Getting Full Value from Microsoft 365 E5
Note: Microsoft packaging, entitlements, add-ons, and regional availability change over time. Use this guide as a planning aid and verify current licensing before making purchasing or consolidation decisions.
On this page
Executive Summary
- E5 can cover meaningful identity, endpoint, email, audit, and compliance gaps without adding new platforms.
- Many environments pay twice — once for Microsoft capabilities and again for separate tools that overlap with them.
- Licensing alone does not create value. The value comes from configuration, rollout discipline, and operational ownership.
- You already own E5 and suspect parts of it are underused.
- You are planning renewals and want to reduce duplicate spend without weakening capability.
- You need a clearer way to decide when Microsoft is good enough and when a specialized tool still makes sense.
- Your Microsoft controls are intentionally enabled, documented, and tied to real requirements.
- Overlapping tools are reviewed by function, not by vendor preference or habit.
- Your team can explain which capabilities stay in Microsoft, which stay external, and why.
- We assess what E5 capabilities are licensed, enabled, and actually operated.
- We compare overlap areas against your environment, workflows, and evidence requirements.
- We help you operationalize the right Microsoft controls while keeping specialized tools where they add real value.
Why E5 often underdelivers in real environments
Microsoft 365 E5 is broad enough that it is easy to buy for one project and never operationalize the rest. One team buys it for security, another uses it mainly for email and Office apps, and a third continues renewing separate tools because nobody has revisited whether those tools still solve a problem Microsoft already covers.
The common failure pattern is not "wrong license." It is partial implementation. Conditional Access exists but is too loose. Defender for Endpoint is licensed but not fully deployed. Purview features are available but nobody owns classification, retention, or review. Audit data exists but never becomes part of an investigation or evidence workflow.
That is why an E5 review should start with business questions instead of feature tourism. Which controls reduce real risk? Which duplicate existing tools? Which capabilities would improve investigations, audits, or day-to-day operations if they were actually turned on and maintained?
If your team cannot name which E5 capabilities are active, which are licensed-but-unused, and where third-party tools overlap, the review has not happened yet. That gap is where most E5 waste lives.
Where E5 usually creates value fastest
The fastest value comes from the parts of E5 that improve both security posture and operational visibility at the same time. These four areas are where we would look first.
Most environments find immediate gaps in at least one of these: Conditional Access policies, privileged admin protections, Defender for Endpoint deployment coverage, or Purview audit retention. Start there before touching anything else.
Identity and privileged access
Entra ID P2
- → Just-in-time admin elevation instead of standing privileges
- → Recurring access reviews for sensitive apps and roles
- → Consistent handling of high-risk sign-ins
Overlaps with: PAM platforms, identity governance tools, access certification products
Endpoint and email protection
Defender for Endpoint P2 + Defender for Office 365 P2
- → EDR, phishing protection, safe-linking, sandboxing built in
- → Intune Plan 1 covers enrollment, compliance policy, Autopilot
- → Often the first place overlap with existing tools appears
Overlaps with: UEM suites, MDM platforms, email security gateways, PC lifecycle tools
Audit, investigation, and compliance
Purview audit + compliance suite
- → Longer audit retention and clearer evidence paths
- → DLP for Teams, eDiscovery, Insider Risk, Communication Compliance
- → Helps with investigations, cyber insurance, customer security reviews
Overlaps with: DLP platforms, eDiscovery tools, communication surveillance, compliance suites
Reporting and operational visibility
Power BI Pro
- → Self-service dashboards and leadership reporting
- → Can replace separate dashboarding tools for common use cases
- → Not a replacement for deeper data-platform investments
Overlaps with: BI platforms, analytics tools, dashboarding products
Where overlap questions are worth asking
The right mindset is not "What can Microsoft replace?" but "What are we already paying for that may cover enough of the requirement to simplify the stack?"
Does the Microsoft capability cover the same outcome, or just a similar-sounding feature? Two tools can both say "DLP" and protect very different things. Compare by outcome — what data, what channels, what enforcement, what reporting — not by product name.
Teams vs. separate VoIP
Teams Phone is not included in E5 — it is a separate add-on, and external calling requires PSTN design (Calling Plan, Operator Connect, or Direct Routing).
- • Users already live in Teams daily
- • Voice needs are standard (queues, auto-attendants)
- • Admin simplification is a priority
- • Contact-center workflows are complex
- • Compliance recording has specific requirements
- • Analog devices or branch survivability matter
Bookings vs. separate scheduling
Not unique to E5, but often exists in tenants that also pay for standalone scheduling software.
- • Need is simple appointment booking + availability
- • Microsoft-native integration is a plus
- • Current tool is underused or expensive for what it does
- • Scheduling is a revenue engine with advanced routing
- • Deep CRM logic or custom workflows required
- • Client experience is built around the scheduling platform
Defender, Purview, Intune vs. existing security stack
The broadest overlap zone. Covers endpoint management, DLP, email protection, insider-risk monitoring, legal hold, and executive reporting.
