EDITOR’S NOTE: Luis Lima is a seasoned industry veteran recognized as one of the top IT services experts in Canada. In today’s post, I share with you an excerpt from his recent article on Managed Service Provider (MSP) performance, followed by an explanation of how it impacts an organization’s procurement and supply chain practices.
“Why Canadian Businesses Are Secretly (and Not-So-Secretly) Frustrated with Their MSPs”
Author: Luis Lima, CRO @ Zonal ASD
Date: July 29, 2025
Let’s be honest—your MSP was supposed to be your tech sidekick. The Alfred to your Batman. The Jarvis to your Iron Man. Instead, it’s starting to feel more like a plot twist from a horror movie:
“We logged a ticket last week. Still waiting…”
Across Canada, businesses are quietly asking themselves:
“Is this really the best we can get?”
The State of Satisfaction: Lukewarm at Best
- 73% of Canadian companies have adopted managed services in some form
- Yet 66% of executives express doubts about their current provider—especially around cybersecurity and responsiveness
- The market is growing at 12.8% CAGR through 2032, but customer satisfaction isn’t keeping pace
This disconnect is prompting a deeper question: Are we working with a true partner—or just a vendor?
Top 5 Complaints About MSPs in Canada
Let’s not sugarcoat it. These are the recurring pain points that keep IT managers up at night:
- Slow Response Times “We logged a ticket last week. Still waiting.” Sound familiar?
- Reactive Instead of Proactive Support If your MSP only shows up when things break, are they really managing your services—or just reacting to chaos?
- High Staff Turnover Every call starts with, “Let me get up to speed.” Again.
- Lack of 24/7 Support Cyber threats don’t sleep. Should your support team?
- One-Size-Fits-All Solutions Your business is unique. Your MSP’s approach? Not so much.
What Businesses Really Want
Canadian companies—especially SMBs, which make up 98% of all employer businesses—are craving MSPs that offer:
- Strategic guidance, not just technical fixes
- Robust cybersecurity, with real-time threat detection
- Long-term partnership, not just a vendor-client relationship
- Data-driven insights, not just dashboards
- Tailored automation, not cookie-cutter scripts
Ask yourself:
- Is my MSP helping me plan for the future—or just patching the present?
- Do they understand my business goals—or just my ticket history?
- Are they empowering my team—or slowing us down?
NOTE: Use the following link to access the full Luis Lima article.
How It Aligns with the Hansen Fit Score (HFS) Framework
Lima’s piece critiques the “vendor-first” model and calls for partner-led value, directly resonating with Hansen’s practitioner-centric Fit Score model, particularly in three ways:
1. Metaprise Model Alignment (System Cohesion)
❝ Your MSP should help you plan for the future—not just patch the present. ❞
MSPs are failing to integrate seamlessly with business operations. HFS’s Metaprise model demands cohesive, goal-aligned, multi-system support, not tech silos. Most MSPs fall short in this systemic cohesion—hence the growing dissatisfaction.
- Gap Identified: Fragmented ticketing vs. unified systems thinking
- Metaprise Response: Enterprise-wide data harmonization, modular stack alignment
2. Agent-Based Model Alignment (Adaptive Responsiveness)
❝ Reactive vs. proactive support is the difference between a partner and a liability. ❞
The Agent-Based model values context-aware, autonomous decision-making agents that simulate and predict client needs—exactly what Lima says current MSPs fail to deliver.
- Gap Identified: Reactive MSPs lack scenario-based orchestration
- Agent-Based Response: Dynamic feedback loops, human + AI co-management
3. Strand Commonality Alignment (Semantic Understanding)
❝ One-size-fits-all is not a strategy—it’s a shortcut. ❞
MSPs offering standardized playbooks disregard unique semantic strands of each client (e.g., unique compliance, procurement, or MRO needs). The HFS Strand Commonality model emphasizes client-specific taxonomies, data patterns, and contextual automation.
- Gap Identified: Cookie-cutter automation = low fit score
- Strand Response: Tailored semantic governance = high-fit engagement
Visual Summary: Hansen Fit Score Mapping
Conclusion
Luis Lima’s post is a practitioner-first indictment of the broken MSP-client relationship model—a perfect case study of what Hansen’s Fit Score aims to diagnose and solve.
While Gartner might measure success in platform KPIs, the Hansen Fit Score reveals misalignment at the systemic, behavioral, and semantic layers.
