Audience Discovery Report - Technology, Information and Internet

Signal Density

5/10

50%

Optimization Tip

Replace generic claims ('quickly', 'powerful', 'unprecedented') with a small table of verifiable specs: supported M365 services + backup frequency, indexing/search scale (items/TB), restore SLAs/benchmarks, and security controls (immutability method, RBAC/MFA, audit trails), plus 1-2 reference architectures for BaaS vs self-managed.

Missing Signals

RPO/RTO specifics and measured restore performance (e.g., bulk restore throughput, time-to-first-restore, mailbox/item restore latency) for M365 workloads
Security/immutability implementation details (e.g., WORM/immutable storage mechanism, retention lock behavior, key management, MFA/role model, audit logging) and any compliance certifications (SOC 2, ISO 27001, etc.)
Backup scope/limits and architecture specifics (supported M365 APIs, backup frequency, indexing approach/scale limits, data residency options, and supported regions)

Good Fit

Chief data officer

VP data Head of analytics Chief AI officer ENTERPRISE

Data Science

WHY THIS VERTICAL

Data science orgs are reacting because slow eDiscovery across Exchange/SharePoint jeopardizes audit deadlines while the infrastructure needed to store and restore that data is too expensive.

Primary Motivation

"Reduce platform costs and preserve uptime."

Why This Title?

Context Budget reset ahead of the next planning cycle: we’re being told to fund growth analytics by decommissioning the snapshot server farm and reclaiming that infrastructure run-rate—without degrading RTO/restore reliability.

Pain Our Exchange Online protection posture is being propped up by a pile of snapshot infrastructure—extra Exchange servers, storage, and the ops overhead to keep it all patched and monitored. We’re paying twice: once for Microsoft 365 and again for the on-prem snapshot estate, and it still doesn’t give us predictable, line-item RTOs when analytics teams need data back fast for reporting or investigations. The mandate is to collapse the backup/restore footprint without blowing up recovery SLAs.

Job Reduce infrastructure footprint and backup costs while retaining SLAs.

KPI Reduce backup TCO by a measurable percentage year-over-year.

Job Mandate

Cut platform costs while maintaining recovery time objectives for analytics.

Biggest Fear

Losing budget if I can’t show verifiable savings without increasing RTOs.

Why this Score?

I rate this an 8. It directly addresses my goal by claiming reclamation of six Exchange servers and 68.7% TCO savings. It also links to Product Documentation and Trust Center. But I need named customer references, a TCO methodology, RTO guarantees, and pricing to approve.

Good Fit

Site reliability engineer

Platform engineer Cloud reliability engineer Incident responder ENTERPRISE

DevOps & SRE

WHY THIS VERTICAL

SRE teams are reacting because restores that depend on on-prem bandwidth take hours and routinely threaten incident RTO/RPO commitments for critical collaboration data.

Primary Motivation

"Reduce incident MTTD and MTTR."

Why This Title?

Context Ransomware event impacting Teams/SharePoint content is forcing an immediate shift to cloud-native restore patterns to get service back without waiting on on-prem bandwidth.

Pain Right now a restore is effectively a data logistics problem—hours of transfer, on-prem chokepoints, and a slow grind back to usability. In an incident, that’s unacceptable because Teams and SharePoint are operational systems for engineering and execution, not “nice to have” collaboration tools. We need cloud-native recovery that can get users productive again without treating the corporate network like the restore bus.

Job Restore services and files without pulling data on-prem.

KPI Restore critical collaboration data within the SLA window.

Job Mandate

Minimize disruption by enabling cloud-native restores for Microsoft 365.

Biggest Fear

Lengthy restores that saturate on-prem bandwidth and extend downtime.

Why this Score?

I scored this 8 because the page directly addresses my core pain: cloud-native restores and avoiding on‑prem bandwidth. The customer quote explicitly confirms BaaS avoids pulling data back on‑prem, which matters to my ransomware incident. However, the page lacks restore throughput metrics, RTO/RPO SLAs, architecture diagrams, API/SDK details, and egress cost estimates. It links to docs and demo videos, so it is salvageable, but I need those specifics before buying.

Good Fit

LMS administrator

Learning systems administrator Course platform engineer E-learning operations engineer ENTERPRISE

E-Learning Platforms

WHY THIS VERTICAL

Education institutions are reacting because lost course content and student communications create accreditation and appeals risk, making reliable record restores and compliance-proof retention mandatory.

Primary Motivation

"Protect student records and accreditation."

Why This Title?

Context Received a formal legal/records request for specific student communications and course artifacts—now we have to prove we can retrieve complete, defensible records out of M365 on a deadline.

Pain Course shells, assignments, and faculty communications live in M365, and when content gets deleted or overwritten, it’s not just an inconvenience—it becomes an accreditation and audit exposure. We can’t be in a position where we can’t produce a clean record of instruction and student communications on demand. The operational reality is that restores have to be reliable and fast at the item/course level, not a months-long scavenger hunt through retention gaps.

Job Restore course materials, emails, and files quickly.

KPI No unresolved student record restore incidents.

Job Mandate

Maintain recoverable student records and course content in Microsoft 365.

Biggest Fear

Losing accreditation due to unrecoverable student records.

Why this Score?

Useful: promises granular global search, point-in-time restores, BaaS and links to Product Documentation and a practitioner's guide (so 'how' is reachable). Missing: concrete restore steps/UI screenshots, APIs/SDKs, RTO/retention SLAs, and chain-of-custody/e-discovery export details I need for legal requests.

Good Fit

Messaging engineer

M365 administrator Exchange Online administrator Collaboration engineer ENTERPRISE

Enterprise Software

WHY THIS VERTICAL

Enterprise IT ops teams are reacting because audits and incidents force terabyte-scale, WAN-saturating restore cycles and manual searches that miss legal SLAs and delay mailbox recovery RTOs.

Primary Motivation

"Stop incidents from disrupting engineers and customers."

Why This Title?

