Which Microsoft Licensing Agreement to Choose
Introduction – Why Choosing the Right Microsoft Agreement Matters
Choosing the right Microsoft licensing agreement might not sound thrilling, but it can have millions of dollars at stake.
The wrong contract can lock you into overspending or inflexible terms for years.
Microsoft offers several agreement types: Enterprise Agreement (EA), Cloud Solution Provider (CSP), Microsoft Customer Agreement (MCA), and Microsoft Products and Services Agreement (MPSA). Each agreement type suits different situations.
This guide will help you navigate these options.
We’ll break down key factors and real-world scenarios so you can confidently match the agreement type with your organization’s profile. Read our comprehensive guide, Microsoft Licensing Agreements Comparison: EA vs CSP vs MCA.
(Buyer tip: Don’t just accept Microsoft’s default recommendation. By understanding your needs and the trade-offs of each contract, you can avoid paying for things you don’t need.)
Key Factors to Consider Before Choosing
Before diving into specific agreements, evaluate your organization on a few key factors. These will shape which Microsoft contract makes the most sense for you:
- Organization size and user volume: Larger organizations often qualify for programs like EA that offer volume discounts (typically requiring 500+ users). Small businesses won’t meet those minimums and should look at CSP or Open Value programs designed for them. Size drives which agreements you’re even eligible for and how much leverage you have on pricing.
- License count stability: Is your user/license count predictable or constantly changing? If you have a stable or steadily growing user base, a multi-year commitment (like EA) can lock in good pricing. If your headcount or license needs fluctuate (seasonal workers, high growth, or downsizing), a flexible month-to-month model (CSP or MCA) lets you adjust seats up or down without penalty.
- Cloud vs. on-premises balance: Consider your technology mix. Organizations heavily invested in cloud services (Azure, Microsoft 365, SaaS apps) may favor agreements that specialize in cloud subscriptions (CSP/MCA). If you still maintain a lot of on-premises software and servers, you might need an agreement that can cover perpetual licenses or Software Assurance for those systems (EA or MPSA). A hybrid cloud/on-prem environment might even use a combination of agreements.
- Negotiation needs and custom terms: Some contracts allow more negotiation than others. Enterprise Agreements are negotiated directly with Microsoft (often via a large reseller) and can include custom terms or special pricing for big deals. In contrast, CSP is sold via partners with more standardized terms (the partner might give you a discount, but you’re not negotiating with Microsoft directly). If you require bespoke contract terms, an EA gives more room to negotiate amendments than an off-the-shelf CSP or MCA.
- Vendor relationship (direct vs. partner): Decide if you prefer working directly with Microsoft or through a partner. An EA or MCA establishes a direct agreement with Microsoft (though a licensing partner typically facilitates an EA, it’s fundamentally a Microsoft contract). This direct route can come with dedicated account management and Microsoft support. CSP, on the other hand, means your primary relationship is with a Microsoft partner reseller. A good partner can provide personalized support and bundled services – but quality varies, so choose carefully. Some organizations value the hands-on partner approach; others feel safer dealing directly with Microsoft.
- Financial model (CapEx vs. OpEx): Different agreements align with different budgeting preferences. An EA often involves committing to a set of licenses for 3 years (with annual payments), which some finance teams treat similarly to a capital expense commitment. CSP and MCA operate on subscription (monthly/annual) payments – pure OpEx that scales with usage. If you have a capital budget to invest upfront in perpetual licenses, an MPSA or EA can accommodate that. If you want costs tied to actual monthly usage (OpEx), CSP/MCA fits better. Consider also the accounting impact: buying perpetual licenses (EA/MPSA) versus subscribing (CSP/MCA) can affect how expenses hit your books.
Keep these factors in mind as we explore which agreement is the best fit in various scenarios.
For more comparisons, Microsoft EA vs. MPSA: Enterprise Agreement or Pay-as-You-Go Volume Licensing?.
