How to build a business case for changing your MSP provider

BLOGBy Rullion on 30 September 2025

Switching Managed Service Programme (MSP) providers is a major decision. Your first-generation MSP often brings early wins: reducing admin, consolidating suppliers, and bringing much-needed structure to hiring. But as your organisation evolves, those solutions can fall short. Visibility isn’t where it needs to be, processes don’t adapt, and the programme stops keeping pace with future goals. Often, these challenges can be addressed through open conversations with your current provider. But when they can’t, it may be time to consider changing your MSP provider and moving to a second-generation MSP provider, your next partner.

 

5 signs it’s time to switch MSP providers

For leadership, the decision often comes down to proving the return on investment, reducing risk exposure, and ensuring the MSP evolves alongside strategic priorities. Knowing when to make that move isn’t always straightforward, but there are common warning signs that can strengthen your business case:

Limited visibility

If you can’t access accurate, real-time data on workforce spend, supplier performance, or compliance, you’re operating blind. This makes it harder to control costs, demonstrate ROI, or make strategic decisions.

Processes that don’t adapt

When workflows remain rigid and fail to keep pace with evolving business needs or regulatory changes, inefficiency creeps in. This often leads to bottlenecks, slower mobilisation, and higher risk exposure.

Misalignment with strategy

Your MSP provider should act as a partner, not just an administrator. If the programme feels transactional and disconnected from your long-term workforce goals, it weakens your ability to deliver against wider business priorities.

Supplier limitations

An MSP that relies on a narrow supplier network restricts access to talent. This not only slows down hiring for specialist roles but also prevents you from tapping into under-represented or overlooked talent pools.

Lack of innovation

If reporting hasn’t improved in years, technology feels outdated, or the provider isn’t pushing continuous improvement, your MSP may be holding you back instead of helping you move forward.

The next step is turning these challenges into a structured argument that leadership can’t ignore: your business case.

 

What to include in a business case for switching MSP providers

The issues you’ve identified become the evidence, and the improvements you’re aiming for become measurable objectives. By structuring your case around these points, you’ll give stakeholders the confidence that switching MSP providers is a strategic decision, not just a reaction to frustrations.

Executive summary

Think of this section as the “elevator pitch” for your case. If a senior leader only reads one page, it should answer: Why change now, and what will we gain? 

Example: Our current MSP model is not providing the visibility, flexibility, or supplier reach we require. By transitioning to a second-generation provider, we can reduce average cost per hire by 15%, cut mobilisation timelines by 20%, and ensure full compliance visibility across our workforce.

 

Current challenges

This is where you turn warning signs into hard evidence. Leadership will expect more than anecdotes, so use data to back up your points. The stronger your evidence, the harder it is to ignore. Think rising time-to-hire figures, compliance gaps, or supplier underperformance. 

Example:

  • Reporting dashboards are limited, preventing us from tracking supplier performance in real time.
  • Average time-to-hire has risen from 28 to 53 days over the past 12 months, delaying project starts.

 

Objectives 

Objectives show what success looks like after the switch. They should be specific, measurable, and tied directly to organisational priorities. Think of this as the “destination” your business case is leading towards.

Example:

  • Reduce time-to-hire for technical roles by 20%.
  • Achieve 100% compliance audit readiness.
  • Introduce real-time workforce reporting by Q2.

 

Options analysis

Show leadership that you’ve weighed alternatives fairly.

A strong business case doesn’t assume switching is the only option. It shows leadership that every alternative has been considered. Presenting a fair comparison between staying with your current provider and moving to a new one makes your recommendation more credible and balanced.

Example:

Option 1: stay with current provider

  • Pros: continuity.
  • Cons: persistent issues unresolved.

Option 2: switch to new provider

  • Pros: wider supplier network, improved tech, better compliance.
  • Cons: transition costs, short-term disruption (if not managed effectively). 

 

Cost-benefit analysis

Demonstrate how switching creates measurable financial and strategic gains. This could be savings on cost per hire, avoided compliance penalties, or improved project delivery that translates directly into revenue.

Example:

  • Based on current hiring volumes, a reduction of £1,500 per hire equates to £225,000 in annual savings.
  • Avoided compliance fines (based on previous breaches) estimated at £50,000 annually.