Context Active ransomware response involving Exchange Online mailboxes—leadership is demanding we hit RTOs without spinning up or feeding an on-prem restore pipeline.

Pain Our recovery motion still assumes dragging terabytes back over the WAN to an on-prem restore environment, which turns any mailbox-level incident into a network saturation event. That blows past RTO targets and creates collateral impact on other enterprise traffic. We need Exchange Online recovery that stays cloud-native so restores don’t depend on WAN headroom or local infrastructure that’s least reliable during an incident.

Job Perform item-level and mailbox restores directly in cloud, fast.

KPI Meet agreed RTOs for mailbox recovery during incidents.

Job Mandate

Ensure recoverable Exchange Online data meets RTOs without on-prem restores.

Biggest Fear

Being forced to pull terabytes on-prem for restores, saturating WAN and missing RTOs.

Why this Score?

I need a restore workflow that proves we won't pull terabytes over WAN during M365 restores. It includes a customer quote about avoiding on‑prem restores and links to Product Documentation, a practitioner's guide, and demos. But I don't see restore runbooks, measured RTOs, bandwidth throughput, or API/SDK details I need to validate performance.

Good Fit

Industrial IT systems engineer

OT systems engineer Control systems IT engineer Automation IT engineer ENTERPRISE

Robotics

WHY THIS VERTICAL

Industrial robotics organizations are reacting because large mailbox restores can saturate plant networks at peak shifts, threatening production-facing RTOs during IT incidents.

Primary Motivation

"Keep production lines online and compliant."

Why This Title?

Context Post-incident hardening after a ransomware scare: we’re reworking M365 restore workflows specifically to eliminate on-prem data pulls that saturate the network during shift turnover.

Pain When we have to do bulk mailbox restores, the data movement is the real outage—pulling large volumes during shift changes hammers the plant/fab network and competes with OT/robotics traffic that can’t tolerate jitter. The current restore motion isn’t aligned to line-level RTOs; it’s a bandwidth event first and a recovery event second. We need a recovery path that doesn’t turn the network into the bottleneck every time we’re under the gun.

Job Restore Exchange, OneDrive, SharePoint, and Teams without network impact.

KPI Meet production-facing RTOs for IT incidents affecting operations.

Job Mandate

Ensure Microsoft 365 recoverability to meet line-level RTOs after ransomware.

Biggest Fear

Mailbox restores saturate fab network and cause missed RTOs.

Why this Score?

This speaks directly to my migration goal because it explicitly promotes BaaS to avoid pulling restores on-prem. It links to Product Documentation, a practitioners guide, demo videos, and a free trial, so a technical path exists. However, I still need measured restore throughput, egress/bandwidth metrics, architecture or restore workflow diagrams, and SLA or tested RTO results to validate in our fab environment.

Good Fit

Chief technology officer

Head of engineering operations VP engineering operations CTO of manufacturing systems ENTERPRISE

Computer Hardware

WHY THIS VERTICAL

Hardware manufacturers need fast, targeted recovery and legal retrieval without full snapshot restores because restore complexity and on-prem footprint increase downtime risk on the factory floor.

Primary Motivation

"Keep production lines and teams operational."

Why This Title?

Context Following a board directive to reduce operational risk and IT run costs, we’re being pushed to simplify collaboration recovery so incidents don’t translate into manufacturing downtime.

Pain In manufacturing environments, recovery complexity is downtime risk—if collaboration and workflow content can’t be restored cleanly and quickly, engineering changes, shift handoffs, and production coordination stall. The current restore process has too many steps and dependencies, which increases the probability of extended disruption during an incident. We need predictable, low-friction recovery for Teams/SharePoint data because the business impact shows up on the floor.

Job Cut downtime by improving cloud-based recovery for collaboration data.

KPI Production downtime attributable to collaboration data loss.

Job Mandate

Ensure collaboration data recovery reduces operational downtime risk.

Biggest Fear

A failed M365 restore that causes prolonged manufacturing downtime and a board-level incident.

Why this Score?

I found concrete claims like immutable backups, zero-trust, and a 68.7% TCO saving. It cites Gartner Leader status and links to Trust Center and product docs. But the page omits SLAs, RTO examples, pricing, and time-to-value timelines. I need explicit recovery SLAs, test results, and pricing to convince the board today.

Good Fit

Chief information officer

VP of IT Head of technology operations VP infrastructure ENTERPRISE

Computer Software

WHY THIS VERTICAL

Software organizations are reacting because slow legal/audit responses and expensive incident recoveries (including ransomware) expose them to penalties and high outage costs.

Primary Motivation

"Reduce overall IT spend and legal risk"

Why This Title?

Context Board-level cyber-resilience directive specifically targeting SaaS assets: we’re being asked to demonstrate stronger M365 recoverability and faster compliance response as part of risk reduction.

Pain Incidents are expensive twice—first in productivity loss while SaaS data is unavailable or corrupted, and then again in the downstream legal/compliance drag when we can’t respond quickly with defensible records. At the same time, our current approach carries significant ongoing cost in tooling and operational overhead. We need a cyber-resilient posture for Microsoft 365 that improves restore/recovery outcomes and legal responsiveness without growing the run-rate.

Job Reduce legal exposure and speed recovery after attacks

KPI Audit response time and ransomware recovery cost

Job Mandate

Ensure enterprise M365 data recoverability and compliance while reducing TCO

Biggest Fear

Board escalation from slow restores and legal exposure after an M365 outage

Why this Score?

I appreciate the Gartner callout, TCO percent, Trust Center and docs links, and a 30-day trial. That makes this relevant to my board request today. However, I still need SLA-backed RTO/RPO targets, explicit certifications (SOC2/ISO) on-page, an architecture or recovery runbook, and clear time-to-value or pricing to justify a policy change. The page sells capability but stops short of board-grade risk and ROI evidence.

Good Fit

Chief data officer

VP of data Head of analytics Director of data strategy ENTERPRISE

Data Analytics & Business Intelligence

WHY THIS VERTICAL

BI and compliance teams are blocked by scattered M365 evidence that makes item discovery and eDiscovery too slow to meet compliance reporting and legal discovery timelines.

