Why Comparing IT Suppliers Internally Is a False Economy

For many organisations, comparing IT suppliers looks straightforward. Get a few quotes, run some meetings, weigh up the options and choose the best fit. In reality, this process rarely plays out that cleanly, particularly for IT Managers who are already under pressure to keep systems running and users productive.

What often starts as a sensible procurement exercise quickly turns into a time drain, a political challenge, and a distraction from day-to-day delivery. The cost is not always financial. More often, it is time, focus and credibility.

The hidden workload nobody accounts for

For IT Managers, supplier comparison is rarely their primary role. Yet they are the ones expected to:

• Translate business needs into technical requirements

• Repeat the same conversations with multiple suppliers

• Sit through supplier-led proposals shaped around what is being sold, not what is needed

• Manage follow-up calls, emails and internal questions

Each supplier meeting takes preparation. Each proposal needs reviewing. Each internal conversation needs context. None of this appears on a project plan, yet it consumes hours that could be spent improving systems, reducing risk or supporting users.

From an IT Manager’s perspective, the process is inefficient by design.

The sales dynamic works against good decisions

Most IT suppliers are not neutral advisors. They are incentivised to present their own services as the best solution, even when the fit is marginal. This creates a familiar problem for IT Managers.

Suppliers frame the conversation.
Technical detail clouds comparison.
Pricing structures differ just enough to make alignment difficult.

IT Managers then become the translator between suppliers and senior leadership, often defending decisions they did not fully control. This is where pressure builds, especially when boards or directors are asking why outcomes differ between proposals that all claim to be best practice.

Why IT Managers end up exposed

When supplier selection is handled internally, accountability often lands in the wrong place.

If a chosen supplier underperforms, the question is rarely “was the process flawed?”. Instead, it becomes “why did IT recommend this option?”. That is an unfair position for any IT Manager to be in, particularly when they were asked to compare suppliers who all presented information through a sales lens.

This is where credibility risk creeps in. Not because of poor judgement, but because the structure of the process makes objectivity difficult.

A different way to approach supplier selection

An independent approach changes the dynamic completely.

Instead of IT Managers managing multiple suppliers directly, an independent intermediary can:

• Clarify the real business requirement before suppliers are engaged

• Filter the market so only suitable suppliers are involved

• Standardise comparison points so proposals can be assessed properly

• Act as a buffer between IT teams and supplier sales activity

This approach is particularly effective when reviewing IT support services, where ongoing relationships and response expectations matter as much as technical capability.

Why this matters to the business, not just IT

From a senior management perspective, internal supplier comparison often looks cost-effective. There is no visible line item for the time spent. However, the opportunity cost is significant.

When IT Managers are pulled into prolonged supplier engagement, the business pays elsewhere. Projects slow down. Technical debt grows. Strategic initiatives stall.

This is especially true when reviewing connectivity, telephony or infrastructure, where decisions have long-term contractual and operational consequences. Independent guidance across Business Connectivity & Communications helps ensure decisions are made on fit and resilience, not sales pressure.

Final thought

Most IT Managers do not need more suppliers competing for their attention. They need fewer conversations, clearer information and a process that supports good decisions without unnecessary pressure.

Comparing IT suppliers internally feels economical. In practice, it often costs more than organisations realise.