Before qualification, “a company with internal IT” is only a prospect description. After qualification, a co-managed IT opportunity has an agreed gap your MSP can fill and people on both sides willing to own the arrangement. Look for that working agreement before treating the company as a good fit.
I would cut “we support any IT team” from the referral brief. Tell a partner which work your MSP can take on and which conditions make it deliverable. A longer list of introductions is not much help if your service lead cannot turn them into a service.
Describe the Gap You Can Actually Fill
Write the profile around a recurring need your team is equipped to meet. An internal IT title does not show whether that need exists. Nor does a large endpoint count establish that the buyer wants the particular responsibility your MSP can carry.
For example, consider a proposed profile for an MSP that can deliver specialist escalation support. The prospect retains a capable internal support function, can describe the cases it needs help with, and wants a defined path to that expertise. Those are conditions to investigate, not facts about every company with internal IT.
The same profile would be wrong for an MSP selling a different service. Start with your delivery capability and the work the buyer wants to retain. Do not use “co-managed” to hide uncertainty about what you will actually provide.
Bill Poole recommends giving referral partners a recognizable ideal client profile so they can identify a useful introduction. He contrasts a specific business profile with asking for anyone. That is practitioner advice worth applying here: give the referrer a situation they can recognize, then qualify it yourself.
Ask for Evidence Behind the Fit
Bring the internal IT lead and the business sponsor into the qualification process. Explain the proposed gap before discussing detailed access or taking over tools. You are testing whether the arrangement can work, including whether your MSP is prepared to do its share.
| What to Establish | Question to Ask | Useful Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| A Defined Need | “Which work needs outside help, and what happens when it is not covered?” | The buyer can describe the gap and its business effect, with examples the MSP can assess. |
| An Internal Delivery Partner | “Which responsibilities will your team keep, and who can make those decisions?” | A named internal owner participates in scoping and can confirm the retained work. |
| Business Authority | “Who approves this service and resolves a disagreement about priorities or spending?” | The sponsor understands the proposed service and the route for approval. |
| A Supportable Environment | “What would we need to learn or change to deliver the work we have discussed?” | The technical lead can assess relevant records with appropriate permission, and the buyer will discuss material gaps. |
| Compatible Working Practices | “How will we share the information needed to act, and approve changes that affect each other?” | Both teams can agree a usable handoff and a change process without relying on informal favors. |
| Commercial Commitment | “Which outcome are you prepared to fund as an ongoing service?” | The buyer distinguishes a recurring service need from an isolated project and accepts a discussion about scope and price. |
Keep an unanswered question open in the opportunity record. Do not translate “we will sort that out later” into a positive qualification result. Equally, a gap in documentation may be something the buyer is willing to fix through a properly scoped engagement.
Ask for permission before collecting client records or reviewing ticket samples. Limit the request to what your delivery lead needs to assess the proposed work. Qualification does not require unrestricted access to a prospect’s environment.
Test Cooperation Without Making It a Personality Score
A cautious internal IT lead is not automatically a bad-fit colleague. They may need to understand what the MSP will change and which responsibilities remain theirs. Give them that information and assess the response to a concrete proposal.
A proposed line is: “We are discussing help with this specific gap. What would make the handoff useful for your team, and what would you need us to leave with you?” Listen for a workable boundary, then check whether your service can honor it.
If the executive wants one arrangement and internal IT describes another, pause the offer and resolve the difference together. A campaign cannot reconcile conflicting instructions about who is responsible. Marketing cannot supply missing authority or fund work the agreement leaves unpriced.
I would also cut a qualification question that asks whether the internal technician is “easy to work with.” Replace it with an observable question about the proposed workflow. Record whether the teams accepted the handoff, along with any unresolved condition.
Decide Whether to Proceed, Clarify or Decline
Proceed to a scoped offer when the delivery lead can assess the work and the buyer has agreed the essential conditions. This is still subject to the commercial review and agreement. Good discovery does not itself establish that the service will earn its required margin.
Keep the opportunity in clarification when a fixable condition has a named owner and an agreed next step. For example, the sponsor might need to confirm who will cover the internal role during an absence. Do not price an assumption about that cover as though the client had accepted it.
Decline the proposed arrangement if an essential condition cannot be met and neither side accepts a workable alternative. Explain the specific mismatch. If appropriate, suggest a differently scoped service rather than pretending the original offer fits.
Do not offer a recurring discount to make an unsuitable arrangement look affordable. Resolve scope and delivery cost first. The profile should identify clients your service can support; it should not become a justification for accepting whatever work arrives.
Measure Fit After the Introduction
Count introductions by source in the CRM. Record which became qualified opportunities and the reason others did not progress. Keep the reason specific enough to improve the referral brief, rather than grouping every rejection under “not interested.”
For signed clients, connect the opportunity to the delivery record. Compare the recurring responsibilities sold with the work actually provided. Record material scope changes so an extra service does not look like unexplained delivery inefficiency.
Use the model’s quarterly margin-and-fit review to revisit the profile. Count how many clients from each source still fit the service they bought, and inspect their managed-service margin with burdened delivery labor and tools included. A source that produces many meetings may still produce little work your MSP can sustain.
The model’s managed-service gross margin target is 50%. Results below that target would make me revisit the profile and delivery assumptions. The target is not a break-even line, and a pattern does not prove the referral source caused the shortfall. Check whether the estimate or the delivered scope was wrong.
Rewrite the next referral brief around a confirmed service gap and the working conditions above. Ask the sales lead to record the answers, and have the delivery lead review the unresolved conditions before an offer goes out. That gives you a client profile you can test against the service you actually deliver.
mspoutpost.com/articles/co-managed-it-qualify-the-client-before-you-offer-it
Written by Owen Gallagher
MSP Outpost publishes information, not legal, financial, insurance, tax or compliance advice, and reading it creates no professional relationship. For decisions about your business, talk to a qualified professional.