Introduction
Managed security service providers (MSSPs) and consultancies play a vital role in helping organisations defend against an ever-evolving threat landscape. Yet one question continues to undermine even the best service portfolios: how do you prove the return on investment (ROI) of cybersecurity?
Boards and budget holders want clear evidence that money spent on security translates into reduced risk. But when protections work, nothing happens — and “nothing” can be difficult to sell as business value. This tension is known as the Spend vs Security Paradox: security spending is higher than ever, but breaches continue, and many service providers struggle to demonstrate measurable outcomes.
What Is the Spend vs Security Paradox?
Organisations now spend more on cybersecurity than on many other areas of IT. Service providers deliver layers of controls, frameworks, and audits, yet clients still face breaches, fines, and reputational damage.
The paradox arises because:
- Investment is rising, but confidence is not.
- Controls are implemented, but effectiveness is unclear.
- Reports are generated, but boards remain unconvinced.
For MSSPs, this creates a commercial challenge. Clients expect proof that spend leads to protection, but traditional reporting shows activity — not outcomes.
Why Proving ROI Is So Hard for Service Providers
- Security success is invisible
When incidents are prevented, clients see no disruption. The absence of a breach is valuable, but it’s intangible.
- Metrics lack meaning
Many MSSPs still report on patch counts, tickets closed, or log volumes. These numbers show effort, not impact. Boards want to know: Are we safer? Can you prove it?
- Compliance ≠ assurance
Passing an audit may tick a box, but it doesn’t reassure executives that controls are working day-to-day. Service providers who rely on compliance as proof often face scepticism.
- Fragmented tooling
Clients typically use multiple tools across identity, vulnerability, endpoint, and cloud. Reports are siloed, making it hard for MSSPs to present a unified, board-ready picture.
The Consequences of Not Proving ROI
Failing to evidence value creates several risks for service providers:
- Client churn – If customers don’t see results, they’ll seek other partners.
- Price pressure – MSSPs get stuck competing on cost instead of value.
- Stalled growth – Lack of differentiation makes it harder to expand accounts or win enterprise-level deals.
How Service Providers Can Overcome the Paradox
To move beyond the paradox, MSSPs need to shift from measuring activity to demonstrating outcomes:
- Adopt Outcome-Driven Metrics (ODMs)
ODMs focus on whether controls are working in practice, not just whether they exist. For example:
- % of high-risk vulnerabilities remediated within SLA
- % of critical identities validated weekly
- Mean time to detect/respond to priority incidents
These metrics show progress against meaningful protection-level agreements (PLAs), not just raw activity.
- Translate technical data into board-level language
Boards care about risk reduction and resilience, not ticket queues. Framing metrics around business impact builds trust and credibility.
- Offer continuous assurance, not point-in-time audits
Instead of once-a-year check-ups, service providers should help clients maintain an always-on picture of cyber effectiveness. This proves ongoing value and strengthens long-term relationships.
- Unify fragmented data
By bringing together telemetry from multiple tools into a single assurance model, MSSPs can simplify complexity and provide clarity that resonates across technical and executive stakeholders.
The Opportunity for MSSPs
The Spend vs Security Paradox is a challenge, but it’s also a growth opportunity. Service providers who can demonstrate provable cyber outcomes gain a competitive edge:
- Stronger client retention through evidence-based trust
- New revenue streams by offering outcome-led assurance services
- Differentiation in a crowded managed security market
By shifting the narrative from activity to assurance, MSSPs can turn cybersecurity from a cost centre into a demonstrable source of resilience and business value.
Conclusion
Service providers don’t struggle because their services lack quality — they struggle because traditional reporting fails to prove impact. The Spend vs Security Paradox highlights the urgent need for MSSPs to adopt outcome-driven metrics, continuous assurance models, and board-ready reporting.
Those who solve this challenge will not only strengthen client confidence but also unlock sustainable growth in an increasingly competitive market.