 

Implementation plan

Even the best business case will raise the question, “How will we manage the transition?” Your implementation plan reassures stakeholders by showing how risks will be controlled and disruption minimised. Break the plan into phases and set realistic timeframes.

Example:

  • Phase 1: shadow mode (Months 1–2).
  • Phase 2: 50% requisitions managed by new MSP (Months 2-3).
  • Phase 3: full handover (Months 4–6). 

 

KPIs and success measures

Defining KPIs upfront makes your business case measurable and accountable. This section shows how success will be tracked after implementation. Clear measures help leadership see the long-term value of change.

Example:

  • Reduce average time-to-hire from 48 to 38 days within 6 months.
  • Achieve 95% supplier compliance with the agreed SLA by Q3.
  • Deliver full visibility of workforce spend by year-end.

 

Demonstrating ROI: cost vs value

Boards rarely approve a switch without seeing hard numbers. To win them over, your business case must prove that the value of change outweighs the cost of disruption. A simple three-step ROI model makes this clear: the cost of staying put, the cost of switching, and the value gained. Each step should be backed up with data and, where possible, linked to strategic business goals.

1. Cost of staying put

  • (Average cost per hire × annual hires)
  • Compliance breaches, project delays, supplier mark-ups 

2. Cost of switching MSP providers

  • Transition fees, internal resource time, short-term disruption 

3. Value gained

  • Savings from lower mark-ups
  • Reduced compliance risk
  • Faster mobilisation and delivery
  • Stronger supplier performance 


Example:

Our NWG MSP partnership: In 2025, NWG required mobilisation of Information Services (IS), data, cybersecurity, and change management roles with a 4-week deadline (over Christmas) to support their digital transformation. 

  • 100% of contractors were transitioned on time, despite a condensed four-week window and minimal legacy data.
  • Effective contingent workforce management with zero disruption to services, preserving business continuity across mission-critical information systems projects during a peak period for infrastructure planning.
  • £15,000+ saved in the first month alone through improved fulfilment routes and transparent rate control.

This example illustrates how value can be realised quickly. And, when combined with the ROI framework above, it helps build a case that is both credible and compelling.

 

Managing risks during the transition

Even with a strong business case, leaders will ask, “What’s the risk?” Anticipating these concerns will make your case more persuasive. For more guidance, our MSP Implementation Question Checklist highlights the questions you should ask during mobilisation to ensure your programme is set up for success.

  • Operational disruption – delays in hiring or mobilisation. The mitigation for this would be a phased transition, a parallel run for 1–2 months before full handover.
  • Supplier resistance – Preferred suppliers may hesitate to engage. Early communication, clear SLAs, onboarding support
  • Knowledge transfer gaps - Knowledge transfer gaps. Structured handover between outgoing and incoming MSP
  • Compliance lapses – Risk of exposure during transition. Align compliance checks with new provider from Day 1

 

Securing stakeholder buy-in

Different stakeholders view value differently. Map their concerns to your business case:

  • Finance/Board: ROI, predictable spend. Show annual savings, break-even point, and long-term value
  • HR/Operations: Talent access, time-to-hire. Evidence of a wider supplier network and faster fills
  • Compliance: Audit readiness, risk management. Highlight improved governance and real-time visibility
  • Procurement: Supplier performance, cost control, contractual efficiency. Demonstrate stronger supplier management, better rates, and transparent reporting
  • Project Managers: Mobilisation speed. Show reduced delays and faster project delivery

 

The long-term benefits of a 2nd Gen MSP

Your business case should end by showing how a second-generation MSP provider sets the organisation up for future success:

  • Real-time data for strategic workforce planning
  • Stronger governance in highly regulated environments
  • Access to broader supplier networks, including overlooked and under-represented talent pools
  • Faster project mobilisation, reducing time to value
  • Continuous improvement, not stagnation
  • This shifts the decision from a short-term fix to a long-term strategic investment. 

A well-structured business case turns the idea of switching MSPs from a reactive decision into a justified, proactive strategy. It helps provide the confidence that your next MSP partnership will deliver greater value.

And when you reach the point of preparing for mobilisation, our MSP Implementation Checklist is a practical tool to help you ask the right questions and ensure your new programme is set up for long-term success.

 

Share
Interested in how an MSP can improve your contingent workforce management?

Visit our MSP solution page or book a discovery call to see how we can build a programme that supports your organisation's needs.

