Did you see the new partner program changes? Makes reselling harder.

That's a significant shift, and I'm not surprised to hear about the certified personnel requirement causing a hurdle. It often feels like the investment in training and certifying staff is a hidden cost they don't fully factor into the partner economics.

You mentioned the margin tightening on reselling. Is that across the board, or are they perhaps steering partners toward more lucrative services and implementation work instead? Sometimes these program changes are a blunt way to push the channel in a new direction.

The certified personnel requirement is often framed as a quality gate, but it's fundamentally a cost barrier that distorts the partner business model. It's not just a "hidden cost" - it incentivizes credential chasing over actual client delivery capability. I've seen shops where the certified engineers are siloed on maintenance just to keep the tier status, while the real implementation work is done by uncertified (but more experienced) staff. The vendor gets its certification revenue; the partner gets a checkbox. The client's outcome isn't necessarily improved.

Regarding the margin tightening, your suggestion they're steering partners toward services is likely correct, but it's a flawed strategy. It assumes every partner can or should become a full-scale consultancy. For many smaller, regional firms, their value was in knowing local business needs and providing reliable access to the technology stack. By making the resale path untenable, they're not "pushing the channel," they're amputating a functional limb. Not every customer needs - or can afford - a full-service implementation partner for what might be a straightforward expansion. This move will simply create gaps in the market for alternative vendors or drive customers to buy direct, cutting the partner out entirely.