If HFS were applied to MSP evaluation, it would:
- Quantify fit and alignment across systems, agents, and data
- Predict the success probability of a partnership over a 3–5 year span
- Guide Canadian SMBs in choosing high-fit, low-friction MSPs
Here’s the radar chart comparing performance across key categories for:
- Traditional MSPs (based on pain points from Luis Lima’s post)
- HFS-Aligned Providers (based on Metaprise, Agent-Based, and Strand Commonality integration)
Key Takeaways:
- Traditional MSPs tend to underperform, especially in Areas Such as Proactive Support, Customization, and Strategic Alignment
- HFS-driven providers show significantly higher scores across all dimensions
- The largest gaps appear where semantic alignment and adaptive orchestration are required—precisely where Hansen’s models offer the most transformative value
Why is MSP performance important to procurement and supply chain?
Managed Service Provider (MSP) performance is increasingly critical to the success of procurement and supply chains because MSPs no longer just support backend IT—they now shape operational continuity, digital readiness, and strategic agility across the entire value chain.
Here’s a breakdown of why MSP performance matters deeply to procurement and supply chain:
Managed Service Provider (MSP) performance is increasingly critical to the success of procurement and supply chains because MSPs no longer just support backend IT—they now shape operational continuity, digital readiness, and strategic agility across the entire value chain.
Here’s a breakdown of why MSP performance matters deeply to procurement and supply chain:
1. System Uptime = Supply Chain Continuity
- Procurement platforms, ERPs, and supplier portals all depend on MSP-managed infrastructure (cloud hosting, APIs, network security).
- Poor MSP performance (e.g., downtime, ticket delays) directly disrupts purchasing workflows, POs, invoice matching, and supplier communication.
- Example: Even 1 hour of downtime in supplier portals or RFQ processing = delayed shipments, stockouts, or MRO shutdowns.
2. Cybersecurity = Supplier and Contract Risk
- Procurement handles sensitive data (pricing, contracts, supplier info). MSPs are often the frontline for threat detection, endpoint security, and recovery.
- A weak MSP with inadequate 24/7 response exposes supply chains to ransomware, data breaches, and third-party vulnerability exploitations (e.g., SolarWinds, Kaseya).
- This risk is amplified by globally distributed supplier networks.
3. Strategic Automation Depends on MSP Capability
- Today’s procurement relies on:
- Automated intake flows
- Supplier scorecards
- Taxonomy governance
- Spend analytics dashboards
- These require high MSP competence in system orchestration, API management, and proactive data support.
- A reactive MSP undermines the ROI of automation and stalls transformation initiatives.
4. MSP Fit = Vendor Ecosystem Resilience
- The best MSPs behave like partners—advising on tech stack evolution, not just responding to tickets.
- In supply chains where vendor onboarding, compliance audits, and performance measurement are increasingly automated, your MSP determines how agile and responsive you can be.
- Poor MSPs slow down integrations with new suppliers or technologies (e.g., ESG risk engines, AI sourcing tools).
5. Downtime & Delays = Procurement Value Erosion
- Procurement’s core KPIs (cost savings, cycle time, supplier satisfaction) erode when systems lag.
- Example: A slow MSP response delays access to supplier data, which in turn delays sourcing decisions, ultimately impacting product-to-market timelines.
- These delays ripple through inventory management, forecasting, logistics, and end-customer fulfillment.
Visual Summary: MSP → Procurement Impact Map
Tie-in with the Hansen Fit Score (HFS)
- Metaprise: A low-fit MSP weakens system integration and platform cohesion.
- Agent-Based: Without real-time responsiveness and adaptive behavior, procurement loses orchestration efficiency.
- Strand Commonality: Cookie-cutter MSPs often fail to understand or support procurement’s domain-specific taxonomies and nuances in supplier data.
Bottom Line:
A high-performing, HFS-aligned MSP is not a luxury—it’s a strategic enabler for modern procurement and supply chains. Poor MSP fit leads to cascading failures across sourcing, operations, and risk management.
Layered Impact Graphic: Cascading Risk from Poor MSP Performance
- Illustrates how weak MSP capabilities trigger cascading failures—from delayed procurement to full-blown supply chain and revenue risk.
- Highlights the urgency of aligning MSP selection and oversight with Hansen Fit Score (HFS) dimensions.
30
BONUS COVERAGE
How costly are procurement and supply chain disruptions?
Here’s a ranked list of the most costly enterprise disruptions or failures, from greatest to least, based on total financial impact, brand damage, and long-term strategic fallout. Procurement and supply chain disruptions rank very high, but a few other categories may surpass them depending on severity and industry.