- • Microsoft-centric requirement is well-covered
- • Current tools duplicate Microsoft capabilities
- • Stack simplification reduces operational overhead
- • Requirements span multiple clouds or non-Microsoft SaaS
- • Specialist functions go deeper than Microsoft offers
- • Coexistence with clearer role boundaries is the better answer
Teams collaboration governance
Some organizations buy third-party products to supervise messaging, enforce communication boundaries, or investigate collaboration content. E5's Teams-side controls may cover more than expected.
- • Content lives primarily in Teams, Exchange, SharePoint, OneDrive
- • DLP, Communication Compliance, and Information Barriers cover the use case
- • Governance must cover non-Microsoft platforms too
- • External compliance tool has regulatory or audit acceptance
The SIEM question: is your telemetry getting easier or harder to manage?
This is not about whether to buy Microsoft Sentinel. Sentinel is a separate Azure product — it is not part of E5, and many teams prefer keeping their SIEM outside the core productivity and identity stack. That is a reasonable design choice.
The real question is simpler: when more of your identity, endpoint, email, and collaboration data already lives inside Microsoft, does that make telemetry easier to collect, or are you still paying people to glue the same logs together across disconnected tools?
- → Microsoft publishes unified audit coverage across major M365 services
- → Native connector paths exist for Microsoft security products into most SIEMs
- → Fewer Microsoft-side telemetry silos means less connector sprawl and less normalization work
- → Firewalls, LOB apps, non-Microsoft SaaS, network gear, and cloud platforms still need their own data paths
- → Fewer vendors does not automatically mean better detection
- → You still need a real SIEM strategy — E5 just makes the Microsoft slice potentially cleaner to feed
The extras question: apps you did not ask for
Microsoft 365 E5 does not just include security and compliance tools. It also ships with a growing collection of apps and features that appear in your tenant whether you planned for them or not — things like Clipchamp (video editing), Viva Engage (employee social), Loop (collaborative workspaces), Universal Print (cloud printing), Avatars for Teams, and Windows Autopatch. None of these are the reason you bought E5. But they are there, and they deserve a governance decision, not indifference.
Every bundled app or feature falls into one of three buckets. The right answer depends on your environment, not on whether the app is objectively good.
- → Worth exploring: solves a real problem your team has today, even if modestly
- → Safe to ignore: not harmful, but not relevant to your workflows either
- → Worth disabling: creates data sprawl, user confusion, or governance risk with no clear benefit
Why this matters more than it sounds
Left unmanaged, bundled extras create real problems. Users start storing content in apps nobody administers. Data ends up in places that are not covered by your retention policies or DLP rules. Features that seemed harmless get woven into business processes, and then Microsoft changes or retires them — leaving you with a gap you did not know you had.
Microsoft publishes a Modern Lifecycle Policy that covers many of these services. The policy means Microsoft provides advance notice before making significant changes, but the specifics vary by product. The practical takeaway: do not assume any bundled app will exist in its current form forever, and do not build critical processes around tools you have not evaluated.
Illustrative examples
These are not exhaustive. They are examples of the kind of thinking that should happen for every app that ships with your tenant.
Clipchamp
A lightweight video editor built into Microsoft 365. Useful if your marketing, training, or communications teams need quick internal video without buying a separate tool. Not a replacement for professional editing software. If nobody in your organization edits video, it is safely ignorable.
Viva Engage (formerly Yammer)
An employee social and community platform. Can support internal communication and knowledge sharing if your organization values that style of interaction. If you do not have a use case for company-wide social channels, it is another place where content can accumulate outside your governance perimeter.
Microsoft Loop
Collaborative workspaces with portable components that sync across Teams, Outlook, and other Microsoft apps. Potentially useful for teams already deeply invested in Microsoft collaboration patterns. Also a new surface for data to live in — worth reviewing from a DLP and retention perspective before adoption spreads organically.
Universal Print
Cloud-based print infrastructure that eliminates the need for on-premises print servers. Directly useful if you are still maintaining print servers and want to simplify that stack. Irrelevant if your organization has moved away from centralized printing or uses a different solution.
Windows Autopatch
Automates Windows and Microsoft 365 Updates for Enterprise licensing tiers. Can reduce patch management overhead if you are currently handling update rings manually through Intune or other tools. Worth evaluating if patch compliance is a persistent struggle. Less relevant if you already have a mature patch process that works.
Avatars for Teams
Personalized avatars for Teams meetings. Harmless for most organizations and may be useful for teams that prefer not to be on camera. Unlikely to cause governance issues, but if you want a cleaner Teams experience for regulated environments, it can be disabled.
