What it does
Sorts out which member of the Copilot family fits a given job, so you don't sell a £30/user seat where free Copilot Chat would do, or reach for GitHub Copilot when the user lives in Teams. The names all say "Copilot" and mean very different things.
Key facts
- Microsoft 365 Copilot (per-user) — the paid seat that lives inside Word, Excel, Outlook, Teams and Copilot Chat, grounded on the user's own tenant data via the semantic index. This is the one people mean by "Copilot".
- Microsoft 365 Copilot Chat — the free, web-grounded chat included with qualifying M365 plans (E3/E5, Business Standard/Premium). No tenant grounding on the free tier; agents you run in it are metered by Copilot Credits.
- Copilot Studio agents — you build these. Custom agents grounded on your data, published to Teams, web, or as declarative agents inside M365 Copilot. Consumption-priced.
- Security Copilot — a separate SOC product for analysts, priced in Security Compute Units (SCUs), not seats.
- GitHub Copilot — for developers in the IDE and on GitHub. Its own tiers, unrelated to M365 licensing.
- Dynamics 365 Copilots — in-app assistants baked into Sales, Customer Service, Finance, etc., licensed with the D365 app, not bought separately.
When to use / skip
Start with the surface the user actually works in. Knowledge worker in Office apps who wants drafting, summarising and tenant-grounded answers — that's M365 Copilot per-user. If the budget isn't there and web grounding is enough, drop to free Copilot Chat and accept it can't see SharePoint or mailboxes without a licence.
Need a bespoke assistant over specific data, or a bot on a website or in Teams — build it in Copilot Studio. Developer writing code — GitHub Copilot, full stop; don't try to make M365 Copilot do it. SOC analyst triaging incidents — Security Copilot. CRM or ERP user who wants help inside the record they're on — that's the relevant Dynamics 365 Copilot, and check it's included before quoting anything.
Configuration decisions
- Where does the user spend their day — Office apps, a browser, an IDE, the SOC, or a D365 app? That names the product.
- Do they need answers grounded on tenant data, or is public web enough? Tenant grounding means a paid M365 Copilot seat or a Copilot Studio agent with knowledge sources.
- Is this one assistant for everyone, or a purpose-built agent for a workflow? Off-the-shelf seat vs Copilot Studio build.
- Autonomy: person-in-the-loop chat, or something that runs on a trigger unattended? The latter pushes you to Copilot Studio.
- Budget model: fixed per-user seats, or metered consumption you can't fully predict?
Gotchas
- Free Copilot Chat and paid M365 Copilot look identical in the UI. People assume the free one reads their SharePoint — it doesn't without a licence.
- Running agents inside free Copilot Chat burns Copilot Credits. Licensed M365 Copilot users get common grounding zero-rated; unlicensed users don't. Same agent, different bill.
- D365 Copilot features vary by app and by licence tier. "Dynamics has Copilot" is not a plan — check the specific app and SKU.
- GitHub Copilot is bought and billed separately from everything M365. Don't fold it into a Copilot proposal as if it shares the same licensing.
- Security Copilot is not part of M365 Copilot. E5/E7 now includes an SCU allowance, but the standalone product is priced and provisioned on its own.
Consultant notes
- The cheapest correct answer is often free Copilot Chat plus one or two Copilot Studio agents, not a wall of £30 seats. Lead with the job, not the SKU.
- Map named user personas to surfaces before you price anything — it kills the "everyone needs Copilot" assumption fast.
- Where a client already pays for E5, remind them Security Copilot capacity and Chat come with it; you may be selling something they part-own.
- Mixed estates are normal: developers on GitHub Copilot, knowledge workers on M365 Copilot, service teams on D365 Copilots. That's a portfolio, not a contradiction.
Check the free-vs-paid Copilot Chat grounding boundary before every proposal — Microsoft keeps moving it.