Scenario 1 – Large Enterprise (5,000+ Users, Standardized IT)
Best fit: Enterprise Agreement (EA). For a large enterprise with thousands of users and a fairly standardized IT environment, the EA is Microsoft’s flagship contract. It’s designed for organization-wide licensing at scale.
The strengths of an EA include built-in volume discounts (you pay less per license by committing to a high quantity) and an enterprise-wide scope that covers all users/devices in one agreement.
Microsoft also provides structured support and account resources to EA customers – you’ll have a Microsoft rep and access to benefits like planning services and training credits as part of the package.
The trade-off is flexibility. With an EA, you’re locked into a three-year term. You can add licenses if you grow (and pay for those additions at regular intervals via “true-up” reports), but you generally cannot reduce your license count until the EA is up for renewal. In practice, this means if you downsize or have unused licenses, you’re still paying for them for the remainder of the term.
A large, stable company that can accurately forecast needs will save money with an EA. But if you anticipate significant changes, be cautious – once signed, an EA is not easy to dial back. (Some very large organizations mitigate this by using a hybrid approach: they cover their stable core licenses under an EA for the discount, and use CSP subscriptions to handle any unpredictable needs or project-based spikes.
This combo can work, but it requires careful management to avoid overlap.)
Scenario 2 – Mid-Sized Business (500–2,000 Users, Growth or Fluctuations)
Best fit: CSP or MCA. Midsize companies often find Microsoft’s Cloud Solution Provider program or the Microsoft Customer Agreement more fitting than a full EA, especially if they expect growth or swings in user count.
These options do not require a 3-year lock-in. You can increase or decrease subscriptions as your needs change, which is ideal for organizations in flux.
For example, imagine a firm with 800 employees that experiences regular staff changes. Instead of committing to an EA’s minimum seat count, they opted to license via a CSP partner on a monthly subscription.
This way, when 20 people left the company, the firm dropped 20 licenses the next month, paying only for active users.
In an EA, that company would have paid for all 800 licenses for the entire year (and beyond), even if some seats sat unused. CSP saved them from overpaying for vacant licenses.
The flexibility of CSP/MCA does come with a slight cost premium. Per-license pricing under CSP is generally closer to retail, whereas an EA might have deeper discounts.
Microsoft also now adds premium charges for month-to-month plans (to encourage annual commitments). Even so, for a mid-sized business, avoiding over-provisioning usually outweighs the smaller discount.
The bottom line: if you’re around the 500–2000 user range and especially if your license needs aren’t rock steady, a CSP agreement (through a good partner) or the direct-pay MCA can align your costs with actual usage. You’ll gain agility and avoid being stuck with an enterprise contract that no longer fits.
Scenario 3 – Primarily Azure Consumption
Not every organization fits neatly by size; some are defined by what they buy.
If your primary Microsoft spend is on Azure cloud services (rather than user software like Office 365), your decision might revolve around Azure-specific agreements.
Options: Microsoft Customer Agreement (MCA) vs. Enterprise Agreement (EA) for Azure. The MCA is an evergreen agreement (no fixed term) that allows you to purchase Azure services on a pay-as-you-go basis directly from Microsoft.
It’s very flexible – you can scale Azure usage up or down and only pay for what you consume, with no long-term commitment.
This is great for moderate or unpredictable cloud usage. Choose MCA for agility: it lets you experiment and grow your Azure environment without being locked into a huge upfront commitment.
When would an EA make sense for Azure?
Only at the high end of spending. If your organization is planning massive Azure consumption (typically committing to spend millions of dollars per year on Azure), an Enterprise Agreement might secure better pricing.
Microsoft often gives significant discounts or credits to enterprise customers who commit to a big annual Azure spend as part of an EA.
In return, you’re committing to that spending whether you use it or not. Guidance: If you have a very high and predictable cloud consumption (for example, a steady $5M/year on Azure services), an EA could reduce your unit costs.
Otherwise, stick with the more flexible MCA. It’s usually not worth losing flexibility unless the scale of your Azure use guarantees you a bargain via EA.
(Note: You can also purchase Azure through CSP partners, but for simplicity and direct control, many organizations prefer either an MCA direct with Microsoft for Azure, or an EA if the discounts justify it.)
