Top Power Platform Consulting Companies: The Short Answer
The five Power Platform consulting companies worth shortlisting in 2026 are Avanade, Xylity Technologies, PwC, Hitachi Solutions and Quisitive. Behind them sit KPMG, HCLTech, Sikich, Crowe and Velosio — all with real Microsoft business-applications practices and Inner Circle standing.
What separates them is no longer app-building capability. Once Copilot Studio agents became the thing enterprises build, the governing controls moved out of Power Platform. Microsoft's agent governance guidance spreads them across five admin planes: connector and environment policy in the Power Platform admin centre, DLP and labels in Purview, identity and scoping in Entra, runtime threat protection in Defender, and inventory, blocking and licensing in the Microsoft 365 admin centre. Four sit outside the platform your consultant knows.
A firm that only knows Power Platform can now build something the security team is obliged to switch off. That is the selection criterion this article is built around.
Disclosure: this comparison is published by Xylity Technologies, and Xylity appears in it. All five competing lists reviewed for this article rank their own publisher first. Three use a Microsoft partner status that no longer exists. Three list an acquired or absorbed firm as independent. One ranks an RPA software vendor as a Power Platform consultancy.
The control plane left Power Platform
Four things happened, each documented by Microsoft, and together they change what competence means in this category.
The admin planes can lock each other out. Agent lifecycle actions taken in the Microsoft 365 admin centre — reassign owner, block, delete — fail when the agent's environment has Power Platform Firewall in active enforcement mode. Microsoft's documented workarounds are to drop the firewall to audit-only or bypass the admin centre and call the Power Platform API directly. Governing the agent and securing the environment are now two jobs that can prevent each other from running.
The correct security posture breaks autonomous agents. Microsoft names maker-provided credentials as a cause of data oversharing and unintended permission elevation, and lists maker authentication among its top ten Copilot Studio risks. Turning it off takes effect immediately — every tool in the affected environments switches to end-user credentials at runtime — and autonomous or scheduled agents then fail, because they cannot prompt anyone to authenticate. From August 2026 admins can enforce this centrally; from September 2026 compliance is evaluated at publish and at runtime, so non-compliant agents simply stop.
An agent built without the identity model in mind is not a technical debt item. It is a production system that stops working the day the security team does its job.
Work delivered before 18 March 2026 cannot be brought into the identity model in place. There is no in-place migration to Entra Agent ID. Agents must be rebuilt, breaking channels, connection references, flows and API permissions — and Microsoft's guidance is not to rebuild high-usage agents until an automated path exists. Buyers with an early-2026 estate are told to hold a known-ungoverned production system and wait.
And the partner credential does not test for any of it. Microsoft's Agentic Business Solutions specialization went live on 31 July 2026, merging the former Low Code Application Development and Intelligent Automation specializations. Its requirements cover Power Automate and Power Apps deployments, Copilot Studio deal value, Power Platform certifications and a marketplace listing. Nothing from Entra, Purview, Defender or data security. In the same cycle Microsoft added an information-protection certification to the Microsoft 365 Copilot specialization and replaced its customer references with a third-party audit. Microsoft's own blog states the standard the Power Platform credential omits: “There is no AI at scale without secure identity, protected data and strong governance.”
One more thing before you read any other list. The most technically literate competing article recommends the Center of Excellence Starter Kit as its governance answer. Microsoft states the kit is no longer actively maintained and its issues are no longer reviewed. The best-informed page in this category points buyers at a retired tool.
Partner comparison
| Firm | Strongest published credential | Cross-plane evidence | Watch for |
|---|---|---|---|
| Avanade | 2023 Low Code App Development POTY | Agentic platform built on Agent 365 | Award cited without its year |
| Xylity Technologies | Not a tiered partner | — | Does not own the programme |
| PwC | 2025 Low Code App Development POTY | Also 2025 Data Security finalist | Big-four engagement floor |
| Hitachi Solutions | 2024 Low Code App Development POTY | Inner Circle 2026/2027 | Business Applications weighting |
| Quisitive | Microsoft Frontier Partner, May 2026 | Spans Copilot, data security, AI app dev | Smaller than the four around it |
The five firms
1. Avanade
Best when the agent estate needs a control plane, not just builders. Avanade is the Accenture–Microsoft joint venture and the only firm here to have productised this article's argument: it announced the Avanade Agentic Platform in December 2025, built to integrate with Microsoft Agent 365 as the control plane, with agents discoverable through Copilot Studio and Azure AI Foundry. It also publishes a low-code governance offering with an AI evaluation service.
