A Software Asset Management engagement ends the way it was always going to: with a gap analysis and, close behind it, a recommendation to buy something to close the gap. The pressure at this point is real but quiet. The partner is helpful, the number looks official, and the path of least resistance is to accept the remediation and move on. That path is almost always the most expensive one. The number you have been handed is an opening position, and your next move decides how much of it you actually pay.
This article walks through what to do once the engagement is complete: how to read the gap analysis, what to verify before you respond, and how to keep a remediation proposal from becoming a purchase you did not need. If the engagement is still in front of you, read the partner led SAM engagement explained first.
Do not treat the gap analysis as final
The first and most important move is a shift in posture. The gap analysis is a reading of your estate produced on the vendor's terms, using the vendor's counting methodology. It is not your Effective License Position, and it is not the last word. Microsoft uses its own data from Azure, Microsoft 365, and management tooling, and even a careful SAM tool report can differ from that calculation. The gap analysis is a claim. Your job now is to test it.
A gap analysis is a claim about what you owe. A reconciliation is the truth. They are rarely the same number.
Testing it means reconciling the gap line by line against your own entitlements, applying every credit the analysis left out. Downgrade rights, prior purchases, rights under existing agreements, and use that should not count all push the real number down. The difference between the gap as presented and the gap as reconciled is your saving, and it is often substantial.
Verify before you respond
Before you say anything back to the partner, run your own checks. A handful of questions exposes most of the distance between the proposal and the real position.
- Which counting methodology produced the gap, and does it match how Microsoft would actually calculate
- Were downgrade rights and prior entitlements applied, or only deployments counted
- Does the analysis include use that is licensed under an agreement the partner did not see
- Where does the gap place you against the 5 percent clause, which adds licenses at 125 percent of price
- Is any part of the proposed remediation a product you do not need but the partner is motivated to sell
Each of these is a place where the proposed number and the defensible number diverge. You do not have to win every point. Winning the ones that matter is usually enough to change the outcome materially.
Map your options honestly
After reconciliation you will know roughly where you stand, and that tells you which route fits. There is no single right answer, only the one that matches your real position.
| Reconciled position | The right next move |
|---|---|
| Gap mostly disappears after credits | Document the reconciliation and respond with your position, not a purchase |
| Real but small shortfall | True up deliberately, at standard price, on your timing |
| Shortfall near the 5 percent line | Act to cross back under the threshold before any formal process begins |
| Remediation includes unneeded product | Separate the genuine shortfall from the upsell and decline the rest |
The discipline is to let the reconciled position drive the decision, not the proposal. A remediation quote is built to be accepted whole. Your response should be built around what you actually owe.
Keep the relationship intact
Pushing back on a gap analysis is not a hostile act, and it should not read as one. The partner ran a process; you are reconciling its output, which is exactly what a diligent customer does. Stay cooperative, communicate through a single owner, and frame your response as accuracy rather than resistance. A measured, evidence led reply tends to land better than either silence or a fight, and it preserves the relationship you will still need at renewal.
It also protects you if the matter ever escalates. A self verification is a contractual demand you cannot decline, and a formal audit runs through a third party accounting firm under the MBSA audit clause. Having reconciled the SAM gap calmly and on the record means you arrive at any later process already holding a defensible Effective License Position rather than an unexamined liability.
Turn the engagement into leverage
Handled well, a finished SAM engagement is not a setback. It is intelligence. You now know how the vendor reads your estate, where it thinks the gaps are, and what it will try to sell. Reconcile that against your own number and you hold the more accurate position, which is the one that wins. The engagement that was meant to create a sale becomes the thing that lets you avoid an unnecessary one.
A buyer side advisor does this reconciliation with you, tests the gap analysis against your real entitlements, separates genuine shortfall from upsell, and responds to the proposal from your side of the table. Our guarantee stands behind the work: we reduce your exposure or we reimburse our service fee, and with gainshare you pay only from verified savings. For the full motion from invitation to outcome, work through the SAM engagement playbook.
If this is live on your desk right now, our SAM engagement response team runs your internal assessment before Microsoft sees a single number.