Managed Services
We run it, and you keep control of it.
When this fits
You need 24-hour coverage and cannot justify hiring for the quiet hours.
Your engineers spend their week on operations rather than on what only they can do.
Key knowledge sits with one or two people and the risk of that has become obvious.
How we work within it
A defined scope, written down
What we operate, what you operate and where the boundary sits — ambiguity in that line is where operational failures live.
Your estate stays yours
You keep the credentials, the contracts and the ability to leave. Exit is designed at the start, not negotiated at the end.
Improvement, not just uptime
A review cadence where the architecture is revisited rather than frozen, so the estate is better a year in rather than merely still running.
What you get it on
Managed Services, across these domains
A delivery model is not a product. These are the technology domains we work in through it — start from the one your problem sits in.
Engagement and pricing model
A monthly subscription against a defined scope, sized by the estate rather than by ticket count — charging per ticket rewards the wrong thing on both sides. Project work outside the scope is quoted separately.
What we commit to, and what we measure
Response and resolution against the levels agreed for your specific scope.
Repeat incidents — a recurring issue that stays open is an unfixed cause, not a well-handled ticket.
Change success rate, and the proportion of changes that needed rollback.
Targets are set per engagement and written into the agreement. We do not publish a number here, because a service level that is not attached to a specific scope is not a commitment.
Questions we are asked
What service levels do you offer?
They are set per engagement and written into the agreement, because a service level detached from a specific scope commits to nothing. We would rather agree a number we can meet on your estate than publish one that sounds good.
Do we lose control of our own systems?
No. You keep ownership, credentials and the vendor relationships. An arrangement you cannot exit is not a service, and the exit path is part of the agreement from the start.
What happens to our internal team?
Usually they stop doing operations and start doing the work only they can do. Where the intent is to build internal capability instead, training is the model to look at, not this one.
Can you manage systems you did not build?
After an assessment of what is there. Where we find something we cannot safely operate, we tell you what would have to change rather than accepting the scope and the risk quietly.
How does this end?
With notice, and with a handover that leaves you able to run it — documentation, credentials and a transition period. That is designed in at the start.
Start with an assessment
The fastest way to a useful answer is a short, scoped look at what you already have.