Primary Motivation

"Deliver compliant, timely data for reporting"

Why This Title?

Context New executive KPI: compress compliance response SLAs—our org is being measured on turnaround time, and current M365 discovery speed is failing the mandate.

Pain Compliance reporting is getting blocked by discovery latency—when we need to answer ‘who had what, when’ across mail, Teams, and SharePoint, item-level retrieval is too slow and too manual. Without fast, indexed access, every request turns into an ad hoc extraction project that burns analyst time and pushes us past reporting deadlines. We need to make backup data queryable so compliance analytics isn’t waiting on slow pulls and human triage.

Job Accelerate discovery to feed compliance analytics pipelines

KPI Time from request to data available for compliance reports

Job Mandate

Enable fast, indexed access to M365 backups to meet compliance analytics deadlines

Biggest Fear

Slow e-discovery that misses regulatory deadlines and exposes us to fines

Why this Score?

This solution page speaks directly to my mandate by calling out global search, granular recovery, demos, docs, and a Trust Center link. However, it omits quantifiable RTOs, indexing latency, SLA/time-to-value, a pricing table, and concrete named-customer implementation metrics. The repeated "68.7% savings in TCO" is uncontextualized. Worth a deeper look, not an immediate buy.

Good Fit

Client success manager - enterprise accounts

Engagement manager Client delivery lead Account technical lead ENTERPRISE

IT Services and IT Consulting

WHY THIS VERTICAL

IT service providers are reacting because slow legal-hold fulfillment causes client escalations, putting contractual discovery SLAs and account retention at risk.

Primary Motivation

"Retain clients and avoid escalations."

Why This Title?

Context A top-tier enterprise client is in an active audit and has formally demanded faster eDiscovery turnaround—our current fulfillment timelines are triggering escalation.

Pain When an enterprise customer is in an audit or litigation posture, “we’ll get back to you in a few weeks” is not an acceptable answer. Long lead times on legal holds, eDiscovery exports, or targeted restores turn into escalations, risk renewals, and pull senior stakeholders into fire drills. We need consistently fast turnaround on discovery and recovery requests so we can meet audit clocks and keep accounts out of escalation mode.

Job Provide fast item-level exports and restores for clients.

KPI Meet client SLA for legal discovery deliverables.

Job Mandate

Keep enterprise clients satisfied by reducing discovery and restore times.

Biggest Fear

Clients escalate during audits due to slow legal holds and restores.

Why this Score?

I scored this a 7 because it addresses my eDiscovery pain but lacks hard SLAs or named case studies. Positive signs: granular search claim, 68.7% TCO metric, Gartner leader mention, and links to docs and Trust Center. Missing the exact eDiscovery RTOs, legal-hold turnaround times, named customer references, and an eDiscovery demo. Links to product docs and demos save it from being pure fluff.

Good Fit

CIO

Chief information officer Head of IT VP technology ENTERPRISE

Information Technology & Services

WHY THIS VERTICAL

IT leaders are reacting because excess Exchange servers, snapshots, and related headcount inflate costs, and they need a leaner backup model that reduces spend year over year.

Primary Motivation

"Reduce opex while maintaining service reliability."

Why This Title?

Context After a board-level cost review, we’ve been tasked with shrinking the infrastructure footprint and licensing exposure tied to Exchange backup/restore—specifically retiring excess servers and snapshot dependencies.

Pain We’re carrying an inflated Exchange support footprint—extra servers, snapshot capacity, backup plumbing, and the people-hours to keep it all running. It’s classic hidden TCO: licensing, storage growth, patching cycles, monitoring, and incident response for a stack that exists primarily to enable restores. The business wants fewer moving parts and lower run-rate, but we can’t trade that for weaker recoverability or longer restore times.

Job Reduce infrastructure footprint while meeting recovery SLAs.

KPI Lower backup infrastructure and licensing spend year over year.

Job Mandate

Cut IT operating costs by migrating restores and retention to cloud.

Biggest Fear

Board rejects my cost-reduction plan due to unverifiable vendor claims.

Why this Score?

I need verifiable ROI and a clear cost model to satisfy the board. The page claims reclaiming six Exchange servers and large TCO savings but shows no pricing, TCO methodology, or named customer. It links to Product Documentation and Trust Center, which helps, but not enough for a board decision.

