A mid-sized NBFC’s internal audit team recently asked IT to produce a complete list of every application touching customer financial data, ahead of an RBI examination. The core banking system was easy. The Dynamics 365 Finance and Operations environment was easy. The problem was everything built on top of Power Platform over the previous three years: loan-approval trackers stitched together by branch operations staff, a collections dashboard built by someone in the credit team who has since left, a dozen Power Automate flows moving customer data between Dataverse and personal OneDrive accounts because nobody had configured a data loss prevention policy to stop it. IT could not produce the list. Not because anyone had done anything malicious, but because no one had ever been asked to keep one.
That is not an edge case. It is the default state of most Power Platform tenants that have been live for more than about eighteen months, and it is the specific problem Microsoft has spent 2026 quietly building tooling to address.
What Microsoft just admitted
In June 2026, Microsoft moved Advanced Connector Policies to general availability and put Power Platform Inventory into public preview. The two releases are worth reading together, because separately they look like routine platform maturity and together they read as an admission. Advanced Connector Policies replaces the blunt “allow or block this connector” model of traditional data loss prevention with action-level control, governing individual operations rather than entire connectors, specifically because, as Microsoft has framed it, agents and Copilot-authored flows can now use a connector as a tool, a knowledge source, or a pathway to a sensitive operation in ways a simple allow-list was never built to distinguish. Power Platform Inventory, meanwhile, gives administrators connector and operation-level visibility across canvas apps, model-driven apps, cloud flows, agent flows, and Copilot-authored agents, surfaced through the admin center, an API, and Azure Resource Graph, with no opt-in required.
Put those together and the sequencing makes sense: a policy engine is only as good as the inventory it applies to. Microsoft shipping both in the same release wave, framed explicitly around the fact that “Copilot, agents, and AI-first projects have multiplied both the number of builders and the number of places they build,” is a tacit acknowledgment that the platform’s own success created a visibility problem it now has to sell tooling to solve. That framing is Microsoft’s own positioning, not an independently audited claim, but the underlying dynamic is one most Dynamics 365 and Power Platform consultants will recognize from client environments: the tenant grew faster than anyone’s ability to describe what was in it.
Why this is a governance problem before it is a technical one
For organizations outside regulated industries, an incomplete app inventory is an IT hygiene issue. It shows up as duplicated effort, orphaned automations nobody remembers building, and a Center of Excellence team perpetually behind the pace of citizen development. Irritating, costly in wasted licensing and support time, but not existential.
For regulated financial institutions, particularly in India, it is a different category of problem. RBI’s Master Direction on Outsourcing of IT Services, issued in April 2023 and effective that October, applies to scheduled commercial banks, larger NBFCs, and all-India financial institutions, and it rests on one unambiguous principle: outsourcing transfers a function, not the accountability. Boards and senior management remain responsible for outsourced and third-party technology arrangements regardless of where the underlying infrastructure sits or who built the application layer on top of it. The direction also requires cyber incident reporting to RBI within six hours of detection, along with documented vendor due diligence, concentration risk assessment, and subcontractor governance running through the full supply chain.
None of that framework was written with citizen-developed Power Apps in mind, but none of it exempts them either. A collections tracker built by a branch employee, running on Dataverse, connected to a third-party SMS gateway through a personal connector, that experiences a data exposure incident, still starts the same six-hour reporting clock as an incident in the core banking platform. The accountability language in the Master Direction does not distinguish between an application IT commissioned and one IT never knew existed. For a bank or NBFC running Dynamics 365 F&O alongside a sprawling Power Platform layer, the absence of an inventory is not a documentation gap examiners will overlook; it is itself evidence that the control environment has not kept pace with how the technology is actually being used.
