This article is based on an interview with Karen O’Connor, General Manager, ICT Services and Solutions at Datapac, originally published in the Business Post as part of their Focus on Managed ICT Services report in March 2026. Read the original article here.
How has the role of IT within organisations evolved in recent years?
IT has shifted from operational support to something far more consequential. Where it was once measured by uptime and responsiveness, it now underpins business continuity, regulatory exposure, financial risk and customer trust.
Boards are increasingly accountable for information security, cyber resilience and supply chain security. Insurers, regulators and customers expect demonstrable assurance rather than informal confidence. In that context, IT can no longer be treated as a back-office function; it has become a board-level responsibility.
This shift changes the standard of proof, meaning that assurances systems are well managed are no longer sufficient. Leadership needs evidence that risks are understood, controls are effective and recovery is possible.
Many organisations remain with their incumbent IT partner for years. What factors should prompt them to reassess that relationship?
Longevity in an IT partnership is not a problem in itself, as continuity often brings deep institutional knowledge and operational stability. The risk arises when familiarity replaces scrutiny.
If systems are running and renewal costs are relatively stable, there may seem to be little reason to revisit the relationship. But this view misses a critical question of value. IT services markets evolve rapidly, particularly in areas such as automation, security controls, governance and reporting. If a provider’s offering remains static while the wider market advances, the real value being delivered is quietly declining, even if the price has not changed.
A mature managed service should compound in value over time. As providers invest in better tooling, automation and operational maturity, customers should experience fewer incidents, faster resolution, stronger security controls and clearer governance. If the service looks the same year after year, it may be a sign that the partnership is maintaining the status quo rather than advancing it.
When evaluating the effectiveness of an IT partner, what kind of visibility should leadership expect?
Service level reports and ticket metrics are important, but they are operational hygiene. They confirm that the service is functioning as contracted. They do not, on their own, show that IT is supporting business objectives or reducing risk.
Leadership should expect visibility that reflects business outcomes and risk posture. This means clear reporting on security controls and vulnerabilities, insight into cost drivers and upcoming financial exposure, and progress against initiatives that improve productivity and resilience.
This level of visibility transforms reporting from a technical summary into a governance tool. It allows boards to understand not just what their IT services provider is doing, but how it is protecting and enabling the organisation.
Organisations are under increasing pressure to meet regulatory and cyber assurance requirements. What role should an IT partner play in supporting this?
Compliance is no longer a technical checkbox. It is a governance issue with real financial and reputational consequences. Many organisations turn to legal advisers, auditors or specialist consultancies for guidance in this area, which is entirely appropriate. However, it also points to a gap in how IT services have traditionally been positioned. A significant part of the market has been built around operational support, not evidencing governance. When providers define their role primarily as fixing issues and maintaining systems, they often lack the frameworks and reporting structures needed to engage at a compliance and assurance level.
A modern IT services partner should help translate technical controls into demonstrable assurance. This includes mapping controls to recognised frameworks, providing evidence of recoverability and resilience, and ensuring that configurations, particularly in widely used platforms such as Microsoft 365, align with compliance obligations. The goal is not to claim compliance on a client’s behalf, but to provide the clarity and evidence that allows leadership to stand over their position with confidence.
With the pace of technological change, how can organisations make confident investment decisions without overcommitting or falling behind?
The pace of change has produced two common responses. Some organisations adopt a highly cautious approach, delaying investment until change becomes unavoidable. Others pursue multiple initiatives at once, only to find that the expected benefits do not materialise.
Neither reflects poor judgement. Both are responses to an overwhelming volume of choice and a lack of clear pathways from investment to measurable outcomes. Cautious organisations risk falling behind competitors. Those who over-invest risk fragmentation, complexity and wasted expenditure.
A strong IT services partner acts as a translator between business ambition and technical reality. This means understanding organisational goals, assessing the current environment objectively, and building a phased roadmap that ties investment to measurable outcomes. It also means acting as a filter between the organisation and vendor claims, so that new technologies are adopted for clear business reasons rather than perceived urgency.
Good ideas often stall in the boardroom when there is no credible path from ambition to execution. A partner that can define that path allows organisations to move forward with confidence rather than hesitation.
For organisations approaching an IT support renewal, what questions should leadership be asking their provider?
Renewal periods offer a natural opportunity to reassess not just cost but capability and alignment with business needs. Leadership should be looking for clear evidence that their risk posture has improved over time. They should understand what new capabilities or operational improvements have been introduced in the past year and how these translate into tangible benefits for the organisation.
Renewal discussions should also bring future exposure into focus. Licensing changes, infrastructure lifecycles and evolving regulatory requirements can all introduce financial and operational risk if they are not anticipated. Organisations should also consider the continuity of knowledge within their IT environment. If key internal personnel were unavailable, or if the provider relationship changed, how much operational understanding would remain documented and accessible?
These questions shift the conversation from service activity to business assurance. In an environment where IT accountability sits at board level, the objective is not simply to maintain systems. It is to give leadership the evidence they need to make informed decisions about their organisation’s IT services.