The simple salary vs. monthly fee comparison is a financial lie. This common method hides the true, fully loaded cost of internal IT vs MSP services, ignoring essential elements like burden, specialized tooling, training, and operational risk. This flawed model results in unpredictable tech spend and dangerous coverage gaps. We will fix this by creating an apples-to-apples comparison that accurately accounts for hidden costs on both the internal IT side and the MSP side. To achieve true financial predictability, we must establish a reliable baseline.
The key error many finance leaders make when assessing the cost of internal IT vs MSP is comparing the MSP fee only to a technician’s base salary. To secure a predictable budget, CFOs must calculate the Fully Loaded Cost of Employee (FLCE), which captures the total yearly expense of keeping staff operational and compliant. Ignoring FLCE creates immediate blind spots in the financial model.
Here is the straightforward formula needed to calculate the true annual expense of your internal IT staff:
Once these hidden costs are factored in, a hypothetical $75,000 base salary rapidly converts into a $105,000 to $130,000 FLCE. Crucially, this metric covers salary only, existing before the separate costs of specialized tooling, physical hardware, incident risk, and 24/7 coverage gaps are addressed.
Internal IT costs extend far beyond the FLCE salary you budget, especially when compared to comprehensive 24/7 help desk and endpoint management solutions. To move beyond reactive "break-fix" mode, an internal administrator requires an expensive, specialized toolchain—a cost MSPs bundle into their flat fees. Without these systems, your internal resource cannot operate proactively (patching, monitoring, securing, and documenting).
The next major hidden expense is the tool stack required for a professional IT operation. Add the following unavoidable line items (often paid per user/endpoint) to your internal IT budget:
Factoring in the FLCE plus these mandatory licenses reveals the true cost of internal IT vs MSP, and the perceived internal savings disappear entirely.
The core argument against relying on internal IT is capability coverage. Modern IT demands specialized expertise in security, cloud, networking, and compliance, which a single generalist cannot cover. This breadth shortage creates dangerous operational risks and inevitable budget leaks.
This capability gap results in several predictable, hidden costs:
This final calculation reveals the total cost of internal IT vs MSP requires budgeting an annual reserve for outside specialist expertise. Leaders must assume purchasing project hours yearly to mitigate technical gaps and the single point of failure risk.
The single-administrator model’s operational gaps lead directly to bill shock—unpredictable spending when an incident occurs. To establish an accurate comparison for the cost of internal IT vs MSP, you must budget an annual risk reserve that accounts for these potential expenses.
Incident costs create financial volatility and include:
Internal IT owns this risk entirely. By contrast, a mature MSP doesn’t eliminate risk, but its proactive monitoring and security controls reduce both the probability and the financial impact. If you adopt the internal model, include this annual risk reserve on your ledger to achieve true financial predictability.
To accurately compare internal IT costs against an MSP, define precisely what the flat fee displaces. A full-service MSP consolidates security, labor, and tooling, usually priced per user or per device. The core value of the flat fee rests on mandatory inclusions that eliminate hidden operational costs.
Ensure your agreement specifically includes these line items:
Always ask for a detailed service catalog and a tool list to confirm which technologies are included. Finally, clarify the boundary: what is defined as standard service versus what triggers an expensive, out-of-scope project.
Most MSP contracts are engineered to produce the very bill shock you want to escape. A contract advertised as "flat fee" often uses murky scope boundaries to trigger expensive, out-of-scope charges.
To eliminate cost volatility, understand the industry’s most common sources of surprise costs:
Protect yourself by demanding radical transparency. Ask for a sample Master Service Agreement (MSA) and Statement of Work (SOW) upfront. Define all scope boundaries in writing, and confirm that offboarding and data handover costs are explicitly zero. This due diligence ensures your flat fee is truly flat.
With both internal costs (FLCE, tools, risk) and the MSP fee defined, the break-even analysis identifies the tipping point. This threshold shows exactly when your internal Fully Loaded Cost of IT equals the MSP’s flat annual fee plus expected out-of-scope charges.
|
Break-Even Point = FLCE + Tools + Risk Reserve ≤ MSP Annual Fee + Expected Out-of-Scope |
Model this across two timelines. The 1-year view establishes immediate cash reality (MSP fee as OPEX). The 3-year view incorporates inevitable costs: employee turnover, hardware refreshes, and modernization. True predictable IT spend requires this longer lifecycle view.
