White-Label Model

The arrangement

Microsoft is the brand on the workshop. Frontier builds and delivers it under Microsoft’s approval.
Consulting firms (e.g. PwC) are the customers/learners. Their people earn the credential; the firm uses “Frontier Certified” as a distinction.
Frontier Engineering engineers teach every session (for now). Frontier may be invisible or “delivered by” — TBD (^q-021).

Build so the brand is a swappable layer from day one (Microsoft today; possibly firm-co-branded or other vendors later):

Slide master per Microsoft brand guidelines — get their template/brand kit early
Course platform theme + domain → Frontier Engineering Digital Learning
Certificate / badge — issued by Microsoft (^q-015); we supply completion/assessment data in whatever format their issuing system needs
Lab repos, sample company, facilitator guide in neutral voice

Approval workflow and turnaround for content and updates (^q-016)
Brand/trademark usage rights; “delivered by Frontier Engineering” attribution?
Who owns the content IP; can Frontier reuse it outside Microsoft?
Credential governance: Microsoft issues. Still to settle: who records assessment results, data handoff, firm-level usage rules (^q-017), renewal (^q-023)
Commercials: per-cohort fee, Microsoft funding programs, firm-paid seats (^q-020)
Lab tenancy and cloud cost responsibility (^q-009)
Exclusivity (Frontier sole provider? territory?)
Whether designation ties into Microsoft partner programs (specializations, Solutions Partner) (^q-013)

Nomination/eligibility of participants (^q-019)
Firm-level designation rules and how they may use it in marketing
Client-confidentiality rules if real client work is used in a deployment phase
Lead handling: does Frontier get FDE work from firms? (likely sensitive — they’re also potential competitors)