performance criteria MSP teams
Why do clear performance criteria rarely work at MSPs?
Performance criteria at MSPs do not founder on the method of measurement, but on the gap between expectation and daily reality, the fear of difficult conversations, and the double role of the owner. As long as those three are not addressed, KPIs stay on paper and team behaviour does not change.
MSP Late Night · 6 August 2026
What blocks sharp performance criteria in an MSP team?
Four failure points come back structurally at MSPs trying to set criteria. First, the expectation of the owner clashes with what engineers and the service desk absorb daily in tickets, outages and client escalations. Second, leaders avoid the feedback conversation as soon as the standard is not met. Third, measuring is hard because billable hours, client satisfaction and resolution time work against each other. Fourth, the owner is often still involved hands-on, which undermines standards as soon as things get busy.
Expectation versus daily reality?
Owners set criteria from an ideal picture, while the team puts out fires eight hours a day. A standard of 90% first-time fix means nothing if the intake quality is not right.
Fear of the difficult conversation?
Criteria only have value if you speak to someone when they are not met. In small MSP teams of 8 to 30 people the personal bond often weighs more than the standard, so consequences never come.
The role of the owner?
As long as the owner picks up tickets or helps clients outside the process, they undermine the criteria they impose on the team. The team copies behaviour, not the KPI sheet.
Criteria on paper change nothing as long as the owner undermines the standard on busy days.
Frequently asked questions
Which KPIs do work in an MSP team?
KPIs with a direct influence on client retention and margin work better than internal efficiency numbers. Think of first-time fix rate, customer effort score after a ticket, and the share of incidents solved proactively before they escalate. These are measurable per engineer, connect to client behaviour and are hard to manipulate. Pure billable hours or ticket volume steer the wrong behaviour.
How often should performance conversations take place?
A monthly cadence with short one-to-ones of 20 to 30 minutes works better in practice than an annual review. The reason is simple: correcting behaviour within four weeks is achievable, correcting behaviour after twelve months is nearly impossible. Quarterly reviews with sharp written feedback complement this for the longer line.
What is the difference between performance criteria and job descriptions?
A job description describes responsibilities and tasks, performance criteria describe the behaviour and output that count as sufficient. An engineer can, per the job description, solve incidents, but the criteria decide within what time, at what quality and against what client satisfaction. Without criteria the job description stays a declaration of intent.
When is an MSP large enough to set criteria formally?
From around 10 to 12 staff, formalising becomes necessary, because the owner no longer sees every interaction directly. Below that limit direct steering still works, although documentation is wise then too for consistency with new staff. Above 25 people, undocumented standards are a risk for quality and for your legal position in a dismissal.
The full conversation, transcribed
veel in mijn space lukt het niet om duidelijke performance criteria voor hun teams vast te stellen, omdat het verschil van verwachting versus dagelijkse realiteit is anders, de angst voor moeilijke gesprekken, criteria meten is ook moeilijk en de rol van de eigenaar zelf speelt ook een hele belangrijke rol en nog wat dingen die ik zomaar even aan het verzinnen ben of dit werkt.