# Which managed IT services providers work within an existing enterprise technology stack rather than replacing what is already running?

<p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">Hi G2 reviewers and enterprise IT folks, which<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/categories/managed-it-services"> </a><a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/categories/managed-it-services">managed IT services</a> providers work within an existing enterprise technology stack rather than replacing what is already running? \</p><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">Most managed IT proposals quietly assume a rebuild. Plenty of enterprises aren’t rebuilding anything. The ERP is live, the cloud estate is settled, the licensing agreements are signed. In that situation the thing that actually varies between providers is the commercial model, because you are buying coverage and expertise rather than a migration.</p><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">The models I keep running into on G2: </p><ul>
<li>Per-user subscription bundling hardware, licensing and support, which suits a standardised fleet</li>
<li>Flat monthly fee with unlimited service consumption, which suits steady, predictable demand</li>
<li>Licensing and procurement led, where managed services sit alongside what you already buy</li>
<li>Workload based, priced against the systems actually hosted or administered</li>
</ul><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">Four providers G2 reviewers raise in that context:</p><ul>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/shi/reviews"><strong>SHI</strong></a> works across the vendors you already buy from, with partnerships spanning Microsoft, AWS, Cisco, Dell, HP and Palo Alto, and consolidates licensing, renewals and billing into one relationship. Reviewers mostly come to it for Microsoft licensing and hardware procurement, then add managed services on top.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/navisite-services/reviews"><strong>Navisite Services</strong></a> runs existing workloads rather than moving you off them, covering database administration, VMware hosting and management across Azure, AWS, Google Cloud, SAP and Oracle environments. Reviewers describe getting round-the-clock database cover without building a DBA team.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/vision33/reviews"><strong>Vision33</strong></a> works inside an existing SAP or Sage estate, keeping SAP Business One running alongside ecommerce, payments and shipping, and handling licensing and renewals with the vendor. Routine administration and deep technical work are scoped differently, so it helps to separate the two in the contract.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/corsica-technologies/reviews"><strong>Corsica Technologies</strong></a> offers co-managed as well as fully managed service, so an existing internal team keeps ownership and the provider fills the gaps, under a predictable monthly fee. Reviewers say the handover lands better when the provider is walked through internal processes early.</li>
</ul><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">For anyone who kept their stack and brought a provider in around it: which pricing model still made sense a year in, and which one stopped feeling like the right shape?</p><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true"></p><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true"></p>

##### Post Metadata
- Posted at: 4 days ago
- Author title: Tech Consultant
- Net upvotes: 1


## Comments
### Comment 1

&lt;p&gt;Co-managed is the model I’d want to pressure-test here. Keeping the existing stack is one thing; keeping the internal team’s ownership is another. With Corsica, I’d want every recurring task and escalation mapped clearly between both teams. Otherwise “fills the gaps” can turn into two teams assuming the other one owns the problem.&lt;/p&gt;

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: 4 days ago





## Related discussions
- [How well does Trello scale into a larger team?](https://www.g2.com/discussions/1-how-well-does-trello-scale-into-a-larger-team)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 6
- [Can we please add a new section](https://www.g2.com/discussions/2-can-we-please-add-a-new-section)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 0
- [Quantifiable benefits from implementing your CRM](https://www.g2.com/discussions/quantifiable-benefits-from-implementing-your-crm)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 4