A Mandate to Be Cheap
-
I don't disagree that nearly all MSPs are terrible, but it is only a reflection of the market. MSPs are only as bad as customers allow them to be, in reality. And they keep getting hired and retained. But everything you describe is the internal IT market as well, but without the benefits of MSP management, resources and scale.
-
@scottalanmiller said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
But everything you describe is the internal IT market as well, but without the benefits of MSP management, resources and scale.
The difference is, the MSP is harder to break with then internal IT in a lot of areas. Combine that with the management/resources/scale the damage tends to be far greater to a business.
-
@Breffni-Potter said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
The difference is, the MSP is harder to break with then internal IT in a lot of areas. Combine that with the management/resources/scale the damage tends to be far greater to a business.
How is that possible? In the US there is nothing of the sort. Internal IT is hard to control, MSPs you always have total control. Always. Internal IT is the greater risk by orders of magnitude.
-
@scottalanmiller said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
Internal IT rules because businesses are not smart, are taught to fear the concept of external services and because business skills are not taught here...No one knows what crazy logic these companies have. But I've been preaching that any shop under three full time IT people is too small to even discuss having internal staff for many years.
@Breffni-Potter said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
Why would a business owner choose an MSP when most MSPs are yeehaw cowboys who are out of their control a lot of the time.
Yes, that's generally been my experience, and the experience of many of my friends. Well, I haven't experienced cowboys, but neither have I been satisfied. I guess I'm just not smart
-
@Carnival-Boy said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@scottalanmiller said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
Internal IT rules because businesses are not smart, are taught to fear the concept of external services and because business skills are not taught here...No one knows what crazy logic these companies have. But I've been preaching that any shop under three full time IT people is too small to even discuss having internal staff for many years.
@Breffni-Potter said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
Why would a business owner choose an MSP when most MSPs are yeehaw cowboys who are out of their control a lot of the time.
Yes, that's generally been my experience, and the experience of many of my friends. Well, I haven't experienced cowboys, but neither have I been satisfied. I guess I'm just not smart
What I've found the most is that the worse an MSP is, the more likely that no one will replace them.
-
In the nicest possible way. I do not have the hours in the day to go back and forth on this because we just end up going round in circles with back and forth's.
I've seen it happen so so many times that I now hold the belief that most MSPs on the market should be avoided, not embraced or used.
Do they have a place? Absolutely but for the most part they are bad, finding the good ones is nigh impossible.
Is that the fault of businesses with no technical knowledge being taken advantage of? Sure but where do they get that technical knowledge from? Where do they get the management inside to handle the relationship.
-
@Breffni-Potter said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
I've seen it happen so so many times that I now hold the belief that most MSPs on the market should be avoided, not embraced or used.
You say that as if I didn't already agree that that was true. That's not disputing what I said in any way.
-
@Breffni-Potter said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
Do they have a place? Absolutely but for the most part they are bad, finding the good ones is nigh impossible.
Again, agreeing with me.
-
@scottalanmiller said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@Breffni-Potter said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
I've seen it happen so so many times that I now hold the belief that most MSPs on the market should be avoided, not embraced or used.
You say that as if I didn't already agree that that was true. That's not disputing what I said in any way.
But your stance is that based on the scales of good/bad - Internal IT is generally worse then MSP IT.
My stance is the opposite.
-
@Breffni-Potter said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
Is that the fault of businesses with no technical knowledge being taken advantage of? Sure but where do they get that technical knowledge from? Where do they get the management inside to handle the relationship.
They get it from finding a good MSP. How do they get a good MSP? By having good business sense in management. It's that simple. The only other process is more dangerous - trying to hire a good internal IT person to then hire a good MSP, two places for things to break. Hiring a good internal IT person is harder than hiring a good MSP, so you are starting out at a disadvantage.
-
It requires no TECHNICAL knowledge in a business to get a good MSP. That's one of the first business flaws and a fundamental underpinning to many mistakes. You don't need good HR knowledge to hire good HR outsourcing companies. You don't need a law degree to hire a lawyer. Why do businesses need to be IT managers to hire an IT outsourcer?
-
@scottalanmiller said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
It requires no TECHNICAL knowledge in a business to get a good MSP. That's one of the first business flaws and a fundamental underpinning to many mistakes. You don't need good HR knowledge to hire good HR outsourcing companies. You don't need a law degree to hire a lawyer. Why do businesses need to be IT managers to hire an IT outsourcer?
-
The implication that MSPs are bad and internal staff is good is that if someone is an unethical, incompetent MSP that you feel that they will improve by becoming an employee.
My assertion is that the opposite is true. With an MSP, the same person gets a better support network, businesses get a better interface to the department, the risks of hiring are reduced, the need to pay for one person regardless of if they are qualified or not or have the right skills or not go away, you get scale, etc. I'm saying that the MSP structure fixes a huge number of issues with the direct hiring structure.
But you are arguing that the actual people change their behaviour when hired directly, which I believe is unfounded.
-
@olivier said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@scottalanmiller said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
It requires no TECHNICAL knowledge in a business to get a good MSP. That's one of the first business flaws and a fundamental underpinning to many mistakes. You don't need good HR knowledge to hire good HR outsourcing companies. You don't need a law degree to hire a lawyer. Why do businesses need to be IT managers to hire an IT outsourcer?
IT is a business function. If you had IT skills yourself, enough to hire based on knowing all the answers yourself, why would you be hiring someone else to do that? Outsourcing is moving skills out of the house, not duplicating them.
-
@scottalanmiller said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@olivier said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@scottalanmiller said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
It requires no TECHNICAL knowledge in a business to get a good MSP. That's one of the first business flaws and a fundamental underpinning to many mistakes. You don't need good HR knowledge to hire good HR outsourcing companies. You don't need a law degree to hire a lawyer. Why do businesses need to be IT managers to hire an IT outsourcer?
IT is a business function. If you had IT skills yourself, enough to hire based on knowing all the answers yourself, why would you be hiring someone else to do that? Outsourcing is moving skills out of the house, not duplicating them.
I agree, but that sounded like inception
-
@olivier said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@scottalanmiller said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@olivier said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@scottalanmiller said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
It requires no TECHNICAL knowledge in a business to get a good MSP. That's one of the first business flaws and a fundamental underpinning to many mistakes. You don't need good HR knowledge to hire good HR outsourcing companies. You don't need a law degree to hire a lawyer. Why do businesses need to be IT managers to hire an IT outsourcer?
IT is a business function. If you had IT skills yourself, enough to hire based on knowing all the answers yourself, why would you be hiring someone else to do that? Outsourcing is moving skills out of the house, not duplicating them.
I agree, but that sounded like inception
ITception
-
Good quick write there. I totally agree... comes down to basic logic which is better safe than sorry. Not to say there aren't good open source solutions out there but often times it's not worth cutting cost corners if you're more exposed to risk.
-
@zuphzuph said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
Good quick write there. I totally agree... comes down to basic logic which is better safe than sorry. Not to say there aren't good open source solutions out there but often times it's not worth cutting cost corners if you're more exposed to risk.
Thanks
-
But I work for non profit organization ... where cheap means cheap
-
@msff-amman-Itofficer said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
But I work for non profit organization ... where cheap means cheap
Well sadly, that is the case for most NFP. But if they stopped being cheap and ran their shit like a business, they would earn more or be more efficient with their donations, and be able to use more money for whatever it is the NFP is supporting.
