Why automation vendors default to Google
Google Workspace has broad, well-documented APIs and a developer ecosystem built around fast demos. A lot of generic automation tooling gets built Google-first for that reason: it's easier for the vendor, not because it's a better fit for the firm the automation is supposed to serve.
The stack accounting firms actually run
Almost every accounting firm operates daily in Outlook, Teams, SharePoint, and OneDrive, not Google Workspace. That's the mismatch: a vendor optimizing for ease of development builds against Google's APIs, while the firm needs automation that lives inside the inbox, file structure, and chat platform its staff already use every day.
The easiest stack to build a demo against and the stack your firm actually runs on are usually two different things. Automation built for the first one has to be adapted to the second — automation built for the second one just works.
What building Microsoft-first actually changes
Files land directly in the SharePoint folder structure staff already look in. Triggers come from the Outlook inbox partners already monitor. Notifications arrive in the Teams channels staff already have open. Nothing is routed through a platform your firm doesn't otherwise use, and nothing requires staff to check a second place for something that should already be where they work.
Why this matters more than it sounds
Beyond the friction of adopting a new tool, keeping automation inside the Microsoft 365 environment your firm already runs means client data stays inside the security and compliance boundary your IT already governs, instead of passing through an additional platform with its own access model to manage.
Related: Outlook as an automation trigger: what's possible →