Ranked: What Costs More Than a Procurement or Supply Chain Disruption?
Key Insight:
- While supply chain disruptions (e.g., COVID-era port delays, chip shortages) are top 5 in cost across all sectors, the only more expensive events are:
- Security breaches
- Regulatory blowback
- Financial misconduct
- That said, supply chain and procurement failures often amplify or trigger these costlier events:
- A supplier ESG failure → a regulatory fine
- A compromised 3rd-party network → a data breach
- A vendor misstatement → an accounting scandal
Procurement Insights
The Hansen Fit Score Through The Eyes Of The IT Department And Why MSP Matters To Procurement
Posted on August 2, 2025
0
EDITOR’S NOTE: Luis Lima is a seasoned industry veteran recognized as one of the top IT services experts in Canada. In today’s post, I share with you an excerpt from his recent article on Managed Service Provider (MSP) performance, followed by an explanation of how it impacts an organization’s procurement and supply chain practices.
“Why Canadian Businesses Are Secretly (and Not-So-Secretly) Frustrated with Their MSPs”
Author: Luis Lima, CRO @ Zonal ASD
Date: July 29, 2025
Let’s be honest—your MSP was supposed to be your tech sidekick. The Alfred to your Batman. The Jarvis to your Iron Man. Instead, it’s starting to feel more like a plot twist from a horror movie:
“We logged a ticket last week. Still waiting…”
Across Canada, businesses are quietly asking themselves:
“Is this really the best we can get?”
The State of Satisfaction: Lukewarm at Best
This disconnect is prompting a deeper question: Are we working with a true partner—or just a vendor?
Top 5 Complaints About MSPs in Canada
Let’s not sugarcoat it. These are the recurring pain points that keep IT managers up at night:
What Businesses Really Want
Canadian companies—especially SMBs, which make up 98% of all employer businesses—are craving MSPs that offer:
Ask yourself:
NOTE: Use the following link to access the full Luis Lima article.
How It Aligns with the Hansen Fit Score (HFS) Framework
Lima’s piece critiques the “vendor-first” model and calls for partner-led value, directly resonating with Hansen’s practitioner-centric Fit Score model, particularly in three ways:
1. Metaprise Model Alignment (System Cohesion)
2. Agent-Based Model Alignment (Adaptive Responsiveness)
3. Strand Commonality Alignment (Semantic Understanding)
Visual Summary: Hansen Fit Score Mapping
Conclusion
Luis Lima’s post is a practitioner-first indictment of the broken MSP-client relationship model—a perfect case study of what Hansen’s Fit Score aims to diagnose and solve.
While Gartner might measure success in platform KPIs, the Hansen Fit Score reveals misalignment at the systemic, behavioral, and semantic layers.
If HFS were applied to MSP evaluation, it would:
Here’s the radar chart comparing performance across key categories for:
Key Takeaways:
Why is MSP performance important to procurement and supply chain?
Managed Service Provider (MSP) performance is increasingly critical to the success of procurement and supply chains because MSPs no longer just support backend IT—they now shape operational continuity, digital readiness, and strategic agility across the entire value chain.
Here’s a breakdown of why MSP performance matters deeply to procurement and supply chain:
Managed Service Provider (MSP) performance is increasingly critical to the success of procurement and supply chains because MSPs no longer just support backend IT—they now shape operational continuity, digital readiness, and strategic agility across the entire value chain.
Here’s a breakdown of why MSP performance matters deeply to procurement and supply chain:
1. System Uptime = Supply Chain Continuity
2. Cybersecurity = Supplier and Contract Risk
3. Strategic Automation Depends on MSP Capability
4. MSP Fit = Vendor Ecosystem Resilience
5. Downtime & Delays = Procurement Value Erosion
Visual Summary: MSP → Procurement Impact Map
Tie-in with the Hansen Fit Score (HFS)
Bottom Line:
A high-performing, HFS-aligned MSP is not a luxury—it’s a strategic enabler for modern procurement and supply chains. Poor MSP fit leads to cascading failures across sourcing, operations, and risk management.
Layered Impact Graphic: Cascading Risk from Poor MSP Performance
30
BONUS COVERAGE
How costly are procurement and supply chain disruptions?
Here’s a ranked list of the most costly enterprise disruptions or failures, from greatest to least, based on total financial impact, brand damage, and long-term strategic fallout. Procurement and supply chain disruptions rank very high, but a few other categories may surpass them depending on severity and industry.
Ranked: What Costs More Than a Procurement or Supply Chain Disruption?
Key Insight:
Share this:
Related