Role Name	Job Title	Sub Vertical	Context Hook	Jobs to be Done (JTBD)	Score	The Gap (Reason)
EB Economic Buyer	Chief data officer Also: VP data, Head of analytics, Chief AI officer	Data Science	Budget reset ahead of the next planning cycle: we’re being told to fund growth analytics by decommissioning the snapshot server farm and reclaiming that infrastructure run-rate—without degrading RTO/restore reliability. Budget reset ahead of the next planning cycle: we’re being told to fund growth analytics by decommissioning the snapshot server farm and reclaiming that infrastructure run-rate—without degrading RTO/restore reliability.	Reduce infrastructure footprint and backup costs while retaining SLAs.	8/10	I rate this an 8. It directly addresses my goal by claiming reclamation of six Exchange servers and 68.7% TCO savings. It also links to Product Documentation and Trust Center. But I need named customer references, a TCO methodology, RTO guarantees, and pricing to approve. Verification Reason I rate this an 8. It directly addresses my goal by claiming reclamation of six Exchange servers and 68.7% TCO savings. It also links to Product Documentation and Trust Center. But I need named customer references, a TCO methodology, RTO guarantees, and pricing to approve.
EU End User	Industrial IT systems engineer Also: OT systems engineer, Control systems IT engineer, Automation IT engineer	Robotics	Post-incident hardening after a ransomware scare: we’re reworking M365 restore workflows specifically to eliminate on-prem data pulls that saturate the network during shift turnover. Post-incident hardening after a ransomware scare: we’re reworking M365 restore workflows specifically to eliminate on-prem data pulls that saturate the network during shift turnover.	Restore Exchange, OneDrive, SharePoint, and Teams without network impact.	8/10	This speaks directly to my migration goal because it explicitly promotes BaaS to avoid pulling restores on-prem. It links to Product Documentation, a practitioners guide, demo videos, and a free trial, so a technical path exists. However, I still need measured restore throughput, egress/bandwidth metrics, architecture or restore workflow diagrams, and SLA or tested RTO results to validate in our fab environment. Verification Reason This speaks directly to my migration goal because it explicitly promotes BaaS to avoid pulling restores on-prem. It links to Product Documentation, a practitioners guide, demo videos, and a free trial, so a technical path exists. However, I still need measured restore throughput, egress/bandwidth metrics, architecture or restore workflow diagrams, and SLA or tested RTO results to validate in our fab environment.
EU End User	LMS administrator Also: Learning systems administrator, Course platform engineer, E-learning operations engineer	E-Learning Platforms	Received a formal legal/records request for specific student communications and course artifacts—now we have to prove we can retrieve complete, defensible records out of M365 on a deadline. Received a formal legal/records request for specific student communications and course artifacts—now we have to prove we can retrieve complete, defensible records out of M365 on a deadline.	Restore course materials, emails, and files quickly.	8/10	Useful: promises granular global search, point-in-time restores, BaaS and links to Product Documentation and a practitioner's guide (so 'how' is reachable). Missing: concrete restore steps/UI screenshots, APIs/SDKs, RTO/retention SLAs, and chain-of-custody/e-discovery export details I need for legal requests. Verification Reason Useful: promises granular global search, point-in-time restores, BaaS and links to Product Documentation and a practitioner's guide (so 'how' is reachable). Missing: concrete restore steps/UI screenshots, APIs/SDKs, RTO/retention SLAs, and chain-of-custody/e-discovery export details I need for legal requests.
EU End User	Messaging engineer Also: M365 administrator, Exchange Online administrator, Collaboration engineer	Enterprise Software	Active ransomware response involving Exchange Online mailboxes—leadership is demanding we hit RTOs without spinning up or feeding an on-prem restore pipeline. Active ransomware response involving Exchange Online mailboxes—leadership is demanding we hit RTOs without spinning up or feeding an on-prem restore pipeline.	Perform item-level and mailbox restores directly in cloud, fast.	8/10	I need a restore workflow that proves we won't pull terabytes over WAN during M365 restores. It includes a customer quote about avoiding on‑prem restores and links to Product Documentation, a practitioner's guide, and demos. But I don't see restore runbooks, measured RTOs, bandwidth throughput, or API/SDK details I need to validate performance. Verification Reason I need a restore workflow that proves we won't pull terabytes over WAN during M365 restores. It includes a customer quote about avoiding on‑prem restores and links to Product Documentation, a practitioner's guide, and demos. But I don't see restore runbooks, measured RTOs, bandwidth throughput, or API/SDK details I need to validate performance.
EU End User	Site reliability engineer Also: Platform engineer, Cloud reliability engineer, Incident responder	DevOps & SRE	Ransomware event impacting Teams/SharePoint content is forcing an immediate shift to cloud-native restore patterns to get service back without waiting on on-prem bandwidth. Ransomware event impacting Teams/SharePoint content is forcing an immediate shift to cloud-native restore patterns to get service back without waiting on on-prem bandwidth.	Restore services and files without pulling data on-prem.	8/10	I scored this 8 because the page directly addresses my core pain: cloud-native restores and avoiding on‑prem bandwidth. The customer quote explicitly confirms BaaS avoids pulling data back on‑prem, which matters to my ransomware incident. However, the page lacks restore throughput metrics, RTO/RPO SLAs, architecture diagrams, API/SDK details, and egress cost estimates. It links to docs and demo videos, so it is salvageable, but I need those specifics before buying. Verification Reason I scored this 8 because the page directly addresses my core pain: cloud-native restores and avoiding on‑prem bandwidth. The customer quote explicitly confirms BaaS avoids pulling data back on‑prem, which matters to my ransomware incident. However, the page lacks restore throughput metrics, RTO/RPO SLAs, architecture diagrams, API/SDK details, and egress cost estimates. It links to docs and demo videos, so it is salvageable, but I need those specifics before buying.
EB Economic Buyer	CIO Also: Chief information officer, Head of IT, VP technology	Information Technology & Services	After a board-level cost review, we’ve been tasked with shrinking the infrastructure footprint and licensing exposure tied to Exchange backup/restore—specifically retiring excess servers and snapshot dependencies. After a board-level cost review, we’ve been tasked with shrinking the infrastructure footprint and licensing exposure tied to Exchange backup/restore—specifically retiring excess servers and snapshot dependencies.	Reduce infrastructure footprint while meeting recovery SLAs.	7/10	I need verifiable ROI and a clear cost model to satisfy the board. The page claims reclaiming six Exchange servers and large TCO savings but shows no pricing, TCO methodology, or named customer. It links to Product Documentation and Trust Center, which helps, but not enough for a board decision. Verification Reason I need verifiable ROI and a clear cost model to satisfy the board. The page claims reclaiming six Exchange servers and large TCO savings but shows no pricing, TCO methodology, or named customer. It links to Product Documentation and Trust Center, which helps, but not enough for a board decision.
