EDITOR’S NOTE: Keep the following statement in line as you read today’s post: “In short: these models are not just aligned with Hansen’s theories—they are manifestations of them, at various maturity levels.”
Let’s break down how the MSP, BPO/“Services-as-Software”, and eVA models reflect and apply the core principles of Jon W. Hansen’s Metaprise, Agent-Based, and Strand Commonality Models, showing the evolution from centralized management to adaptive, intelligent procurement ecosystems.
First, a Brief Recap of Hansen’s Models
Application of Hansen’s Models to MSP, BPO, and eVA
1. eVA (Virginia’s Procurement Initiative)
2. MSP (Managed Service Provider)
3. BPO/Services-as-Software (e.g., WNS + Capgemini + Agentic AI)
Comparative Overlay Table
🔄 Evolutionary Flow: From eVA ➝ MSP ➝ Services-as-Software (AI BPO)
scssCopyEditeVA (Gov 2.0) ───▶ MSP (IT Ops) ───▶ Services-as-Software (Autonomous Procurement)
↑ ↑ ↑
Process + Platform SLA-driven Agentic AI + Strand Fusion
Governance Integration Strategic Orchestration
Strategic Implications for Procurement Practitioners & ProcureTech Vendors
For Practitioners:
- eVA mindset is foundational: Governance + engagement → high adoption.
- MSP model adds control delegation: Monitor, govern, don’t micromanage.
- AI BPO requires orchestration: Let go of tasks, own the ecosystem.
For ProcureTech Providers:
- eVA = Enable interoperability (standards, integration, user ease)
- MSP = Offer SLA-linked monitoring, compliance modules
- BPO/AI = Embed agent-based design, commonality dashboards, value orchestration
Final Takeaway
Hansen’s models provide a strategic blueprint:
- eVA proves that procurement transformation needs aligned architecture (Metaprise), stakeholder agency (Agent-Based), and standardization (Strand Commonality).
- MSPs test operational governance boundaries, requiring data, risk, and SLA alignment across entities.
- AI-driven BPOs are the realization of Hansen’s models in full motion, with emergent behavior from autonomous agents navigating cross-organizational Metaprise structures.
In short: these models are not just aligned with Hansen’s theories—they are manifestations of them, at various maturity levels.
As a procurement practitioner and a ProcureTechSolution provider, do you know your Hansen Fit Score?
30
Procurement Insights
What do Capgemini, WNS, Gartner and Virginia’s eVA have in common, and why is it going to change procurement forever?
Posted on July 14, 2025
0
EDITOR’S NOTE: Keep the following statement in line as you read today’s post: “In short: these models are not just aligned with Hansen’s theories—they are manifestations of them, at various maturity levels.”
Let’s break down how the MSP, BPO/“Services-as-Software”, and eVA models reflect and apply the core principles of Jon W. Hansen’s Metaprise, Agent-Based, and Strand Commonality Models, showing the evolution from centralized management to adaptive, intelligent procurement ecosystems.
First, a Brief Recap of Hansen’s Models
Application of Hansen’s Models to MSP, BPO, and eVA
1. eVA (Virginia’s Procurement Initiative)
2. MSP (Managed Service Provider)
3. BPO/Services-as-Software (e.g., WNS + Capgemini + Agentic AI)
Comparative Overlay Table
🔄 Evolutionary Flow: From eVA ➝ MSP ➝ Services-as-Software (AI BPO)
Strategic Implications for Procurement Practitioners & ProcureTech Vendors
For Practitioners:
For ProcureTech Providers:
Final Takeaway
Hansen’s models provide a strategic blueprint:
In short: these models are not just aligned with Hansen’s theories—they are manifestations of them, at various maturity levels.
As a procurement practitioner and a ProcureTechSolution provider, do you know your Hansen Fit Score?
30
Share this:
Related