Run sensitivity scenarios to stress-test the model:
The model's output is definitive: if internal costs plus a risk reserve exceed the MSP flat fee, outsourcing ensures superior predictability and resource allocation for growth, compliance, and uptime needs.
The solution for internal IT teams drowning in operational tasks is amplification, not replacement. Co-managed IT is the superior financial middle ground: internal IT retains ownership of strategy and business context, while a partner handles operational load and specialized functions.
This model delivers the fastest ROI when internal directors are consumed by tickets, patching, and security noise instead of strategic initiatives, or when compliance requirements (like SOC 2) exceed internal bandwidth and tooling budgets.
Done correctly, co-managed IT drastically lowers the total cost of internal IT vs MSP by ensuring internal salary dollars fund high-value work. MSP spend replaces costly tooling sprawl, specialist recruitment, and unreliable after-hours coverage.
To secure this predictability, responsibilities must be clear:
To achieve financial predictability, transform the strategic assessment into a quantifiable, repeatable model. This workflow provides the apples-to-apples comparison necessary to demonstrate the true cost of internal IT vs MSP to executive leadership.
Prerequisites: Define your comparison horizons (1-year cash reality versus 3-year Total Cost of Ownership or TCO). Establish the required service baseline (e.g., must include 24/7 security monitoring).
Isolate internal labor expenses. Recalculate the Fully Loaded Cost of Employee (FLCE) for every IT staff member. Use the 3-year TCO horizon to amortize all one-time costs: recruiting, bonuses, and initial training.
Total the Annual OpEx Stack by summing license costs for proactive tools (RMM, EDR, backups, documentation). Address the Uncovered Gap by adding a reserve for specialized outsourcing projects (e.g., firewall configuration or cloud architecture) that internal staff cannot handle.
Quantify risk to eliminate unpredictable bill shock. Budget the Annual Risk Reserve by setting aside 5–10% of the combined FLCE and OpEx stack. Designate this reserve for emergency incident response, compliance failures, or unexpected hardware replacement.
Calculate the MSP’s True Cost by totaling the Annual Fee (monthly fee multiplied by 12) and adding expected external charges. Include the upfront Onboarding Fee plus a realistic budget for expected Out-of-Scope charges. Base this budget on known project requirements (e.g., planned moves, adds, and changes).
Stress-test both models (Internal vs. MSP) to determine which structure handles change with less financial volatility. Run Sensitivity Scenarios against the 3-year TCO baseline using the following events:
Determine the best fit. Select the option that delivers both the Lowest Total Cost and the Lowest Cost Volatility across all scenarios. Use this data to confidently negotiate essential MSP variables: scope boundaries, SLAs, and explicit zero-cost data exit terms.
No, not always. Whether the MSP fee is cheaper depends entirely on how you calculate the cost of internal IT vs MSP. The fully loaded cost of an internal employee (FLCE), which includes salary, benefits, tools, and training, often makes the MSP flat fee more cost-effective. However, the MSP wins financially only if the contract is truly all-inclusive and avoids hidden out-of-scope charges.
A realistic budget separates operating expenses (OpEx) for support and maintenance, from capital expenditures (CapEx) for strategic projects. For budgeting predictable IT spend, plan for four critical areas: robust cybersecurity controls, standardized cloud backups, high-quality end-user support (L1–L3), and mandatory hardware lifecycle replacement every three years. Many budget on a per-user, per-month basis to simplify forecasting.
When calculating the internal IT cost, include employee burden (taxes, benefits), required tooling licenses (RMM, EDR), training, and a risk reserve for unexpected incidents. On the MSP side, hidden costs often include onboarding fees, hourly rates for project work (out-of-scope), vendor management exclusions, and steep contract exit fees. A truly flat-fee MSP covers most of these.
You should consider hiring internal staff when your business requires constant on-site presence, your core business relies on highly specialized proprietary applications, or the volume of major change projects outweighs routine operational needs. Often, the optimal solution is Co-Managed IT, where internal staff focuses on strategy and ownership while the MSP handles the 24/7 operational workload.
Demand complete transparency to ensure predictable IT spend. Require a detailed service catalog that clearly defines scope boundaries, what tools are included, and which tasks trigger an out-of-scope charge. Ensure the Master Service Agreement (MSA) provides clear SLAs, explicitly defines the project rate card, and guarantees zero cost for data handover and offboarding should you choose to leave.