EB Economic Buyer	Chief data officer Also: VP of data, Head of analytics, Director of data strategy	Data Analytics & Business Intelligence	New executive KPI: compress compliance response SLAs—our org is being measured on turnaround time, and current M365 discovery speed is failing the mandate. New executive KPI: compress compliance response SLAs—our org is being measured on turnaround time, and current M365 discovery speed is failing the mandate.	Accelerate discovery to feed compliance analytics pipelines	7/10	This solution page speaks directly to my mandate by calling out global search, granular recovery, demos, docs, and a Trust Center link. However, it omits quantifiable RTOs, indexing latency, SLA/time-to-value, a pricing table, and concrete named-customer implementation metrics. The repeated "68.7% savings in TCO" is uncontextualized. Worth a deeper look, not an immediate buy. Verification Reason This solution page speaks directly to my mandate by calling out global search, granular recovery, demos, docs, and a Trust Center link. However, it omits quantifiable RTOs, indexing latency, SLA/time-to-value, a pricing table, and concrete named-customer implementation metrics. The repeated "68.7% savings in TCO" is uncontextualized. Worth a deeper look, not an immediate buy.
EB Economic Buyer	Chief information officer Also: VP of IT, Head of technology operations, VP infrastructure	Computer Software	Board-level cyber-resilience directive specifically targeting SaaS assets: we’re being asked to demonstrate stronger M365 recoverability and faster compliance response as part of risk reduction. Board-level cyber-resilience directive specifically targeting SaaS assets: we’re being asked to demonstrate stronger M365 recoverability and faster compliance response as part of risk reduction.	Reduce legal exposure and speed recovery after attacks	7/10	I appreciate the Gartner callout, TCO percent, Trust Center and docs links, and a 30-day trial. That makes this relevant to my board request today. However, I still need SLA-backed RTO/RPO targets, explicit certifications (SOC2/ISO) on-page, an architecture or recovery runbook, and clear time-to-value or pricing to justify a policy change. The page sells capability but stops short of board-grade risk and ROI evidence. Verification Reason I appreciate the Gartner callout, TCO percent, Trust Center and docs links, and a 30-day trial. That makes this relevant to my board request today. However, I still need SLA-backed RTO/RPO targets, explicit certifications (SOC2/ISO) on-page, an architecture or recovery runbook, and clear time-to-value or pricing to justify a policy change. The page sells capability but stops short of board-grade risk and ROI evidence.
EB Economic Buyer	Chief technology officer Also: Head of engineering operations, VP engineering operations, CTO of manufacturing systems	Computer Hardware	Following a board directive to reduce operational risk and IT run costs, we’re being pushed to simplify collaboration recovery so incidents don’t translate into manufacturing downtime. Following a board directive to reduce operational risk and IT run costs, we’re being pushed to simplify collaboration recovery so incidents don’t translate into manufacturing downtime.	Cut downtime by improving cloud-based recovery for collaboration data.	7/10	I found concrete claims like immutable backups, zero-trust, and a 68.7% TCO saving. It cites Gartner Leader status and links to Trust Center and product docs. But the page omits SLAs, RTO examples, pricing, and time-to-value timelines. I need explicit recovery SLAs, test results, and pricing to convince the board today. Verification Reason I found concrete claims like immutable backups, zero-trust, and a 68.7% TCO saving. It cites Gartner Leader status and links to Trust Center and product docs. But the page omits SLAs, RTO examples, pricing, and time-to-value timelines. I need explicit recovery SLAs, test results, and pricing to convince the board today.
CH Champion	Client success manager - enterprise accounts Also: Engagement manager, Client delivery lead, Account technical lead	IT Services and IT Consulting	A top-tier enterprise client is in an active audit and has formally demanded faster eDiscovery turnaround—our current fulfillment timelines are triggering escalation. A top-tier enterprise client is in an active audit and has formally demanded faster eDiscovery turnaround—our current fulfillment timelines are triggering escalation.	Provide fast item-level exports and restores for clients.	7/10	I scored this a 7 because it addresses my eDiscovery pain but lacks hard SLAs or named case studies. Positive signs: granular search claim, 68.7% TCO metric, Gartner leader mention, and links to docs and Trust Center. Missing the exact eDiscovery RTOs, legal-hold turnaround times, named customer references, and an eDiscovery demo. Links to product docs and demos save it from being pure fluff. Verification Reason I scored this a 7 because it addresses my eDiscovery pain but lacks hard SLAs or named case studies. Positive signs: granular search claim, 68.7% TCO metric, Gartner leader mention, and links to docs and Trust Center. Missing the exact eDiscovery RTOs, legal-hold turnaround times, named customer references, and an eDiscovery demo. Links to product docs and demos save it from being pure fluff.
EU End User	Cloud backup administrator Also: Recovery engineer, Data protection specialist, Backup operations engineer	Cloud Computing	Desire to keep restores in cloud to reduce egress costs Desire to keep restores in cloud to reduce egress costs	Perform cloud-native restores without on-prem rehydration.	7/10	I rate this a 7. The customer quote explicitly says BaaS keeps restores in cloud to avoid bandwidth costs, which matches my mandate. The page links to product docs and a practitioner's guide, so 'how' may be available. But the page lacks on-page architecture diagrams and an explicit restore-in-cloud workflow. It also lacks API/CLI examples and measured egress savings to prove time-to-value. Verification Reason I rate this a 7. The customer quote explicitly says BaaS keeps restores in cloud to avoid bandwidth costs, which matches my mandate. The page links to product docs and a practitioner's guide, so 'how' may be available. But the page lacks on-page architecture diagrams and an explicit restore-in-cloud workflow. It also lacks API/CLI examples and measured egress savings to prove time-to-value.