What to do about it
You do not need to audit every app in the Microsoft 365 admin center. But you should do three things:
- Identify what is enabled by default. Check your Microsoft 365 Apps admin settings and know which apps appear in the launcher, Teams sidebar, or user installs without any action from you.
- Decide per app, not globally. Some extras are genuinely helpful for specific teams. Disabling everything is as lazy as enabling everything. Make a deliberate choice for each one that touches data or user workflows.
- Revisit at renewal or when Microsoft announces changes. Microsoft updates packaging, renames products, and shifts features between plans regularly. What was safe to ignore last year may be worth adopting now — or vice versa.
Microsoft provides tenant-level controls to disable many bundled apps through the Microsoft 365 admin center or via PowerShell. This is generally the right approach for apps you have evaluated and decided against — disable them at the admin level rather than relying on individual users to ignore them. Check current admin controls before each major Microsoft 365 update, because disablement options can change.
How to review E5 without turning it into a rip-and-replace project
- Inventory what is licensed. Confirm what you actually own today, including add-ons, channel differences, and feature limitations that vary by region or agreement type.
- Inventory what is enabled. A licensed feature with no deployment owner is shelfware. An unmanaged bundled app is a governance gap.
- Map current tools by outcome. Compare functions such as EDR, DLP, scheduling, telephony, reporting, privileged access, legal hold, insider-risk review, and audit evidence — not just vendor names.
- Decide where Microsoft is good enough. If the Microsoft feature meets the requirement, improves operational simplicity, and does not create a material gap, consolidation may make sense.
- Keep specialized tools where they are clearly stronger. Deep telephony, non-Microsoft ecosystems, advanced workflow automation, or niche compliance demands may justify a separate platform.
- Roll out in phases. Test identity and endpoint changes carefully, pilot overlap reductions with one function at a time, and document the decision criteria so future renewals are easier.
The goal is not vendor purity. The goal is a stack you can explain, operate, and defend.
What a good E5 utilization review should produce
A good review ends with decisions, not just screenshots. You should be able to name which E5 capabilities are now part of the operating baseline, which third-party tools remain in place, which ones are candidates for retirement, and what evidence will prove the new design works.
Clearer identity controls, better endpoint visibility, stronger email protection, more defensible audit history.
Fewer redundant products, less unclear ownership, more consistent device and collaboration controls, coherent admin experience.
Cleaner paths from Microsoft telemetry into your review process and SIEM workflows.
A documented rationale for where Microsoft fits for access governance, collaboration controls, reporting, and evidence — and where a separate tool remains justified.
A per-app decision for every bundled feature that touches data or user workflows — enabled intentionally, disabled intentionally, or queued for evaluation.
If the end result is simply "we should use more Microsoft," the review was not specific enough. If the result is "we know exactly where Microsoft helps, where it does not, and why" — plus a clear list of which extras are enabled, ignored, or disabled — then the exercise did its job.
Common Questions
Does Microsoft 365 E5 replace every third-party security or operations tool?
No. E5 includes a broad set of identity, endpoint, email, compliance, and audit capabilities, but specialized tools may still be the better fit for non-Microsoft workloads, niche compliance needs, advanced telephony requirements, or deeper operational workflows.
What is the fastest way to get more value from E5?
Start with the controls that improve both security and operational visibility: Conditional Access, privileged admin protections, Defender for Endpoint, Defender for Office 365, Purview audit visibility, and a review of overlapping tools you may already be paying for elsewhere.
Is Teams Phone included with Microsoft 365 E5?
No. Teams Phone is a separate add-on, and external calling also requires a PSTN path such as Calling Plan, Operator Connect, or Direct Routing. That does not make it a bad option - it just means you should evaluate the full voice design, not assume the capability is already covered.
Is Microsoft Bookings an E5-only feature?
No. Bookings is available across multiple Microsoft 365 plans. It still belongs in an E5 value conversation because many organizations with E5 also have access to Bookings somewhere in the tenant and may be paying for a separate scheduling tool without realizing a Microsoft-native option already exists.
Are you recommending Microsoft Sentinel as the SIEM if we use E5?
No. Sentinel is a separate Azure product, not part of E5. The practical point is narrower: when more of your core stack is already on Microsoft, it can be easier to centralize Microsoft identity, endpoint, email, and collaboration telemetry into whichever SIEM you choose.
What about the extra apps Microsoft includes — Clipchamp, Viva, Loop, and others?
Some are genuinely useful for specific workflows. Some create data sprawl or user confusion if left ungoverned. Some are safe to disable at the tenant level if they do not fit your environment. The key is deciding intentionally rather than discovering them by accident.
Related resources
Sources & References
Paying for E5 but not sure what is really being used?
We can review what is licensed, what is enabled, where other tools overlap, and where Microsoft is or is not the right fit for your environment.
Contact N2CON