discovery Call

Bauer Automate Named Technology Automation Services of the Year (2026)

Tue, 22 Sep 2026 10:00:00 -0600

Bauer Automate won Technology Automation Services of the Year at the CorporateLiveWire Innovation & Excellence Awards 2026.

CorporateLiveWire runs this awards program every year, inviting business professionals and industry subscribers to nominate companies on quality of service, innovation, client experience, and sustainability. Winners are featured in the Innovation & Excellence publication, distributed to businesses and professionals worldwide.

Bauer Automate is a Calgary-based Microsoft Power Platform consultancy built on a simple idea: most businesses run on manual, repetitive work that Microsoft 365 can handle instead. Every day, our team uses SharePoint Online, Power Automate, Power Apps, Power BI, and Dataverse to find that manual work and automate it, for clients across oil and gas, legal, healthcare, aviation, utilities, and the nonprofit sector. We also lead the Calgary Power Platform User Group and the PowerUp Series, so other local professionals can build the same skills. This award recognizes that work, in the category built specifically to judge it.

We want to thank our clients for trusting us with that work, and for the chance to build solutions that actually get used. We also want to thank our team. An award like this one reflects hours of work that happen long after a client stops noticing the manual process that used to slow them down.

If your team is still doing something by hand that Microsoft 365 could do instead, we would like to hear about it. Book a discovery call, and let's find out where to start.

Book A FREE Discovery Call

One Flag, and the Whole Workspace Is There

Tue, 22 Sep 2026 10:00:00 -0600

A new project starts, and it needs a home: a site, a document library set up the right way, the content types your templates expect, navigation people can follow, a task board, and permissions that match who is on the team. Today, getting all of that usually means a ticket to IT and a wait, or an evening one of your project managers spends assembling it by hand. Either way the project waits on setup work done by someone who is not running the project.

The reason the wait exists is worth naming, because it is the thing ProjectPoint removes. Most tools that can build a SharePoint site to a standard need administrator rights to do it, so the person who needs the site is structurally not the person who can make it. Take that one

constraint away and the ticket, the queue, and the evening all go with it.

What one flag does

In ProjectPoint, a project manager provisions a workspace by setting a flag on the project's row in your Projects list. That single action runs the whole sequence. A site is created and joined to your hub. The hub navigation updates, with audience targeting, so the right people

see it. Your golden site is cloned into it: site features, permissions, content types and site columns, the lists and libraries, the navigation, and the default folder content. A Planner board is created. The homepage is generated with the project's own details filled in. And the project record links itself back to the new site and its board, so the register stays the index of everything. It takes minutes, and the person who needs the site is the person who ran it.

Run by the project owner, not by an administrator

The design decision underneath that is the one worth understanding, because it is the product's strongest technical claim. The provisioning engine is a REST deployment tool that runs on connections owned by the site owner who installs it, calling SharePoint for actions that owner already has the right to perform. No tenant-wide application is consented into your directory, and no elevated role is required to run a provisioning. That is a deliberately precise claim: it is about the provisioning run, not about your whole tenant.

It matters because the alternatives ask for more. The commercial provisioning tools in this space generally require a global administrator to consent an application across the tenant before they will work at all. The free route got harder rather than easier, too: the widely used multi-tenant provisioning application many teams relied on was deleted on 2024-09-09, so even a scripted PowerShell approach now needs an application registered and admin-consented in your tenant. ProjectPoint asks for neither.

What that does not mean

One honest boundary keeps this claim clean. Whether people can create SharePoint sites at all is a single tenant-wide setting your IT team already controls. If they have turned it off, a site owner cannot create the target site no matter how the tool signs in, and that is exactly as it should be. Provisioning without an app consent is not the same as provisioning around a decision your administrators have already made, and we would never pitch it as the latter. It is a way to run project provisioning without new standing access, inside the rules IT already set.

Two honest notes for the reader who checks

Two things this reader will ask about, said plainly. A provisioning run is a sequence of steps, so a run that stops partway is picked up and finished by a person rather than rolled back on its own. And naming conventions and sensitivity labels stay with your standard tenant governance rather than being stamped by the engine at the moment of creation. Neither surprises a SharePoint team, and we would rather name them up front than have you meet them in a demo.