Scenario 4 – On-Premises Heavy, Limited Cloud
What if your organization is still primarily on on-premises software and only dabbling in the cloud? Perhaps you run legacy servers, Windows, and Office on desktops, and aren’t heavily using cloud services yet.
In this case, the choice often comes down to MPSA vs. EA, depending on your size and need for Software Assurance.
- If you’re a large org and want Software Assurance (SA) broadly, an Enterprise Agreement might be the better fit even for on-prem. Under an EA, you can cover all your on-prem licenses and get SA benefits (upgrade rights, support incidents, training, etc.) as part of the deal. It simplifies management to have a single agreement, and large enterprises often value the predictable renewal cycle to review their license estate every few years. EA also allows mixing cloud subscriptions and on-prem licenses under one umbrella as you gradually transition.
- If your on-prem needs are more limited or sporadic, the Microsoft Products and Services Agreement (MPSA) is likely the best fit. MPSA is a pay-as-you-go volume licensing program: no organization-wide commitment, no fixed term. You just buy licenses (and cloud subscriptions, if needed) as required. This is ideal if you occasionally purchase server licenses or Office copies but don’t want a binding contract. MPSA still provides volume pricing based on points/levels, but the discounts are modest compared to an EA. The big benefit is freedom – you’re not tied into maintaining a certain license count. For a company with only a small or declining on-prem footprint, MPSA ensures you aren’t paying for more than what you actually use.
Tip: If you go the MPSA route, use Software Assurance selectively.
SA can be added per license on MPSA, but it incurs an additional cost. Only pay for SA on products where you know you’ll use the benefits (like needing version upgrades or license mobility).
For instance, you might buy Windows Server licenses via MPSA and add SA so you can upgrade to new versions and use Azure Hybrid Benefit, but for a one-off Visio purchase that won’t be upgraded, you might skip SA.
This targeted approach avoids wasting budget on SA for every product.
In short, EA makes sense for on-premises if you’re large enough to need organization-wide coverage (and can afford the commitment), whereas MPSA lets smaller or more cautious orgs buy what they need without a long contract.
Scenario 5 – Public Sector (Government & Education)
Public sector organizations have unique licensing programs, but the fundamental logic of choosing agreements still applies.
Microsoft offers tailored variants, such as the Enterprise Agreement for Government and Enrollment for Education Solutions (EES), specifically designed for academic institutions.
These agreements are adapted to public sector needs (often with special pricing and lower minimum size requirements).
For example, a government EA might allow entry at 250 users instead of 500, and educational institutions can count “full-time faculty/staff equivalents” for an EES contract.
Even with these tweaks, you should approach the decision similarly:
- Large government agency or university system: Likely best served by an Enterprise Agreement (or EES). If you have thousands of employees or students to license, the volume pricing and standardized coverage of an EA/EES is attractive. It simplifies compliance across the entire organization and locks in budgets, which is particularly useful for public entities that require predictable multi-year costs.
- Smaller or budget-constrained public entities: Consider CSP or other flexible programs. A small city government, local school district, or a rapidly changing public program might prefer not to be locked into a big contract. A CSP agreement via a qualified partner allows them to pay monthly and adjust as needs change (for instance, adding licenses for a new department or removing them after a project ends). There are also academic-specific agreements for smaller institutions (such as Open Value for Education or CSP for Education) that can be leveraged. The key is that if the organization’s size doesn’t justify an EA/EES, the cloud-subscription model provides more breathing room in tight public budgets.
The public sector often faces strict budget cycles and oversight, so flexibility vs. predictability is a central trade-off. Large stable institutions lean toward the predictable EA model (with public sector discounts), while smaller or dynamic ones lean toward the flexible CSP model. Just be sure to verify that the chosen agreement meets any compliance requirements specific to government/education (for example, ensuring student-use terms or data residency needs are addressed).