More like this

Nuclear Workforce Planning in 2026

Nuclear Workforce Planning in 2026

The UK’s nuclear sector is moving into 2026 with clear momentum. By September 2025, UK civil nuclear employment had reached just under 100,000 roles, a record high. Growth is being driven by a wider mix of programmes than many people assume. It’s not only large-scale new builds; it’s also fleet operations, defuelling, decommissioning, supply chain activity, and emerging delivery models like Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) beginning to shape future nuclear workforce planning. At the same time, government direction is becoming clearer. The UK’s long-term nuclear sector plan is increasingly defined through national roadmapping and policy signalling with an emphasis on sustained nuclear capability through to 2050. And that has implications for how workforce strategy is shaped in 2026. Delve into (and jump to): Why 2026 is a turning point for workforce planning in the nuclear sector One sector, very different workforce needs The skills shaping nuclear hiring in 2026 Where nuclear workforce planning breaks down What better nuclear workforce planning looks like in practice What major programmes are signalling in 2026 Why 2026 is a turning point for workforce planning in the nuclear sector The nuclear workforce challenge is often described as a shortage issue. In reality, the pressure points in 2026 are more specific and more operational. This year sits at the intersection of several competing demands: Major new build delivery continuing at scale (including Hinkley Point C and Sizewell C) Sustained demand across the existing nuclear fleet, including operations and nuclear life extension planning Long-term decommissioning and waste management programmes continuing nationally Rising expectations around safety, quality, assurance, and regulatory compliance Growing demand for digitally enabled engineering and delivery capability Increased attention on the workforce implications of SMRs, including the shift toward repeatability and standardised delivery models In 2026, the same skill sets are being pulled in multiple directions at once: across different sites, delivery stages, and risk environments. The result is a more competitive hiring landscape, leading to longer lead times for scarce capability and higher consequences when workforce planning is reactive. One sector, very different workforce needs “Nuclear recruitment” is often treated as one market. Where in actuality, it’s several markets layered together, and the differences matter. Workforce requirements shift dramatically depending on where a programme sits in the lifecycle: New build delivery Ongoing operations Life extension activity Defueling and decommissioning Emerging delivery models like SMRs Each stage behaves differently in terms of supply, scarcity, onboarding time, and compliance requirements. Design & Engineering Design and early engineering work tend to rely heavily on: Systems and discipline engineering (mechanical, electrical, C&I) Safety case and assurance capability Governance, documentation, and regulatory awareness This is also where “transferable skills” can genuinely work. But only when expectations are set properly. Nuclear environments reward structured thinking, documentation quality, and delivery discipline as much as technical capability. This is increasingly relevant as SMR conversations mature. While the delivery model differs from large-scale builds, the fundamentals remain consistent: nuclear-grade quality mixed with engineering rigour and configuration control. Construction & Commissioning Nuclear workforce growth becomes most visible and most pressured here. In 2026, what becomes most challenging has more to do with readiness than availability. Projects don’t simply need people who can do the work. They need people who can deliver at pace to nuclear standards, within nuclear governance. Early workforce planning here is what can prevent project bottlenecks later. Construction and commissioning typically demand: High-volume site delivery capability Strong quality culture (inspection, welding, fabrication, assurance) Commissioning expertise aligned to safety and compliance expectations Logistics, HSE leadership, and interface management Operations & Maintenance (O&M) Operations is where nuclear becomes long-term. This is also where nuclear life extension activity becomes a real workforce driver in its own right. Extending the operating life of existing stations relies on retained knowledge and stable capability, and not just recruitment volume. These roles depend on: Reliability and asset performance expertise Maintenance planning and outage delivery Compliance, governance, and leadership maturity Deep site knowledge and consistency Decommissioning & Waste Management Decommissioning is sometimes underweighted in workforce conversations, despite being one of the most sustained drivers of UK nuclear employment. The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority’s (NDA) Draft Business Plan 2026–29 (published December 2025) reinforces decommissioning as a long-duration national programme, with ongoing workforce requirements across dismantling, waste handling, remediation, and programme leadership. This work is often less visible than new builds, but it remains essential to the credibility and delivery of the UK’s wider nuclear programme. Check out our interview with Deep Fission’s CEO, Liz Muller, on rethinking nuclear waste management. The skills shaping nuclear hiring in 2026 Demand in nuclear workforce planning isn’t only about