The trade-offs nobody wants to say out loud
Managed Environments, DLP policies, and now Inventory and Advanced Connector Policies are real, useful controls, but they solve for the future more cleanly than they solve for the past. None of them retroactively documents what a citizen developer already built two years ago using a connector that has since been deprecated, or reconstructs the business justification for a flow whose original owner left the company. Enabling inventory visibility tells you what exists today; it does not tell you which of those hundreds of apps and flows are business-critical, which touch regulated data, and which can simply be turned off. That reconciliation work is manual, and it is the part vendors selling governance tooling tend to underplay.
There is also a real cost trade-off. Every layer of governance, whether it is a Center of Excellence function, tighter DLP policies, or a formal intake process for new Power Platform apps, adds friction and administrative overhead to a platform whose original value proposition was speed. CIOs who over-correct risk recreating the slow, centralized IT bottleneck that made Power Platform attractive to the business in the first place. The honest position is that governance maturity and development speed trade off against each other continuously, and the right balance depends on how much regulated or sensitive data actually flows through the platform, not on a generic best-practice checklist.
The talent question compounds this. Someone has to own the reconciliation work, interpret what Advanced Connector Policies flags, and decide which discovered apps get formalized versus retired, and that role sits awkwardly between a functional analyst and a security administrator, a skill combination most F&O and Power Platform teams have not deliberately hired for. Microsoft’s own 2026 release wave adds a related layer worth watching on the cost side: Copilot credit tracking, configurable consumption caps, and automated license reclaim are being positioned as governance features, which is a reasonable framing, but they also mean CFOs will need to start reading Power Platform licensing the way they already read Azure consumption bills, as a variable cost that scales with exactly the citizen-development activity nobody was tracking before.
Turning a preview feature into an actual governance program
Microsoft’s inventory tooling is a starting input, not a finished program, and treating it as the latter is how organizations end up with an accurate list of applications and no clearer sense of which ones represent real exposure. Routeget’s managed application support practice has built a structured baseline exercise, internally referred to as the Platform Visibility Baseline, that takes the raw output of Power Platform Inventory and Advanced Connector Policies and runs it through a reconciliation pass: mapping every discovered app, flow, and agent to a business owner, a data sensitivity classification, and, where relevant, the specific regulatory obligation it falls under, whether that is RBI’s outsourcing direction, GST-related data handling, or an internal audit requirement. The output is not a dashboard; it is an asset register that a board or an examiner can actually be shown, paired with a recommendation on which discovered apps to formalize, which to decommission, and where a Center of Excellence operating model needs to sit going forward. This is a capability the team has developed directly from the failure pattern described above, not a completed engagement track record, and it is available now for organizations that suspect, correctly, that they could not produce their own list if asked tomorrow.
#PowerPlatform #DataverseGovernance #ERPGovernance #RBICompliance #ShadowIT #EnterpriseAI
Enterprise Architecture & ERP Implementation Governance
Transitioning complex organizational workflows into scalable ERP modernization architectures requires systematic alignment between core operational processes and underlying digital infrastructure across all operating subsidiaries. When executing enterprise deployments within intricate multi-entity business environments, organizations must rigorously prioritize data normalization, chart-of-accounts standardization, and unified telemetry architectures. Establishing resilient, pre-configured integration boundaries across legacy application estates directly eliminates technical debt while ensuring end-to-end data integrity across high-frequency transactional lifecycles. Cross-functional governance committees—uniting financial controllers, supply chain leaders, and enterprise technical architects—remain indispensable for maintaining strict configuration discipline and curbing procedural fragmentation across regional operating units.
Beyond core transactional execution, enduring platform longevity depends on deliberate organizational enablement and continuous operational validation across all stakeholder tiers. Implementing isolated sandbox environments, automated regression testing frameworks, and formalized release cadence protocols enables business units to absorb continuous platform enhancements without introducing unexpected downtime or operational friction. Enterprises that deliberately pair proactive telemetry monitoring with targeted role-based training programs consistently achieve accelerated user adoption, compress post-go-live stabilization horizons, and maximize the long-term return on strategic technology investments. This disciplined operating model provides the institutional agility needed to scale operations predictably.
No comment yet, add your voice below!