EU End User	Data center operations engineer Also: Infrastructure support engineer, Systems engineer, Server operations engineer	Computer Hardware	Reclaimed Exchange servers after cloud backup adoption Reclaimed Exchange servers after cloud backup adoption	Decommission legacy snapshot servers while preserving recoverability.	7/10	I need to reclaim Exchange servers and preserve SLAs today. The page gives a concrete customer quote and links to Product Documentation, a practitioner guide, and demo videos. However, it omits architecture diagrams, explicit RTO numbers, restore workflows, supported Exchange versions, bandwidth impact, API/SDK examples, and pricing. That makes the asset relevant but not actionable for implementation decisions. Verification Reason I need to reclaim Exchange servers and preserve SLAs today. The page gives a concrete customer quote and links to Product Documentation, a practitioner guide, and demo videos. However, it omits architecture diagrams, explicit RTO numbers, restore workflows, supported Exchange versions, bandwidth impact, API/SDK examples, and pricing. That makes the asset relevant but not actionable for implementation decisions.
CH Champion	Data protection officer Also: Privacy lead, Data governance manager, Records compliance lead	Internet	GDPR/CCPA requests require fast item retrieval and export GDPR/CCPA requests require fast item retrieval and export	Enable granular discovery and secure exports to meet privacy laws.	7/10	I rate this a 7 because it directly calls out granular global search and fast recoveries relevant to my privacy requests. It links to Product Documentation and a Trust Center, which addresses compliance concerns. But it omits export formats, eDiscovery workflows, SLA/search latency metrics, audit logs, and chain-of-custody details I need to prove timely, auditable deliveries. Customer quotes and a Gartner mention add social proof, but lack named, privacy-specific case metrics or time-to-value for GDPR/CCPA requests. Verification Reason I rate this a 7 because it directly calls out granular global search and fast recoveries relevant to my privacy requests. It links to Product Documentation and a Trust Center, which addresses compliance concerns. But it omits export formats, eDiscovery workflows, SLA/search latency metrics, audit logs, and chain-of-custody details I need to prove timely, auditable deliveries. Customer quotes and a Gartner mention add social proof, but lack named, privacy-specific case metrics or time-to-value for GDPR/CCPA requests.
EU End User	Developer productivity engineer Also: Build systems engineer, Platform engineer, CI/CD engineer	DevTools	Legal inquiry requests developer emails and artifacts discovery Legal inquiry requests developer emails and artifacts discovery	Find and restore developer artifacts without disrupting teams.	7/10	I need fast, accurate eDiscovery for developer mailboxes and OneDrive. It claims global search for emails and files and links to Product Documentation and a practitioner's guide. But it lacks UI screenshots and an eDiscovery workflow. I also need export formats, preservation-hold controls, audit logs, chain-of-custody reports, and APIs for automation. Those gaps keep this from being mandatory reading for me today. Verification Reason I need fast, accurate eDiscovery for developer mailboxes and OneDrive. It claims global search for emails and files and links to Product Documentation and a practitioner's guide. But it lacks UI screenshots and an eDiscovery workflow. I also need export formats, preservation-hold controls, audit logs, chain-of-custody reports, and APIs for automation. Those gaps keep this from being mandatory reading for me today.
EU End User	Enterprise backup engineer Also: Data protection engineer, Storage administrator, Backup operator	Data Infrastructure	Decommissioning Exchange servers after cloud migration Decommissioning Exchange servers after cloud migration	Replace server-resident restores with cloud-native recoveries	7/10	I gave this a 7 because it directly claims cloud-only M365 restores and Exchange server reclamation, which matches my mandate. It includes links to Product Documentation, practitioner guide, and demos, so the 'how' gateway exists. But the page itself lacks architecture diagrams and explicit restore runbooks. It also omits RTO/RPO metrics, API/SDK details, and a clear Exchange support matrix. I need those artifacts to safely decommission Exchange servers, not just marketing quotes. Verification Reason I gave this a 7 because it directly claims cloud-only M365 restores and Exchange server reclamation, which matches my mandate. It includes links to Product Documentation, practitioner guide, and demos, so the 'how' gateway exists. But the page itself lacks architecture diagrams and explicit restore runbooks. It also omits RTO/RPO metrics, API/SDK details, and a clear Exchange support matrix. I need those artifacts to safely decommission Exchange servers, not just marketing quotes.
TD Technical Decision Maker	Head of data engineering Also: Director of data platforms, Chief data architect, Head of AI infrastructure	Data Science	Preparing for compliance audit on reproducibility and retention Preparing for compliance audit on reproducibility and retention	Speed item-level discovery for legal and research audits.	7/10	I need searchable, immutable M365 backups to satisfy audit reproducibility and retention. The page claims "Granular search to find individual documents, files, or emails to speed legal or compliance inquiries and audits." It also mentions immutable backups and links to Product Documentation and a practitioners guide. But I don't see architecture diagrams, retention/WORM controls, audit logs, or export/APIs on this page. Placeholders like 'Quote6' and duplicated '68.7% savings' hurt credibility. Useful lead, but not enough to unblock our audit readiness. Verification Reason I need searchable, immutable M365 backups to satisfy audit reproducibility and retention. The page claims "Granular search to find individual documents, files, or emails to speed legal or compliance inquiries and audits." It also mentions immutable backups and links to Product Documentation and a practitioners guide. But I don't see architecture diagrams, retention/WORM controls, audit logs, or export/APIs on this page. Placeholders like 'Quote6' and duplicated '68.7% savings' hurt credibility. Useful lead, but not enough to unblock our audit readiness.
TD Technical Decision Maker	Infrastructure architect Also: Data center architect, Systems architect, Storage architect	Computer Hardware	Requirement to speed legal inquiries across archived mailboxes Requirement to speed legal inquiries across archived mailboxes	Enable item-level search and restore without full restores.	7/10	I need fast, queryable mailbox search to speed legal holds and avoid full restores. The page claims "Search and recover individual emails or files globally with powerful metadata indexing." It also links to Product Documentation and practitioner guides. But I don't see Search API examples, indexing latency numbers, eDiscovery export formats, or restore SLA benchmarks. Useful resource, not urgent until I can validate performance and APIs. Verification Reason I need fast, queryable mailbox search to speed legal holds and avoid full restores. The page claims "Search and recover individual emails or files globally with powerful metadata indexing." It also links to Product Documentation and practitioner guides. But I don't see Search API examples, indexing latency numbers, eDiscovery export formats, or restore SLA benchmarks. Useful resource, not urgent until I can validate performance and APIs.
