A few months ago, I wrote about our initiative to train Data Champions - business users who could analyse and present data themselves using Power BI and LLMs rather than waiting for IT. The response was interesting. Lots of people resonated with the problem. They want to answer their own questions rather than queue for resources.
But here's what I didn't mention in that post... we weren't just fixing an internal problem. We were testing a hypothesis about how MSPs should evolve.
The customer conversation that changed everything
One of our larger customers said something that stuck with me: "You're brilliant at the complex stuff - the architecture, the security incidents, the strategic planning. But we've got a team of skilled network engineers who could handle routine policy changes themselves if you'd let them. Instead, they're raising tickets and waiting, when they could be moving faster."
They weren't complaining about our response times. They were saying they wanted control back for the straightforward stuff, so we could focus our expertise where it actually matters.
That's when I realised, we had exactly the same dynamic internally with the Data Champions programme. Business users didn't want to wait for simple data queries - not because IT was slow, but because they wanted agency and the ability to move at the speed their business demanded.
The value migration
Traditional MSP models treat every customer interaction as a revenue opportunity. Firewall rule change? Ticket. Policy update? Ticket. The meter's always running.
But that model creates a perverse incentive. We're essentially charging customers for things their own skilled people could do themselves, whilst our engineers - who could be delivering genuine strategic value - are processing routine changes.
So, we started asking whether we were building dependency when we should be building capability.
The co-managed answer
That led us to co-managed SASE and SD-WAN, built on the Fortinet management and orchestration suite of appliances, with segmented role-based access control. We now separate what genuinely requires specialist MSP expertise (patching, monitoring, incident response, security analysis, architecture decisions) from what skilled customer teams can handle themselves (routine firewall rules, policy adjustments, day-to-day operational changes).
Customers who have network engineers can make their own changes immediately, but we maintain full visibility into what's happening - not for control, but for context when we're helping with the complex stuff. And we're still there for the changes that require deeper expertise or when their team needs support.
It's not fully managed. It's not fully self-service. It's a managed partnership where both parties focus on what they do best.
Where this gets interesting
The parallel between Data Champions and co-managed infrastructure isn't accidental. It's the same philosophy applied differently.
When your finance lead can analyse customer data their self because they’ve got Power BI and an LLM to help with the technical bits, our data team gets to do the strategic analysis rather than churning out dashboard requests. Everyone's working at a higher level.
When your network engineers can make their own policy changes in your SASE environment, our engineers get to focus on security posture, architectural improvements, and genuine technical challenges rather than processing tickets. Again, everyone's working at a higher level.
The customers who want a fully managed service because they've got no internal capability? Brilliant, we still do that. But the customers who've invested in skilled people? We're not adding value by making them wait for things they could do themselves.
The commercial reality
Now this does require a mindset shift. We're trading high-volume, low-value transactions for lower-volume, high-value strategic relationships.
But here's what we're seeing. Empowered customers make better decisions because they can move at business speed. They value the relationship more because we're enabling their capability rather than restricting it. And when they do need us, it's for genuinely complex work that we can charge appropriately for.
The traditional MSP model optimised for maximising tickets. We're betting on maximising value per customer relationship. Different economics, but potentially better for everyone.
What we're learning
Democratisation requires confidence. You're essentially saying, "Our value isn't in controlling access to routine changes, it's in the strategic expertise we bring." That's only viable if you've genuinely got that expertise to offer.
It also requires proper architecture. The transparency and guardrails in co-managed infrastructure don't happen by accident. And training Data Champions properly takes investment, not just pointing people at tools.
But the returns compound. Customers who feel empowered, rather than dependent, tend to grow the relationship in different ways. They want strategic consulting. They want architectural reviews. They want us to help them make better decisions, not just execute their tickets.
The industry shift
We're not unique in seeing this. Customers with skilled internal teams are increasingly asking why they're paying for routine changes when they could be paying for strategic insight.
The MSPs that evolve will move up the value chain, becoming genuine strategic partners who enable customer capability whilst delivering expertise where it matters. The ones that cling to the ticket-mill model will find themselves competing purely on price for an increasingly commoditised service.
At Nasstar, we're applying democratisation both internally (Data Champions) and externally (co-managed infrastructure). Not because it's fashionable, but because it's where value genuinely lies.
You might call this enlightened self-interest. We're calling it working out where MSPs should be heading before the market forces us there anyway.
Keen to hear more? Reach out to our team to discuss co-managed services here.
