Professional Services Firm Cuts Slack and Webex Overlap

This case study shows how a professional services firm cuts Slack and Webex overlap by standardising on the Microsoft Teams capability it already paid for inside Microsoft 365. By retiring duplicate collaboration tools and right sizing what remained, the firm removed two recurring contracts and reclaimed seats without losing a single workflow people relied on.

This anonymised composite case study describes how a professional services firm cuts Slack and Webex overlap. It reflects the kind of engagement we run rather than a single named client, and no real organization, logo, or person is identified. The figures are illustrative of a typical outcome. It sits among our case studies and supports the wider digital workplace cost optimization program.

Situation

The organization was a professional services firm of around 900 employees across three offices, with a sprawling collaboration stack that had grown by department rather than by design. Most of the firm lived in Microsoft Teams, which came bundled with the Microsoft 365 licenses everyone already held. On top of that, several practice groups ran Slack for internal chat, and a legacy Webex contract persisted for video and conferencing, left over from an older arrangement nobody had revisited.

The overspend found

The review found the firm was paying in full for three overlapping ways to message and meet. Teams was already funded inside Microsoft 365 and used by nearly everyone. Slack duplicated the chat capability for a subset of teams, billed per active user. Webex duplicated the video and conferencing capability that Teams also provided, on a contract that auto renewed without review. In effect, the firm paid three times for two functions, and the duplication had never been examined because each tool had its own owner and its own renewal date.

Source: vendor plans and pricing documentation for Microsoft Teams, Slack, and Webex (microsoft.com, slack.com, webex.com), as of June 2026. Plan structures and pricing change often; confirm current terms before any consolidation decision.

Approach: how the firm cuts Slack and Webex overlap

The work followed the standardisation logic described in standardising on one collaboration platform. We measured real usage across all three tools to establish what each genuinely delivered, then confirmed that Microsoft Teams, already paid for, covered the messaging and meeting workflows the firm depended on. With that established, we named Teams the primary platform and planned the retirement of Slack and Webex around their respective notice periods, so neither could auto renew during the transition. The auto renewal risk on the Webex contract was exactly the kind we describe in the glossary entry on the auto renewal clause.

Migration was sequenced to protect the work. Active Slack channels that mattered were moved into Teams, Webex meeting habits were redirected to Teams meetings, and the change was communicated in spend terms leadership understood. Where a small group had a genuine external facing need, it was handled within Teams rather than by keeping a separate contract alive.

Outcome

The firm retired both the Slack and Webex contracts entirely, standardising on the Teams capability it already owned. Removing two recurring subscriptions, plus the support and administration overhead of running three platforms, cut the firm's collaboration tooling spend substantially, with the saving concentrated in contracts that were pure duplication of an owned tool. Because Teams was already embedded and the migration was planned around real usage, the change landed without disrupting client work.

ToolBeforeAfter
Microsoft TeamsUsed widely, already paid forPrimary platform for chat and meetings
SlackPaid per user for several teamsRetired, channels migrated to Teams
WebexLegacy contract, auto renewingRetired before next auto renewal
Collaboration tooling spendBaseline across three toolsReduced to the owned Teams capability

Lessons for buyers

The first lesson is that overlap rarely arrives by decision, it accumulates by drift, with each tool justified on its own while the duplication goes unexamined. The second is that the cheapest collaboration platform is usually the one you already own, and counting what Microsoft 365 already provides is the fastest route to a real cut. The third is that timing matters: planning the retirements around notice periods stopped a legacy contract from auto renewing mid transition. Buyers who measure usage across every tool, standardise on what is already funded, and sequence the change around renewal dates can remove whole contracts rather than negotiating slightly smaller ones. This is the core of our collaboration rationalization work.

Frequently asked questions

Is this a real named client?

No. It is an anonymised composite that reflects the kind of engagement we run, with illustrative figures. No real organization, logo, or individual is identified, in keeping with our confidential, buyer side approach.

What was the Slack and Webex overlap?

The firm paid for three ways to message and meet. Microsoft Teams was already funded inside Microsoft 365, while Slack duplicated chat for some teams and Webex duplicated video and conferencing, so two functions were paid for three times.

How did the firm cut the overlap?

By measuring real usage, confirming Teams covered the needed workflows, naming Teams the primary platform, and retiring Slack and Webex around their notice periods so neither auto renewed during the transition.

How much did the firm save?

In this composite, retiring both duplicate contracts plus the overhead of running three platforms cut collaboration tooling spend substantially, with the saving concentrated in contracts that simply duplicated an owned tool.

Did people lose any capability?

No. Teams already covered the messaging and meeting workflows the firm relied on, active Slack channels were migrated, and external facing needs were handled within Teams, so no workflow was lost in the consolidation.

Why did timing matter in this case?

Because the Webex contract was auto renewing without review. Planning the retirements around notice periods stopped a legacy contract from rolling over mid transition, which protected the saving.

Are you paying for collaboration tools twice?

A free digital workplace spend assessment maps every collaboration tool you run, counts what Microsoft Teams already covers, and shows which duplicate contracts you can retire.

Request your free assessment

Workplace Spend Experts is an independent, buyer side advisory firm. We are not a vendor or reseller, take no vendor commission, and are paid only by the buyer. This page is commercial and cost advisory and is not legal advice; for contract interpretation consult your own counsel. Vendor pricing and plan mechanics change often, so any figures carry an as of date.