Microsoft Multi-Cloud Co-Delivery: When EPC Group Leads Microsoft Workloads in Big-SI Programs

TL;DR

• For large multi-year, multi-cloud enterprise transformations, EPC Group often delivers as the Microsoft-specialist layer within broader programs led by a global system integrator (GSI). The co-delivery model is well-established and works cleanly when defined upfront.
• The pattern: EPC Group leads Microsoft analytics, Power BI, Fabric, M365, SharePoint, and AI governance workstreams; the GSI prime delivers the broader transformation (multi-cloud, multi-vendor, application portfolio, change management at scale).
• The structural advantage: the enterprise gets specialist depth on Microsoft workloads without sacrificing the GSI's scale, geography, and multi-cloud orchestration capability.
• Common co-delivery patterns include: GSI prime / EPC Microsoft layer, GSI prime / EPC specialty squad (e.g., Power BI CoE stand-up), and independent multi-track delivery with explicit interface management.
• This guide is for enterprise buyers structuring large transformations and for partner organizations planning co-delivery on Microsoft workloads.

Executive Summary

The largest enterprise transformations of 2026 — full-stack modernization programs, multi-year cloud migrations, multi-cloud strategies — are typically led by a global system integrator. The reasons are practical: the GSI brings geographic coverage, multi-vendor relationships, methodology consistency at scale, and the program-management capacity to orchestrate a $50M+ multi-year initiative.

The challenge: GSI prime delivery on Microsoft workloads is often weaker than on the GSI's strongest stack. A GSI that excels at SAP modernization may have a Microsoft practice that is competent but not deep. Enterprise buyers facing a $50M+ multi-cloud program with substantial Microsoft scope have a structural decision: accept the GSI's Microsoft delivery, or insert specialist Microsoft depth into the program structure.

EPC Group's multi-cloud co-delivery model is the structural answer. EPC Group delivers as the Microsoft-specialist layer within the broader program. The GSI prime handles the program architecture, the multi-cloud orchestration, and the workstreams outside Microsoft. EPC Group handles the Microsoft analytics, Power BI, Fabric, M365, SharePoint, and AI governance workstreams with senior-architect depth.

This guide details the co-delivery model, the patterns we use, the contractual structures that work, and the operational discipline that keeps the partnership clean.

Why Co-Delivery Matters

Three structural factors make co-delivery the right model for large multi-cloud programs:

1. Specialist depth beats generalist breadth on technology-specific workloads. Microsoft Fabric implementation expertise is qualitatively different from generic data platform consulting. A specialist firm with hundreds of Fabric implementations brings pattern recognition that a generalist firm cannot match at the same staffing tier.

2. GSI prime delivery offers scale and orchestration the specialist cannot match. A $50M+ multi-year program requires program management, financial controls, geographic coverage, multi-vendor relationships, and methodology consistency that specialist firms typically cannot deliver at scale.

3. The interface is well-understood when structured upfront. Co-delivery has been the dominant model for SAP, Salesforce, and Oracle implementations within broader programs for decades. The patterns transfer cleanly to Microsoft co-delivery.

The Three Co-Delivery Patterns

Pattern A: GSI Prime / EPC Microsoft Layer

The GSI is the contractual prime. EPC Group is a subcontractor or named teaming partner delivering the Microsoft workstreams.

The pattern:

1. GSI holds the master agreement with the client and the overall program responsibility.
2. EPC Group holds a teaming agreement with the GSI for the Microsoft workstreams.
3. EPC Group delivers Microsoft analytics, Power BI, Fabric, M365, SharePoint, and AI governance with full architect-led depth.
4. GSI orchestrates the broader program, integrates EPC Group's workstreams with the rest of the program, and reports to the client.

Right for: programs where the client wants a single throat-to-choke at the prime level and where the GSI has the program-orchestration capability.

Pattern B: GSI Prime / EPC Specialty Squad

EPC Group delivers a specific specialty engagement within a broader GSI-led program. Typical examples:

• Power BI CoE stand-up within a broader modernization program.
• AI governance framework implementation within an enterprise AI program.
• Compliance-native data platform within a regulated-industry transformation.
• Microsoft 365 Copilot rollout within a productivity transformation.

The pattern:

1. GSI delivers the broader program.
2. EPC Group delivers the specific specialty engagement as a defined subscope.
3. Interface points are explicit (data sources, identity integration, change management coordination).
4. EPC Group's engagement has its own Statement of Work and the standard EPC Group Engagement Charter applies.

Right for: programs where the specialty engagement is well-bounded and can be delivered as a defined module.