CH Champion	Legal operations manager Also: Litigation support manager, Discovery operations lead, Legal technology coordinator	Data Analytics & Business Intelligence	Preparing for a large-scale litigation discovery request Preparing for a large-scale litigation discovery request	Coordinate rapid item retrieval and defensible exports	7/10	I need reliable indexed search and defensible exports from M365 backups for a large litigation. It even says, 'Search and recover individual emails or files globally with powerful metadata indexing.' They link to Product Documentation and Trust Center which I count as present artifacts. But the page never mentions eDiscovery export formats, audit logs, chain of custody, export speeds, or legal-hold workflows. Score 7 — relevant resource but not mandatory until I see export and audit proofs. Verification Reason I need reliable indexed search and defensible exports from M365 backups for a large litigation. It even says, 'Search and recover individual emails or files globally with powerful metadata indexing.' They link to Product Documentation and Trust Center which I count as present artifacts. But the page never mentions eDiscovery export formats, audit logs, chain of custody, export speeds, or legal-hold workflows. Score 7 — relevant resource but not mandatory until I see export and audit proofs.
CH Champion	Legal operations manager Also: E-discovery manager, Litigation support lead, Records manager	Semiconductors	Receiving legal hold for potential IP theft investigation. Receiving legal hold for potential IP theft investigation.	Rapidly locate and export relevant emails and files.	7/10	I need fast item-level search to meet legal hold deadlines. It claims global, metadata-indexed search that speeds compliance inquiries. It includes TCO savings, Gartner recognition, demos, a trial, Product Documentation, and Trust Center links. But it provides no SLAs, no search-latency metrics, and no legal-hold or eDiscovery workflow details. Score 7 — relevant resource, not must-read without performance and integration proofs. Verification Reason I need fast item-level search to meet legal hold deadlines. It claims global, metadata-indexed search that speeds compliance inquiries. It includes TCO savings, Gartner recognition, demos, a trial, Product Documentation, and Trust Center links. But it provides no SLAs, no search-latency metrics, and no legal-hold or eDiscovery workflow details. Score 7 — relevant resource, not must-read without performance and integration proofs.
CH Champion	ML platform product manager Also: MLOps program manager, Data reliability lead, Model ops manager	Machine Learning	Ransomware affecting shared model artifacts and collaboration channels Ransomware affecting shared model artifacts and collaboration channels	Advocate for cloud backups enabling fast, granular restores for teams.	7/10	I need to protect shared ML workspaces and cut restore times that block model deployments. The page claims granular search, point-in-time restores, a 30-day trial, and a Trust Center link. It even shows a 68.7% TCO savings claim and Gartner Magic Quadrant recognition. But it omits critical artifacts I need: measurable RTOs, restore throughput benchmarks, and API automation details. Also missing are explicit SLAs, pricing tiers, and support for large model binaries and MLOps integrations. Score 7 because it's relevant but lacks the technical proof I require to greenlight pilots. Verification Reason I need to protect shared ML workspaces and cut restore times that block model deployments. The page claims granular search, point-in-time restores, a 30-day trial, and a Trust Center link. It even shows a 68.7% TCO savings claim and Gartner Magic Quadrant recognition. But it omits critical artifacts I need: measurable RTOs, restore throughput benchmarks, and API automation details. Also missing are explicit SLAs, pricing tiers, and support for large model binaries and MLOps integrations. Score 7 because it's relevant but lacks the technical proof I require to greenlight pilots.
EU End User	Messaging engineer Also: Office 365 administrator, Collaboration systems administrator, Exchange engineer	Artificial Intelligence (AI)	Ransomware impacting shared OneDrive and Teams content Ransomware impacting shared OneDrive and Teams content	Restore individual mailboxes and files quickly without rehydrating on-prem.	7/10	I need concrete RTO/RPO numbers, restore-throughput (mailboxes/hour), and restore workflow or API snippets. Page claims granular recovery and BaaS, and links to a practitioner's guide, docs, and demo videos. But it gives no explicit restore throughput, SLAs, or lab benchmarks on the solution page. Verification Reason I need concrete RTO/RPO numbers, restore-throughput (mailboxes/hour), and restore workflow or API snippets. Page claims granular recovery and BaaS, and links to a practitioner's guide, docs, and demo videos. But it gives no explicit restore throughput, SLAs, or lab benchmarks on the solution page.
TD Technical Decision Maker	Network architect Also: WAN architect, Infrastructure architect, Cloud network architect	Computer Networking	Project to reduce restore-induced WAN outages Project to reduce restore-induced WAN outages	Design recovery flows that avoid saturating backbone links.	7/10	I see a directly relevant claim that BaaS avoids bringing data back on-prem, which could reduce WAN load. The page links to Product Documentation and a practitioner's guide, so it's not pure fluff. However it omits the network-level artifacts I need: bandwidth-throttling docs, restore orchestration APIs, architecture diagrams, and measured RTO/RPO results. I need explicit restore throughput limits, WAN-friendly workflows, and test numbers before I escalate this vendor. Verification Reason I see a directly relevant claim that BaaS avoids bringing data back on-prem, which could reduce WAN load. The page links to Product Documentation and a practitioner's guide, so it's not pure fluff. However it omits the network-level artifacts I need: bandwidth-throttling docs, restore orchestration APIs, architecture diagrams, and measured RTO/RPO results. I need explicit restore throughput limits, WAN-friendly workflows, and test numbers before I escalate this vendor.
TD Technical Decision Maker	Principal cloud engineer Also: Cloud platform architect, SRE lead, Infrastructure architect	Cloud Computing	Need to unify SaaS and self-managed backup controls Need to unify SaaS and self-managed backup controls	Unify administration across SaaS and self-hosted backups.	7/10	I need a unified admin path for SaaS and self-managed backups today to reduce operational friction. This page claims a unified administrative experience and links to Product Documentation and demos. But I don't see architecture diagrams, admin UI screenshots, API/SDK examples, or a compatibility matrix. That makes it relevant but not actionable for implementation decisions. Verification Reason I need a unified admin path for SaaS and self-managed backups today to reduce operational friction. This page claims a unified administrative experience and links to Product Documentation and demos. But I don't see architecture diagrams, admin UI screenshots, API/SDK examples, or a compatibility matrix. That makes it relevant but not actionable for implementation decisions.