Decision Table – Matching Organization Profile to Agreement
Sometimes it helps to see it all at a glance. Here’s a quick reference table matching organization types to the most likely best-fit agreement:
| Organization Type | License Demand Stability | Cloud Mix | Recommended Agreement Fit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Large stable enterprise (5,000+ users) | Predictable (steady growth) | Hybrid (Cloud + On-Premises) | Enterprise Agreement (EA) – covers entire org with volume discounts. |
| Large enterprise with fluctuating demand | Variable (ups and downs) | Cloud-heavy environment | Combination (EA + CSP) – EA for core stable needs, CSP subscriptions to handle surges or new projects for flexibility. |
| Mid-size company, stable usage (≈500–2,000 users) | Moderate (manageable changes) | Mostly Cloud services | Microsoft Customer Agreement (MCA) or a scaled-down EA (if eligible) – depending on if multi-year commit makes sense. |
| Mid-size company, variable usage | Unpredictable (frequent changes) | Cloud-first strategy | Cloud Solution Provider (CSP) or MCA – prioritize flexibility and pay-as-you-go licensing. |
| Small organization (<500 users) | Variable (as needed) | SaaS-only or all cloud | CSP or Open Value program – no minimums, simple subscriptions suited for small budgets and needs. |
Use this table as a starting point – there are always nuances, but it captures the typical alignment between an organization’s profile and the best licensing vehicle.
Next Steps Once You Decide
Identifying the right agreement is half the battle. Next, take steps to execute it wisely:
- If you opt for an Enterprise Agreement, Start preparations early. Benchmark pricing (get quotes and compare, perhaps via a licensing partner or consultant) so you know the discount level to target. Negotiate terms with Microsoft – don’t be shy about asking for concessions on things like price locks, payment terms, or adding a clause for flexibility if possible. Large customers have leverage, so use it. Ensure all stakeholders understand the 3-year commitment and have a plan to utilize the benefits (like Software Assurance) that come with the EA.
- If you go with CSP, choose your partner carefully. The CSP experience is only as good as the provider managing it. Look for a partner with a solid track record, responsive support, and expertise in Microsoft licensing (so they can advise you, not just sell to you). Clarify what support/services they include – e.g., will they help with license optimization, or are they just a portal? Also, review the partner’s cancellation terms closely. While Microsoft allows monthly adjustments, some partners might have their own notice periods or policies, so make sure it’s truly as flexible as advertised.
- If you sign a Microsoft Customer Agreement (MCA): Treat it as an ongoing relationship. Because an MCA is evergreen with no natural end date, it is essential to implement regular reviews of your usage and spending. Set internal checkpoints (say, annually or quarterly) to analyze your Microsoft costs, so you can adjust subscriptions or negotiate new discounts proactively. Also, keep an eye on any multi-year Azure plans or reservations you make under the MCA – track when they expire or renew. In short, you won’t have a big renegotiation every few years like with an EA, so you must bring a continuous management mindset. Ensure you have good asset management and cost control processes (FinOps) to avoid surprises.
- If you choose MPSA, plan your Software Assurance and future needs strategically. Since Microsoft is de-emphasizing MPSA, have a roadmap in mind. You can continue to use it for now, but keep aware of new purchasing programs in case Microsoft eventually phases it out. In the meantime, only buy what you need, when you need it. Decide upfront which purchases should include Software Assurance – for example, server licenses you’ll upgrade frequently or Windows/Office licenses that you might later transition to cloud subscriptions. Avoid blanket spending on SA if the value isn’t there. Also, coordinate if you’re mixing MPSA for on-prem and CSP for cloud: keep records clear to prevent double-licensing or missing out on bundle discounts.
No matter which path you choose, always model the total cost of ownership (TCO) over 3–5 years before you sign. Look at best-case and worst-case scenarios for your user count or cloud consumption.
This forward-looking analysis will confirm if the agreement truly makes financial sense and will highlight any risks.
By combining careful planning with the right licensing agreement, you can get the Microsoft software and services your organization needs—on the terms that suit you best, without paying a penny more than necessary. Good luck with your decision-making!
Read about our Microsoft Negotiation Services
Do you want to know more about our Microsoft Services?