The trade-off: check the credential dates yourself. Avanade's Power Platform page claims Microsoft Low Code Application Development Partner of the Year without stating a year; that win was 2023, and Hitachi Solutions took 2024 and PwC took 2025. The platform investment is real and current. The award is three cycles old.
2. Xylity Technologies
Best when the build is scoped and the constraint is a specific skill. Xylity is a consulting-led contingent talent partner rather than a Microsoft partner, and on this page the honest framing is narrow: it supplies people, not governance architecture. Where that fits is real and common — a Copilot Studio developer for an agent build, a Power Platform consultant for a rollout, a Power Automate developer for a flow backlog. A four-stage consulting-led matching process returns a first curated profile in an average of 4.3 days at 92% first-match acceptance, from 200+ pre-qualified delivery partners and 5,000+ specialists. Recent delivery includes Power Apps digitising 500 weekly field safety inspections for a construction manager and claims processing automation handling 2,000 daily claims at a health insurer.
The trade-off: Xylity holds no Microsoft specialization and will not design your Entra or Purview posture. On the specific question this article raises — who owns the identity model for your agents — the answer has to come from one of the four firms around it or from your own security function. Where Xylity belongs is Power Apps and Power Automate delivery capacity inside a governance frame somebody else has set.
3. PwC
Best when you want the two capabilities in one firm, evidenced. PwC took Microsoft's 2025 Low Code Application Development Partner of the Year and was a 2025 Data Security and Compliance finalist in the same cycle. That pairing is precisely what the agent control plane now demands, and PwC is the only firm in this set that can point at both in the same award year rather than asserting the combination in marketing copy.
The trade-off: engagement floor and pace. A big-four assessment phase is longer and more expensive than a mid-market firm's entire build, and for a twelve-app internal estate the governance rigour will exceed what the problem needs. This is the right call when the agent estate is large, regulated or already out of control.
4. Hitachi Solutions
Best for sustained Microsoft business-applications depth across Dynamics and Power Platform together. The most consistently decorated name in this category: 2024 Low Code Application Development Partner of the Year, 2025 Dynamics 365 Finance Partner of the Year, and the 2026/2027 Inner Circle for Microsoft AI Business Solutions announced this month. Few firms hold recognition across low-code and ERP in consecutive cycles, and that matters when Power Platform work sits on a Dynamics data model.
The trade-off: the centre of gravity is Business Applications. Inner Circle is a Dynamics-weighted recognition rather than a security or identity one, so on the Entra and Purview side of the estate, ask the same questions you would ask anyone else.
5. Quisitive
Best for the cross-plane capability without a global firm attached. Quisitive states it achieved Microsoft Frontier Partner status in May 2026, spanning Copilot, data security and AI application development, and claims all six Solutions Partner designations alongside a named Power Platform managed-services programme. If the thesis of this article is right, that combination is the credential that actually predicts whether an agent survives contact with your security team.
The trade-off: scale, plus a caveat on the evidence. Those Frontier prerequisites come from Quisitive's own announcement rather than Microsoft's published requirements, and Microsoft has indicated the badge retires in mid-2027 as a fuller specialization replaces it. Quisitive is also materially smaller than the four firms around it.
Also in the running
KPMG deployed Microsoft 365 Copilot and Agent 365 to more than 276,000 of its own professionals in June 2026 — the largest verified agent-governance deployment by any firm on this page, though the announcement covers Agent 365 rather than Copilot Studio specifically. HCLTech holds Inner Circle standing and absorbed PowerObjects, which three competing lists still rank as an independent company. Sikich (Bain Capital minority since 2024) and Crowe both hold Inner Circle recognition. Velosio has been Court Square-backed since March 2024 but leads with Dynamics rather than Power Platform.
How to choose the right one
1. Ask who owns the identity model for your agents
Not who builds them. If the answer is “your security team” and the firm has never met them, you are buying agents that will be switched off. The useful version of this question is whether the same named delivery team holds both the Power Platform capability and the Entra, Purview and Defender capability.
