1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Working for outsourcer vs being in-house IT

Discussion in 'Employment & Jobs' started by steve_f, Mar 21, 2013.

  1. steve_f

    steve_f Byte Poster

    Have any of you worked for both at different times, and would be willing to describe the contrast between working for an outsourcer and working as in-house IT?

    I have put my CV out there, and getting a couple of calls from reqruiters, primarily because of the VCP and CCA, although they are interseted in my MS certs too. A lot of the roles are for outsourcing companies.

    Much appreciated.
    Certifications: MCDST, MCSA 2003+Messaging, MCITP:SA, MCSA 2008, ITIL v3 Foundation, Comptia Server+ 2009, CCA Xenapp 6.5, VCP5-DV
  2. simongrahamuk
    Honorary Member

    simongrahamuk Hmmmmmmm?

    I have worked for a 'Managed Service' Provider before, and have to admit that I found it hard at times to cope with the politics of the position I was in.

    I would often find that the advice I was offering the 'client', whom I worked with side by side daily, was in conflict to the advice I was 'recommended' to offer by my employer.

    Having said the above though, it would depend massively on the outsourced role. My role was to manage the system and advise the customer how to develop it, not to simply manage a fully provisioned solution.

    HTH. 8)
  3. JK2447
    Highly Decorated Member Award 500 Likes Award

    JK2447 Petabyte Poster Administrator

    I have done both and currently work for an oursourcer as you put it. Main difference I find is because I work for a company that has many contracts, I get as much variety as I can handle, and its effectively like working for the customer directly doing server support in my case. I would struggle to work for a company with in-house IT now I think, unless that company was a really big global. When I've worked for in house my experience was with 200ish servers. Now, its in the thousands. That helps on the old CV to move your experience to the Enterprise level. Practically everywhere I go now will have less servers than I've had to manage with my present employer.

    That's just my experience, I prefer outsource companies. That said I admit a person is more likely to get to do multiple roles in a smaller firm such as Servers and Cisco kit, which I will never touch because of the way our teams are setup. Hope that helps, Jim
    Certifications: BSc (Hons), HND IT, HND Computing, ITIL-F, MBCS CITP, MCP (270,290,291,293,294,298,299,410,411,412) MCTS (401,620,624,652) MCSA:Security, MCSE: Security, Security+, CPTS, VCP4, CCA (XenApp6.5), MCSA 2012, VCP5, VCP6-NV, VSP, VTSP
    WIP: AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Associate
  4. BraderzTheDog

    BraderzTheDog Kilobyte Poster

    I've worked for both, currently working for an outsourcing company about to change rolls to working back internally.

    There are positives and negatives for both but this is what I have found.

    1. Outsourcing companies: Alot of process and RFC's to follow. Defined SLA's and change control. This is great because it will often convert your back incase of any issues. You also tend to pick up alot of experience quicker when you do this type of role, mainly due to working with different networks / servers on a day to day basis so there are alot more variables. This can be quite stressful and confusing at times, however you do gain alot of experience with different products.

    2. Internal: This for me is the nicest position to be in, you understand your own internal network and what products go where. You also get to become an expert at your products whether it be Cisco / Microsoft / Linux or whatever you do, since you are working with something constant you tend to get good at it quicker. I suppose the downside is you don't get to use products that your organisation does not own. Limiting your skills and experience to what you have internally.

    Hope this clarifies. Both positions are work going for, try them and see which one suits you best.
  5. Kaden

    Kaden New Member

    I think it is best to work with outsourcer Because you have much learning in that and also you have many opportunities to get started your own business.Because you have a lot of experience with that.But you can't get proper benefits that are given to the employee that are working in any IT house.
  6. Coupe2T

    Coupe2T Megabyte Poster

    You have to be careful in the definition of outsourcer and in-house, as outsourced is not always remotely sat in an office working on many different contracts and technologies.

    I work for an outsource company, but I work in the office of the company. I previously worked for the same company but was Tupe'd across, but as a result I now work for an outsource company but still only have work related to the same technologies and environment that I was already working on.

    Whether it's outsource or in house is irrelevant in my opinion. Any job you will come across new technologies, and indeed you should investigate new technologies, maybe you can suggest them to a company as service improvements and cost savings etc, there is nothing stopping you still working with and using new technologies either way.
    Certifications: ECDL, Does that Count!?!
  7. SimonD
    Honorary Member

    SimonD Terabyte Poster

    A jobs a job at the end of the day, I don't see this type of work being really any different to a contractor working for a company via his own limited company (to all intents and purposes the contractor is the outsourcer).
    Certifications: CNA | CNE | CCNA | MCP | MCP+I | MCSE NT4 | MCSA 2003 | Security+ | MCSA:S 2003 | MCSE:S 2003 | MCTS:SCCM 2007 | MCTS:Win 7 | MCITP:EDA7 | MCITP:SA | MCITP:EA | MCTS:Hyper-V | VCP 4 | ITIL v3 Foundation | VCP 5 DCV | VCP 5 Cloud | VCP6 NV | VCP6 DCV | VCAP 5.5 DCA
    WIP: VCP6-CMA, VCAP-DCD and Linux + (and possibly VCIX-NV).
  8. Sparky
    Highly Decorated Member Award

    Sparky Zettabyte Poster Moderator

    Done both for years – pros and cons for both.

    In-house – if you work in the right company then it’s not too bad. Expect a decent budget to upgrade infrastructure and you will get to see some new technology but expect to invest time looking after old kit if the money isn’t there to upgrade.

    There can be danger or boredom if there isn’t any new projects on the go – think about moving on when this happens.

    Outsourced: There are two ways this can go. You can be outsourced but put on one contract such as the desktop support guy for a customer – expect boredom to set in after X months as there is no prospect of a promotion as you are there as a contractor.

    The other way it can go is that you can be involved in many different projects\support contracts at the same time which is great as you will get exposure to lots of different networks. As an example I do all the escalated support calls for 140 servers at different customer sites ranging from NT to 2012. This is in to addition to consultancy\migration work that I am also doing.

    On the flip side the working hours can start to take over your life (currently writing this watching an Exchange 2003 - > Exchange 2010 mailbox migration) as customers drive the business and they will make demands. Expect a text on a Saturday morning from an MD of one of your customers if they can’t log on.

    There is more exposure to new technology working outsourced but expect to work long hours when you start using it.

    Rant\post over! :)
    Certifications: MSc MCSE MCSA:M MCSA:S MCITP:EA MCTS(x5) Security+ Network+ A+
    WIP: Office 365, Server 2016, CEH
  9. davelee212

    davelee212 Nibble Poster

    My first job was as a field engineer for an "outsourcer", then I spent 10 years in "in house" IT for various companies and have recently moved back to an "outsourcer" or Managed Service Provider rather... I'm in server support / consultancy so have to fix stuff when it's broken, install new stuff and I'm getting out and about with customers more often now on project work.

    I'd say that working for "in house" IT for a company is probably easier because you get to know the systems, know the people, know the common issues, etc. I wanted to get out of my internal IT job because I'd just finished 2.5 years or upgrades of everything and feared it would soon become boring. What's for definate is that working for a managed services provider in support and consultancy is never boring and you'll learn a lot more in a short space of time.
    Certifications: Network+, CCNA (expired), MCSA 2000/03 + Messaging, MCSE 2000/03, MCTS:Sharepoint Config, VCP4-DCV, VCP5-DCV, VCP5-Cloud, VCP6-DCV, MCSA 2012, MS Specialist: Hyper-V
    WIP: Dunno yet
    Sparky likes this.

Share This Page