A Mandate to Be Cheap
-
@scottalanmiller said
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.
Most MSPs suck....they really do.
I've had a tech on site valued by one such MSP at £800 a day. Trying to fix a wifi network they installed, have maintained for years and looked after.
Their documentation was non existent, their tech spent most of the time working on other customer calls yet still wanted to bill for an entire day's work.
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.
-
@Breffni-Potter said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
Most MSPs suck....they really do.
So does most internal IT. Far easier to cycle through, get references on and stick with MSPs, though.
Both only suck because SMBs allow them to.
-
@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.
Why would they when most internal IT is the same way? It's the same pool of talent. One is not naturally better than the other. One is just a better way to hire the same talent.
-
@scottalanmiller said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
@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.
Why would they when most internal IT is the same way? It's the same pool of talent. One is not naturally better than the other. One is just a better way to hire the same talent.
Because one is a machine with sales teams designed to part you with your cash in epic ways. The other is someone on their own where the motivation is to do a good job and take care of the environment.
There is good and bad in both camps but I've seen so many cowboy MSPs where as before I would say the odds are the MSP would do a better job, I'm reversing course on that decision and saying you should just avoid them now, too many reseller partnerships, too much rubbish going on.
Many businesses don't have the in house expressive to manage the relationship or the service with an MSP.
-
@Breffni-Potter said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
The other is someone on their own where the motivation is to do a good job and take care of the environment.
Why is this one motivated by doing a good job when they are hard to fire and the other not motivated to do a good job when they are easy to fire? Sorry, but no, internal IT is not motivated in this way any moreso than anyone else. Neither logic nor observation in the real world support this. Even in the enterprise, there is a reason that top skills are often brought in from ITSPs rather than internal.
This is one of those myths that actually stems from the "sales" aspects of the internal staff. Remember just because they don't have a sales team doesn't mean that they don't do sales, too.
-
@Breffni-Potter said in A Mandate to Be Cheap:
There is good and bad in both camps but I've seen so many cowboy MSPs where as before I would say the odds are the MSP would do a better job, I'm reversing course on that decision and saying you should just avoid them now, too many reseller partnerships, too much rubbish going on.
You get reseller agreements with internal IT staff, too. Everything you say about MSPs is exactly what we see with internal staff. Bottom line... it's the same people. The only difference is an intelligent way to staff or one that doesn't make any sense.
These are what I consider the facts of the case (I say that because it is opinion)...
- Average IT staff is terrible.
- MSPs and Internal staff are the same pool of resources.
- You have to filter heavily to get good people, or hire really well.
- The MSP model is viable for SMBs, internal staff is not. Scale alone makes this a necessity.
-
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.