The reassuring half is real too. Two pieces of hardening, restricting and logging writes to the trigger column that starts a provisioning, and reviewing the engine's own identity for least privilege, sit inside the entry tier deliberately and are being completed before the first

sale, not deferred to a later one. This is the layer IT cares about most, and it is treated as launch work rather than roadmap.

Get in touch, and we will flag a row and let you watch the workspace build itself.

Book A FREE Discovery Call

Why Your Brand on Every File Matters (and Why We Automate It)

Thu, 17 Sep 2026 10:00:00 -0600

Here is a small thing that is actually a big thing: every document your team sends out is a tiny ambassador for your business. A proposal, a slide, an invoice, a quick email attachment. When they all look like they came from one confident company, that is a quiet signal that you have your act together. When they do not, that is a quiet signal too.

Most teams do not have a branding problem on purpose. They have a drift problem. One person has last year's template. Someone stretched the logo to fit. The wrong shade of the brand colour crept in from a stock slide. None of it is anyone's fault; it is just what happens when staying on brand depends on every person remembering to, on every file, forever.

The Quiet Costs

Three things happen when documents drift off brand:

Trust erodes a little at a time. A client who sees three different logo treatments in a week does not file a complaint. They just form a slightly smaller impression of how polished you are. Polish reads as competence.
Time leaks. People rebuild the same title slide, reformat the same table, and hunt for the right template instead of doing the work you actually bill for.
Your identity gets diluted. A brand only works when it shows up the same way every time. Drift undoes the investment you made everywhere else.

The Fix is Not "Try Harder"

You cannot solve a consistency problem by asking people to be more careful. You solve it by making the on-brand path the easy path. That is what we do with the On Brand service: we set up your own Microsoft 365 so the branded templates are already in File and New on every machine, the defaults open on brand, and formatting that breaks the brand becomes harder to do by accident. Update one central library and the change reaches everyone in minutes.

It is native Microsoft tooling, no third-party agents, and it scales from "make our templates available" all the way to "every file-creation path on every device leads to our brand."

If your documents have started to drift, that is normal, and it is fixable. We would be glad to show you what on brand by default looks like for your team.

Book A FREE Discovery Call

The Timesheet That Isn't a Separate System

Tue, 15 Sep 2026 10:00:00 -0600

Your billable hours live in a time-tracking tool. The project they belong to lives somewhere else: a site, a plan, a folder of documents. And once a month somebody sits down and reconciles the two by hand, matching a row in one system to a project in another, so the invoice can go out. The record your firm's revenue stands on is kept in the one place that has no direct connection to the work it describes.

That gap is not an accident of your setup. It is the shape of the whole category. Time tracking grew up as its own kind of software, a product you buy on its own, so the hours and the project they were logged against were never meant to live in the same system. The reconciliation is not a step you do badly. It is a tax you pay for keeping two records of the same afternoon in two different places.

Two records of one afternoon

Think about what a timesheet entry and a project record actually are. Both describe the same hour of the same person's work. One says how long and against what code; the other says what the work was part of, where its documents are, who is on it. Keeping them apart means every number has to be carried across the gap by a person, and the carrying is where the errors, the delay, and the month-end scramble come from. The hours matter most and sit furthest from the project.

One list, in the project's own site

ProjectPoint closes the gap by putting time where the project already is. An entry is a row in a SharePoint list in the project's own site, naming the project it belongs to, sitting next to that project's documents and its registers. It is part of the project record, not a separate system pointing at it from outside.

The way that time gets captured is a shipped browser extension for Edge and Chrome, and it is good at the job. It rides in the browser side panel, so it is present on whatever tab the work is happening in. Start a timer with one click, run several at once when the work genuinely overlaps and watch the wall clock split evenly between them so the total never inflates, or log time by hand when the timer missed it. A week strip shows the days you have and have not logged, and a month view answers the question people actually ask, which is not "what is my total" but "am I on pace", with the projection shown rather than hidden. It captures time well, and every minute of it lands in your own list using the sign-in the person already has.

It holds up against the tools built only for this

The mature time-tracking products, Harvest, Ruddr, Clockify and the rest, are good software, and we will not pretend otherwise. But every one of them is vendor-hosted, so the honest capture they give you comes with the record living on someone else's servers, under someone else's subscription. ProjectPoint gives you the capture, concurrent timers that add up correctly, a completeness view, a pace projection, and keeps the record in your own tenant, because it was never anywhere else.