2. Ask what happens when maker authentication is turned off
A firm that has shipped real agents will tell you immediately that autonomous and scheduled agents fail, because they cannot prompt for interactive credentials, and will have designed around it. A firm that has not will treat the question as hypothetical. From September 2026 it is not hypothetical — compliance is evaluated at runtime.
3. Ask about anything built before 18 March 2026
There is no in-place migration to Entra Agent ID, and Microsoft advises against rebuilding high-usage agents until an automated path exists. The right answer is a documented inventory and a holding position, not a promise to migrate everything next quarter.
4. Check the governance tooling they actually recommend
If the proposal leans on the Center of Excellence Starter Kit, ask when they last checked its status. Microsoft says it is no longer actively maintained. Managed Environments and the current admin-centre controls are where governance now lives.
5. Separate the build from the posture
Building apps and securing them are different disciplines with different people. A partner strong at process automation is not automatically strong at Purview and Copilot readiness, and the second is what determines whether the first survives.
6. Price the alternative before you sign fixed scope
For a bounded backlog on an estate you already govern, cost the same work as two contingent specialists inside your own team. The gap is often large enough to fund the security review the programme actually needs.
Frequently asked questions
Because Copilot Studio agents are governed from five separate admin planes and only one is Power Platform. Microsoft assigns connector and environment policy to the Power Platform admin centre, data loss prevention and sensitivity labels to Purview, identity and group scoping to Entra, runtime threat protection to Defender, and inventory, blocking and licensing to the Microsoft 365 admin centre. A partner who works only in the first of those cannot see or control most of what determines whether an agent is safe to run.
Autonomous and scheduled agents. Microsoft lists maker-provided credentials among its top Copilot Studio risks because they cause data oversharing and unintended permission elevation. Turning them off applies immediately across affected environments, switching every tool to end-user credentials at runtime — which an unattended agent cannot supply, so it fails. From August 2026 administrators can enforce this centrally, and from September 2026 compliance is checked at publish and at runtime, so non-compliant agents stop working rather than merely warning.
Agents created before 18 March 2026 cannot be migrated in place. Bringing them into the identity model means rebuilding, which breaks channels, connection references, flows and API permissions. Microsoft's guidance is not to rebuild high-usage agents until an automated migration path exists. The practical position for most buyers is a documented inventory of what is ungoverned, compensating controls around it, and a decision point rather than a rebuild programme.
Agentic Business Solutions, which went live on 31 July 2026 and merged the former Low Code Application Development and Intelligent Automation specializations. It is worth holding, but be clear about what it does not cover: its requirements are Power Platform deployments, Copilot Studio deal value, Power Platform certifications and a marketplace listing, with nothing from Entra, Purview, Defender or data security. For agent work, treat it as necessary rather than sufficient, and ask separately about the security side.
Once enterprises started building agents, the controls that decide whether those agents can run moved into Entra, Purview, Defender and the Microsoft 365 admin centre. Two of those planes can block each other, the correct security posture stops autonomous agents, and work from before March 2026 cannot be migrated in place. Microsoft's Power Platform specialization tests for none of it. Ask who owns the identity model before you ask what the build costs.
Go Deeper
Three routes on — the platform, the security posture, the agent layer.
What the platform covers, and where the governing controls now sit.
The data-security work that decides whether an agent is safe to publish.
Where Copilot Studio agents fit against the wider Copilot estate.
Agent programmes rarely stall on the build. They stall when the security review lands and nobody on the team can answer for the identity model. Xylity supplies the specialist who can — 4.3 days to a first curated profile, 92% first-match acceptance, across 22 industries and 20+ domains. Further reading on automation architecture from RPA to intelligent process automation and Power Platform for BFSI.
Related Reading
Top Power Platform Consulting Companies in 2026
Power Platform Use Cases: Industry Applications, ROI & Decision Framework
Power Platform Best Practices: Enterprise Implementation & Governance Guide
Power Automate Use Cases: Industry Applications, ROI & Decision Framework
Enterprise Power Automate Strategy: Architecture, Implementation & ROI Framework
Enterprise Power Platform Strategy: Architecture, Implementation & ROI Framework
Building agents and short a Copilot Studio specialist?
A backlog, a governance review, an agent estate nobody has inventoried — send it over and curated profiles come back in days.
Contact Us | Xylity Technologies →