Pattern C: Independent Multi-Track with Explicit Interface Management

The client engages multiple delivery partners directly, each on their domain. EPC Group leads Microsoft tracks; the GSI leads non-Microsoft tracks. Coordination happens through the client's PMO or through a formal multi-partner governance structure.

The pattern:

1. Client holds separate agreements with each delivery partner.
2. Each partner has clear scope and accountability for their tracks.
3. Cross-track dependencies are managed through a client-led or jointly-led governance structure.
4. No partner is contractually responsible for the others' delivery.

Right for: enterprises with sophisticated internal PMO capability who prefer direct accountability with each delivery partner.

When Each Pattern Works Best

Program characteristic	Recommended pattern
Single-throat accountability strongly preferred	A (GSI prime)
Well-bounded Microsoft specialty within broader program	B (specialty squad)
Client has strong internal PMO and prefers direct accountability	C (independent multi-track)
Multi-vendor multi-cloud at substantial scale	A or C
Microsoft-dominant program with non-Microsoft adjacencies	EPC Group prime preferred (not co-delivery)
Federal sector with prime/sub regulations	A (typically)
Time-critical Microsoft delivery within broader timeline	B (specialty squad)

How EPC Group Integrates with GSI Methodologies

Each major GSI has its own delivery methodology. EPC Group integrates with the GSI's methodology rather than imposing our own:

• Accenture's myWizard / GenWizard methodology. EPC Group aligns workstream cadences, tooling integration, and reporting formats to Accenture's program structure.
• Deloitte's Digital DNA methodology. Similar alignment to Deloitte's enterprise program structures.
• Capgemini's Connected Enterprise model. Integration with Capgemini's delivery framework.
• TCS's MasterCraft / Co-Innovation Network. Integration with TCS's delivery model.
• Wipro's Holmes platform. Integration with Wipro's AI-augmented delivery.

The principle: the client experiences a coordinated delivery, not a fight between methodologies. EPC Group's internal operational discipline (the Engagement Charter) holds across patterns; the external coordination adapts to the GSI's methodology.

Contractual Structures That Work

Master Subcontract Structure

For Pattern A engagements, a master subcontract between EPC Group and the GSI typically covers:

• Standard subcontractor terms.
• EPC Group's Engagement Charter incorporated by reference.
• IP ownership clarity (typically client-owned with EPC Group retention of pre-existing IP).
• Subcontractor flow-down of client terms.
• Insurance and indemnity alignment.

Direct Client Agreement (Pattern C)

For Pattern C engagements, EPC Group contracts directly with the client on the Microsoft scope. The Engagement Charter applies. Cross-partner coordination is managed at the program level.

Specialty Engagement Structure (Pattern B)

For Pattern B engagements, the structure varies — sometimes a direct client agreement, sometimes a subcontract through the GSI. The choice depends on the client's procurement preferences and the GSI's relationship structure.

Common Co-Delivery Patterns by Industry

Healthcare

Common co-delivery: large GSI prime delivers Epic implementation; EPC Group delivers Power BI analytics layer over Epic Clarity and Caboodle with HIPAA-native governance.

Financial Services

Common co-delivery: large GSI prime delivers core banking modernization; EPC Group delivers risk and finance reporting analytics with SOC 2 and SR 11-7 alignment.

Federal Sector

Common co-delivery: large federal SI prime holds the contract; EPC Group delivers Microsoft Fabric or Power BI workstream as a subcontractor within FedRAMP-aligned scope.

Manufacturing

Common co-delivery: GSI prime delivers ERP modernization; EPC Group delivers Power BI manufacturing intelligence layer.

Common Pitfalls

Across the co-delivery engagements EPC Group has participated in:

1. Undefined interface points. When co-delivery starts without clear interface definitions, dependencies surface mid-engagement and cause friction.

2. Methodology imposition. A GSI that imposes its full methodology on EPC Group's workstreams (or vice versa) creates friction. Methodology integration should be deliberate, not imposed.

3. Communication asymmetry. When the client communicates exclusively through one partner, the other partner becomes underinformed. Communication patterns should include both partners at appropriate levels.

4. Scope ambiguity. When the line between Microsoft scope and broader program scope is unclear, work falls into the gap. Scope definitions should be explicit at engagement design.

5. Tooling proliferation. Two partners with different status-reporting tools, different ticketing systems, different documentation platforms create overhead. Standardize on common tooling at the program level.

6. IP friction. Without clear IP terms upfront, deliverables can become contested. Resolve IP terms before delivery starts.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is multi-cloud co-delivery?

Multi-cloud co-delivery is a delivery model where multiple consulting partners work together on a large enterprise transformation, typically with a global system integrator (GSI) as the prime and specialist firms (like EPC Group for Microsoft) as the specialty layers within the broader program.

Why does EPC Group co-deliver with GSIs?

