HVE Squad: Power Platform feature and schema decisions
Decide what is needed, why it is needed and what data supports it.
Start here | Cowork method | Find outputs | Setup | Deck
The learning contract
Use HVE to interpret client evidence, select technology-specific features, compare logical schemas, handle a change and assemble a justified first-release design.
This is neither generic prompting nor implementation troubleshooting. Core tasks do not debug formulas/code, configure designer properties, or begin with a mandatory table blueprint.
Each case supplies an interview and candidate designs, not the answer. The current case version is HVE-DECISIONS-1.0. Sample CSVs are source examples, not normalized schemas.
Choose the component and decision problem
| Lab | Power Platform components | Feature/schema decisions | Partner offer |
|---|---|---|---|
| 01 CoE and first service | Model-driven app, Power Automate cloud flow, Copilot Studio agent | CoE capabilities versus service features; use-case/decision/activity/reuse data | AI CoE Launch + First Value Stream |
| 02 Order intake | Power Automate cloud flow, AI Builder, Model-driven app | Extraction/correction/review needs; source/order/line/issue/history cardinality | Order Intake Accelerator |
| 03 Process service | Power Automate Process Mining, Power Automate cloud flow | Insight/rota/reminder/trial scope; event/current-work/follow-up data | Process-to-Value Sprint |
| 04 Canvas inspection | Canvas app, Dataverse mobile offline | Offline/photos/checklists/remediation; visit/finding/version/evidence relationships | Field Quality Accelerator |
| 05 Supplier service | Power Pages, Model-driven app, Power Automate cloud flow | Self-service/review/correction scope; supplier/contact/application/revision visibility | Supplier Onboarding Accelerator |
| 06 Service agent | Copilot Studio agent, Agent flow | Knowledge/actions/status scope; transient conversation versus persistent requests | Transactional Service Agent Pilot |
| 07 Legacy operating service | Power Automate desktop flow, Power Automate cloud flow | Queue/reconciliation/history needs; job/attempt/observation/resolution identity | Legacy Workflow Bridge |
| 08 Dispatch workbench | Power Apps code app, Dataverse | Custom interaction versus simpler apps; job/skill/assignment/history model | Dispatch Workbench Accelerator |
| 09 Commercial insight | Power BI, Model-driven app, Power Automate cloud flow | Diagnostic/casework/freshness scope; work/line/measure/investigation grain | Revenue Leakage Diagnostic + Resolution |
| 10 Client variation | Power Pages, Model-driven app, Power Platform solutions | Standard versus variable features; region/reviewer/history schema choices | Repeatable Accelerator Delivery |
Component names identify the decision context, not compulsory architecture. HVE can recommend a simpler alternative. Original approved candidates remain 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, 12, 13, 14, 17 and 20.
Five requests, five decisions
- Needs: what are users trying to do, on what evidence?
- Features: what is included, deferred, rejected or unverified?
- Schema: what entities, fields, relationships and rules support selected features?
- Change: what happens when a real requirement grows or varies?
- Decision pack: can another person explain the choices using realistic records?
These are teaching requests, not five internal Squad stages. The server coordinates the actual work.
Your actions
After each prompt follow Find this output / Do with it / Next. Record the actual original artifact/run/version, your source-backed disposition and the content carried forward.
You should make a choice, compare an alternative, draw/test a relationship, question an unjustified field or walk a changed example. Merely reading an answer or filling a generic decision log is insufficient.
What you leave with
- A prioritized feature set with evidence and technology implications.
- A preferred logical schema and a reason for each field/relationship.
- Rejected options, business states/access/history rules and open client decisions.
- Sample-record/functional acceptance walkthroughs.
- A reusable decision method and offering canvas.
Use the receipt to preserve decisions and source provenance. Supplied review findings are fictional, not actual application test results.
Prerequisites and completion
No Power Platform authoring experience or provisioned app is required for the core. A connected, rehearsed Cowork/HVE project is required to claim live HVE practice; otherwise label a desk walkthrough. Timings require a representative pilot.
The business source pack and decision cases support standalone starts. Lab 10 uses actual lab-05 artifacts when available, or a proposed baseline without invented history.
Optional downstream implementation
Earlier maker references remain separate. Their example schemas and technical drills are not the core decision task or a prescribed answer. Applying a reviewed decision pack requires separate design/build preparation and actual execution evidence.