Managed IT Services vs. In-House IT: What It Actually Costs
The comparison usually gets reduced to one number: an in-house IT hire’s salary versus a managed services monthly fee. That’s the wrong comparison, and it’s why so many budget decisions get revisited a year later.
Here is what actually goes into each side of the ledger.
The in-house number is never just the salary
A single IT hire costs their salary, plus payroll taxes and benefits, plus recruiting and onboarding time, plus the software licenses and training they need to stay current. Add it up and the “cheaper” in-house hire is often 1.3-1.5x their listed salary before they’ve fixed a single ticket.
One person cannot cover every specialty
Networking, cybersecurity, cloud infrastructure, compliance, and helpdesk are different disciplines. A generalist hire is strong in one or two and thin everywhere else – which is fine until the weak spot is the one that gets exploited.
Coverage gaps cost more than the salary line shows
Vacation, sick days, and turnover all create windows where nobody is watching the systems. A managed provider’s coverage does not go on vacation.
The real question is never “in-house or managed” – it’s whether you’re buying a person or buying a team.
Managed services pricing scales with what you actually use
Per-seat or per-device pricing means the cost moves with headcount, not with a fixed salary that keeps accruing whether the business grows or shrinks that quarter.
The hybrid model is common for a reason
Many growing companies keep one internal point of contact for day-to-day priorities and lean on a managed provider for depth, after-hours coverage, and specialties that don’t justify a full-time hire.
The bottom line
Run the comparison on total cost of coverage, not salary versus invoice. Most companies find the gap is smaller than expected – and the coverage is a lot deeper.