ProjectPoint's time entry names a project, with a category, and reports against it. Time broken down to individual tasks and sub-tasks, against a full work-breakdown structure, is the relational model at the Platform tier on Dataverse; when that is the job in front of you, it is
the Platform conversation to have.

One component of a platform, not a point tool

The reason the timesheet is not a separate system is that ProjectPoint is not a time tracker that grew a project feature. It is a project management platform on SharePoint, and time entry is one component of its middle tier, alongside the four project registers and the capture of time and budget feedback from both the project lead and the people doing the work. The point of putting time in the project is that it stops being a silo and starts being one more thing the project workspace knows, reported on next to the budget it burns and the risks it carries.

Where it goes when you bill at a rate

For a firm that bills client work, the next step up is the relational model at the top tier, on Dataverse: rates, billable versus non-billable classification, an invoicing-ready export, and row-level boundaries so a contributor sees only their own entries. That is the Platform conversation, and it is the one to have when time to rate to invoice is the job in front of you. The middle tier gets your hours captured against the right project, in your own tenant, and reported on in context; the top tier turns them into what finance sends the client.

Get in touch, and we will show you hours that already know which project they are on.

Book A FREE Discovery Call

The Report Your Tenant Is Already Holding

Thu, 10 Sep 2026 10:00:00 -0600

Two rituals repeat in every delivery organisation. Once a week, someone sends the "timesheets please" email. Once a month, someone rebuilds the same status report by hand, copying numbers out of a tool into a slide, so leadership can see where the projects stand. Both are work that produces nothing new. Both exist to compensate for the same missing thing: a clear view of your own data that you can simply read.

The reason you cannot simply read it is usually where the data lives. When the record sits on a vendor's servers, getting a report out of it means exporting on the vendor's terms, in the vendor's shape, and then rebuilding the view you actually wanted. The report is a reconstruction, not a read. And the weekly reminder exists for a related reason: completeness is invisible, so a person has to stand in for the check a system should perform.

The reminder is a symptom of a report you cannot see

Look at the weekly chase for what it is. A manager broadcasts "timesheets please" because they cannot see whose week is complete, and a contributor cannot tell either, so two people spend attention on a question a glance should answer. The monthly report is the same problem one level up: the numbers exist, but not in a form anyone can point a chart at, so they get carried across by hand every period. Neither is a discipline failure. Both are what you get when the data is somewhere you cannot query freely.

The data is already list items in your own tenant

Here is the structural difference with ProjectPoint. Your Projects registry is a SharePoint list. Your time entries are SharePoint list items, in your own project sites. That is not a metaphor for "we can export it to you". It is the same data an executive roll-up reads, sitting in a place you already own the tools for, and ProjectPoint turns it into the views your week actually runs on.

The reports, and the reminders that carry their own answer

Every person entering time gets their own week strip, showing the days logged and unlogged, and a month view with a signed pace figure, ahead in green or behind in red, with the projection shown rather than hidden. That is reporting at the level of the individual, and it answers "am I on pace" without anyone sending an email.

Above it, ProjectPoint reports across the portfolio. A cross-project roll-up puts status and budget for every project in one view, built from the registry that already holds them. Scheduled digests land in inboxes showing who is on track and where a budget is heading, so the weekly reminder sends itself with the answer already attached instead of a manager chasing it. And a client-ready weekly progress summary is drafted for each project from the week's own entries, so a project manager sends it rather than assembling it by hand. Because your hours are ordinary list items in your own tenant, a Power BI report points straight at them, over data you already own, with nothing to export and no vendor copy to reconcile against.

The upgrade worth having

The entry tier gets your projects and your hours into your own tenant, correctly shaped and correctly owned. That is the foundation, and it is the part you buy first. The middle tier is where that owned data becomes the roll-up, the digest, and the summary that a delivery lead runs the week on. That is the upgrade worth having, and the reason it is worth having is the reason the whole thing is worth owning: the data underneath every one of those reports is yours, and it stays yours.

Get in touch, and we will point your own reporting at your own data.

Book A FREE Discovery Call