Net It On Blog

Professional services have a reputation for being the important kind of work that has to be learned through experience. However, that reputation doesn’t usually cover these businesses using very much technology, because for a very long time, professional services didn’t.

You always read about the multitude of ways you can improve your business, but next to zero of them talk about what amounts to the elephant in the room: your staff. The workforce is a massive expense for most businesses; and, if it isn’t, it’s likely because you do a lot of things yourself. So, knowing that it becomes important to understand the financials around the people you have working for you. Basically, each worker has a number, and if you are getting that number out of their efforts, interfering with their work dynamic (to try to get more out of them) may actually have the opposite effect. 

Anyone that uses a computer knows just how frustrating it is when that computer doesn’t function as intended. For a business, it negatively affects profitability. If you don’t have the support structure in place to mitigate your technology problems, you could be spending a whole lot of money on nothing. In part one of our five-part series on managed IT services, we talk about how being proactive keeps your technology, and your business, working fluidly.

Small business owners are always looking for a way to shave some of that overhead off of their budgets. While this is probably true for most business owners, the more capital a small business can save, the more it can do. Outsourcing its IT management is one way to either cut down the company’s technology maintenance costs--or, if your company doesn’t currently have a dedicated technician--can keep you from paying way too much to keep your business running smoothly. 

Imagine having a data backup and disaster recovery solution, thinking you’re prepared to handle anything that comes your way. Then disaster strikes and recovery is impossible. If you had tested your solution beforehand, it may have been possible to prevent this misstep entirely. What kind of disasters need to be prepared for, and how can you make sure your testing takes them into account?