headcount. It’s about the right capability, in the right place, at the right time, delivered to the right nuclear standards. As we move through 2026, pressure remains high in areas such as: Electrical engineering and C&I Systems integration and commissioning Quality, inspection, and assurance Safety case and regulatory-aligned delivery roles Project controls (planning, cost engineering, scheduling) Construction management and interface coordination Digital capability (safety, configuration control, performance) What’s notable in 2026 is that these skills are needed across multiple programme types at once. Across the lifecycle, one theme remains consistent: technical skill matters, but so does the ability to operate inside nuclear governance, with process discipline, documentation quality, and assurance expectations playing a key part of the job. Where nuclear workforce planning breaks down Even with all this nuclear sector growth, one of the biggest friction points is the gap between nuclear talent having the right technical background and being fully ready for nuclear delivery environments. That “missing middle” tends to show up in areas like: Project-readiness and site-readiness Compliance and assurance expectations Safety culture alignment Documentation standards and quality processes Geography adds another layer. Large programmes require both regional workforce development and national mobilisation. Without both, pressure builds quickly in local markets. This is why early workforce activity matters. Early shaping of pipelines leads to early team stabilisation and less reactive delivery, especially when multiple programmes are driving demand simultaneously. This is where an abundance mindset matters most. The constraint isn’t that talent doesn’t exist. It’s that readiness is uneven and pathways into nuclear delivery remain too narrow. When organisations invest early in conversion, onboarding and nuclear-grade standards, capacity expands quickly. When they don’t, scarcity feels permanent. “The challenge in nuclear isn’t a lack of people. It’s that capability is arriving at different levels of readiness, at different times, across different programmes. Workforce planning is about aligning that, not just filling roles.”— James Chamberlain, Nuclear, Sector Director, Rullion What better nuclear workforce planning looks like The most effective workforce strategies in 2026 share a few key traits: Plan by lifecycle phase, not just job titles Nuclear delivery depends on sequencing. Workforce planning needs to follow the demand curve across the lifecycle and not just the current open vacancy list. This forward planning can noticeably start to reduce risk: Clearer lead times Better mobilisation Fewer last-minute compromises on quality or readiness Build structured routes for scarce and transferable capability The sector can’t rely only on nuclear-experienced talent. But “transferable” doesn’t mean instant. Transitions work best when there is clear structure around: Expectations and standards Onboarding and compliance readiness Progression pathways once inside the sector Where skills are transferable but nuclear readiness takes time, Train to Deploy helps build job-ready nuclear talent by combining targeted training with your delivery standards, so people arrive ready to contribute from day one. Invest in early careers with conversion in mind The National Nuclear Strategic Plan for Skills includes commitments to scale early career routes, including the ambition to double apprentices entering the nuclear workforce by academic year 2025/26, with 2,500+ apprentices joining the nuclear workforce in 2024/25. The differentiator is what happens after entry: development pathways, retention, and long-term capability building. Treat workforce as delivery risk management In critical infrastructure, workforce constraints don’t only slow hiring. They affect commissioning timelines, quality performance, and programme confidence. This becomes even more important when the sector is balancing large-scale builds, fleet operations, life extensions, decommissioning delivery, and next-generation programme development such as SMRs. “You can’t separate workforce planning from mobilisation. If screening, onboarding, and readiness aren’t designed for scale, the workforce exists on paper but not on site.” — Jayne Lee, Head of Candidate Services, Rullion What major programmes are signalling in 2026 Sizewell C is a strong example of early workforce momentum, and it sits within a wider landscape that includes major delivery demand at Hinkley Point C and sustained activity across operational and decommissioning sites. In the last month, Sizewell C has reported: Around 2,000 workers onsite More than 100 apprentices appointed Around £3bn in contracts awarded to 400+ UK suppliers Continued regional supply chain mobilisation Early pipeline activity is already shaping workforce readiness, long before peak construction demand. This is the direction the wider market is moving in: earlier engagement, clearer forecasting, and more structured talent strategies across delivery phases. The nuclear hiring landscape in 2026 2026 will continue to be a strong year for the UK nuclear sector, but it will also be a demanding one. The organisations that deliver best will be those that approach nuclear workforce planning as a core part of programme execution: Anticipating scarcity early Building structured pipelines Protecting delivery confidence through quality and readiness Creating workforce models that can scale across multiple sites and phases

By Rullion on 04 February 2026