For programs that require GSI scale (geographic coverage, program orchestration capacity, multi-vendor relationships) plus specialist depth on Microsoft workloads, co-delivery combines both. EPC Group brings the Microsoft specialist depth; the GSI brings the program orchestration.

When does EPC Group prime versus co-deliver?

For programs that are predominantly Microsoft-focused with smaller non-Microsoft adjacencies, EPC Group typically primes. For programs that are predominantly multi-cloud or non-Microsoft with substantial Microsoft scope, co-delivery is typically the right pattern.

Which GSIs has EPC Group co-delivered with?

EPC Group has co-delivery experience with Accenture, Deloitte, Capgemini, Wipro, TCS, Cognizant, and several federal-sector primes. Each relationship has its own methodology and interface patterns.

How is scope defined in a co-delivery engagement?

Scope is defined explicitly in the Statement of Work with clear boundaries between EPC Group's Microsoft scope and the GSI's broader program scope. Interface points are documented. The boundaries are reviewed periodically to handle scope evolution.

How is communication managed across partners?

Communication patterns are defined at program kickoff with explicit cadences and participation requirements. Typical pattern: weekly cross-partner standup, bi-weekly executive review with both partners and the client, joint monthly business review.

How is IP handled in co-delivery?

IP terms are documented in the master subcontract or teaming agreement before delivery starts. Typical pattern: deliverables are client-owned; partner-developed accelerators retain partner IP with appropriate client licensing.

What is EPC Group's typical co-delivery scope on a Microsoft workstream?

For a typical Pattern A engagement, EPC Group's scope includes the Microsoft analytics, Power BI, Microsoft Fabric, M365, SharePoint, and AI governance workstreams. Specific scope varies by program; the principle is "EPC Group leads where Microsoft specialist depth matters most."

Does the EPC Group Engagement Charter apply in co-delivery?

Yes. EPC Group's Engagement Charter applies to EPC Group's scope within the co-delivery. The named senior architect, communication SLAs, change-control rules, and quality standards all apply to EPC Group's workstreams.

How does EPC Group integrate with the GSI's methodology?

EPC Group integrates with the GSI's methodology rather than imposing our own. Workstream cadences, tooling, reporting formats, and governance structures align to the GSI's program model. EPC Group's internal operational discipline holds within that integration.

How is the client's experience affected by co-delivery?

When done well, the client experiences a coordinated delivery. Status reports include both partners' workstreams. Executive reviews include both partner leaders. Issues are escalated through clear paths. The complexity of co-delivery is absorbed by the partners, not surfaced to the client.

What is the typical financial structure of co-delivery?

For Pattern A (subcontract), EPC Group invoices the GSI per the subcontract terms; the GSI invoices the client per the master agreement. For Pattern C (independent), EPC Group invoices the client directly. For Pattern B (specialty engagement), the structure depends on the engagement.

How does EPC Group support co-delivery on federal programs?

EPC Group has federal-sector co-delivery experience as a subcontractor to federal SI primes. The federal subcontractor model has specific requirements (security clearances, FAR/DFARS flow-down terms, performance evaluation patterns). EPC Group's federal-experienced team supports these requirements.

What if the GSI prime is underperforming?

EPC Group's responsibility is to deliver our scope. Where GSI underperformance affects EPC Group's ability to deliver (e.g., missing dependencies, unclear direction), EPC Group escalates through the program's defined paths. The client retains the overall remedy with the prime.

How does EPC Group support multi-cloud strategies?

EPC Group's primary capability is Microsoft cloud. For multi-cloud programs, EPC Group integrates with non-Microsoft cloud delivery (AWS, GCP, Salesforce, SAP) through co-delivery with partners that lead those clouds. The Microsoft tracks within multi-cloud programs are where EPC Group brings deep expertise.

Next Steps

If your enterprise is structuring a large multi-cloud or multi-vendor transformation with substantial Microsoft scope, the practical next steps:

1. Define the program's overall structure and the role of Microsoft workloads.
2. Identify whether Pattern A, B, or C is the right co-delivery model.
3. Evaluate Microsoft specialist partners against the operational discipline criteria.
4. Define the interface points between partners.
5. Engage EPC Group early in the program design to validate the co-delivery model.

EPC Group has 29 years of enterprise Microsoft consulting experience including extensive co-delivery participation with the major global system integrators. We are Microsoft Solutions Partner with the core designations and were historically the oldest continuous Microsoft Gold Partner in North America from 2016 until the program's retirement. Our consultants — including Microsoft Press bestselling author Errin O'Connor — bring direct Microsoft specialist depth that complements GSI program orchestration. To discuss co-delivery on your program, contact EPC Group for a 30-minute discovery call.