EU End User	Quantum systems engineer Also: Research compute engineer, QPU operations engineer, Quantum lab IT technician	Quantum Computing	Ransomware impacting lab collaboration tools and experimental notes Ransomware impacting lab collaboration tools and experimental notes	Restore precise files and mailboxes to resume experiments quickly.	7/10	I need a solution that guarantees rapid point-in-time restores for lab data without pulling terabytes on-prem. This page addresses that claim and lists integrations and docs, so it's relevant. But it lacks measurable restore speed, RTO/RPO numbers, architecture or UI screenshots, SDKs, and explicit API or performance benchmarks. It links to Product Documentation and demos, which partially mitigates the lack of technical detail. Verification Reason I need a solution that guarantees rapid point-in-time restores for lab data without pulling terabytes on-prem. This page addresses that claim and lists integrations and docs, so it's relevant. But it lacks measurable restore speed, RTO/RPO numbers, architecture or UI screenshots, SDKs, and explicit API or performance benchmarks. It links to Product Documentation and demos, which partially mitigates the lack of technical detail.
CH Champion	Registrar Also: Records manager, Academic records officer, Compliance officer (education)	E-Learning Platforms	Accreditation or legal requests for historic student communications Accreditation or legal requests for historic student communications	Provide fast, item-level discovery for student records.	7/10	I need guaranteed RTOs, retention/legal-hold details, eDiscovery export formats, pricing, and audit-chain evidence to satisfy auditors. This page claims global search and item-level restores but gives no SLA numbers or TCO breakdown. It links to Product Documentation and Trust Center, which is helpful, but links alone don't prove compliance. Verification Reason I need guaranteed RTOs, retention/legal-hold details, eDiscovery export formats, pricing, and audit-chain evidence to satisfy auditors. This page claims global search and item-level restores but gives no SLA numbers or TCO breakdown. It links to Product Documentation and Trust Center, which is helpful, but links alone don't prove compliance.
EU End User	Service delivery engineer Also: Cloud backup engineer, Exchange Online administrator, Managed backup technician	Managed Service Providers (MSP)	Ransomware or destructive attack impacting multiple customer tenants Ransomware or destructive attack impacting multiple customer tenants	Perform bulk cloud restores without pulling data back on-prem.	7/10	I need to stop manual restores from saturating customer bandwidth during ransomware incidents. This page mentions BaaS keeps data in-cloud to avoid excessive bandwidth pulls. It links to Product Documentation, practitioner guide, and demos, so there is a path to details. But it lacks explicit restore throughput numbers, concurrency limits, architecture diagrams, APIs, and RTO SLAs on the page. Verification Reason I need to stop manual restores from saturating customer bandwidth during ransomware incidents. This page mentions BaaS keeps data in-cloud to avoid excessive bandwidth pulls. It links to Product Documentation, practitioner guide, and demos, so there is a path to details. But it lacks explicit restore throughput numbers, concurrency limits, architecture diagrams, APIs, and RTO SLAs on the page.
EB Economic Buyer	VP of IT operations Also: Head of IT operations, Chief information officer, VP infrastructure	Enterprise Software	Preparing for a legal compliance audit requiring fast item discovery Preparing for a legal compliance audit requiring fast item discovery	Enable fast eDiscovery and defensible restores for regulatory reviews.	7/10	I care because audits need fast item discovery and auditable trails. The page promises global search, demos, a trial, and a Trust Center link. It lacks explicit RTO/RPO/SLA numbers, chain-of-custody details, eDiscovery export formats, audit log samples, and named recovery metrics I can present to auditors. Verification Reason I care because audits need fast item discovery and auditable trails. The page promises global search, demos, a trial, and a Trust Center link. It lacks explicit RTO/RPO/SLA numbers, chain-of-custody details, eDiscovery export formats, audit log samples, and named recovery metrics I can present to auditors.
EB Economic Buyer	VP of infrastructure Also: Head of platform, VP cloud operations, Head of IT services	Cloud Computing	Executive mandate to reduce datacenter footprint and costs Executive mandate to reduce datacenter footprint and costs	Reclaim infrastructure and lower TCO using cloud recovery.	7/10	I need to cut datacenter footprint and prove cost savings. This page contains useful claims: BaaS avoids bringing restores on‑prem and cites 68.7% TCO savings. It links to demos, docs, and a 30‑day trial, so a follow up is possible. But it lacks a pricing table, TCO methodology, SLA/RTO specifics, and architecture diagrams. I need those to justify decommissioning snapshot servers. Verification Reason I need to cut datacenter footprint and prove cost savings. This page contains useful claims: BaaS avoids bringing restores on‑prem and cites 68.7% TCO savings. It links to demos, docs, and a 30‑day trial, so a follow up is possible. But it lacks a pricing table, TCO methodology, SLA/RTO specifics, and architecture diagrams. I need those to justify decommissioning snapshot servers.
EB Economic Buyer	VP of managed services Also: Head of service operations, Chief operating officer (MSP), VP operations	Managed Service Providers (MSP)	Decision to reclaim server estate and reduce backup infrastructure costs Decision to reclaim server estate and reduce backup infrastructure costs	Choose cloud backup to reduce TCO and free infrastructure.	7/10	I need to reclaim server estate and cut backup infrastructure costs now. The page claims cloud BaaS avoids pulling M365 restores on-prem and cites 'reclaim six Exchange servers' and 68.7% TCO savings. That makes it relevant. But it lacks a named customer case study and a detailed TCO model or pricing. It also lacks performance/SLA numbers and clear deployment or bandwidth metrics. It links to Trust Center, docs, demos, and a free trial. I still can't approve budget without a verified TCO breakdown, pricing, and an MSP reference with measurable results. Verification Reason I need to reclaim server estate and cut backup infrastructure costs now. The page claims cloud BaaS avoids pulling M365 restores on-prem and cites 'reclaim six Exchange servers' and 68.7% TCO savings. That makes it relevant. But it lacks a named customer case study and a detailed TCO model or pricing. It also lacks performance/SLA numbers and clear deployment or bandwidth metrics. It links to Trust Center, docs, demos, and a free trial. I still can't approve budget without a verified TCO breakdown, pricing, and an MSP reference with measurable results.