In-house security vs outsourced: who wins on ROI, and productivity

Security can be a powerful catalyst for productivity, not a burden to bear. The right operating model frees engineers to build, removes friction from change, and shortens recovery when something goes wrong. For most UK organisations outside the very largest enterprises, managed security delivers faster capability, broader coverage, and better risk reduction per pound spent. This comparison looks at the two models head-to-head and calls a clear winner for each area.

Executive context

UK cyber risk is not easing. The latest government survey shows 43 per cent of businesses experienced a breach or attack in the last year, rising to 67 per cent for medium-sized organisations. Phishing still dominates. AI-assisted impersonation is now a serious factor in attack campaigns.

The outsourcing trend is well established. Sixty-two per cent of small and 68 per cent of medium-sized businesses already use an external cyber provider. It’s more than just cutting costs; it’s about delivering value swiftly and ensuring uninterrupted coverage that never misses a beat.

On the staffing side, the picture is tougher.

Nearly half of UK organisations report incident management skills gaps. Confidence in meeting even basic Cyber Essentials requirements is slipping. The skills gap is widening faster than in-house recruitment can fill it.

A Security Operations Centre (SOC) lives or dies on people, process, and automation. Many SOCs operate with lean headcount and struggle to retain talent.

1) Speed to capability and coverage

Winner: Outsourced

Standing up a fully functioning SOC is not just buying a platform. It means building twenty-four by seven coverage with tested detection engineering, tuned playbooks, and credible incident response. The National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) warns that continuous operations require a very different resourcing model from office-hours coverage.

Managed providers start with proven tooling such as Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) and Security Orchestration, Automation and Response (SOAR), already integrated with playbooks and supported by an experienced team. That means production-grade monitoring on day one, not month six.

Impact: faster time to value, real twenty-four by seven coverage, and earlier containment.

2) Cost and ROI

Winner: Outsourced for small to mid-sized organisations, a hybrid approach for larger enterprises

In-house security costs exceed salaries. A functioning SOC requires multiple analyst tiers, managers, threat intelligence specialists, quality assurance, on-demand forensics, training, and full shift coverage.

UK salary benchmarks put SOC analysts at £40k to £60k, SOC managers at £60k to £80k, and heads of function at £80k to £110k before pensions, National Insurance, tooling, and overtime. Add SIEM, SOAR, and Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) licensing and maintenance, plus the time spent integrating and tuning it all.

Managed security spreads these costs across many clients. That gives each organisation a lower unit cost per incident detected and contained. Independent breach cost research also shows materially lower losses where automation is embedded, something most providers offer from the start.

In-house solutions offer greater benefits for larger enterprises, as they often have the necessary infrastructure and financial resources to handle substantial upfront costs effectively. Implementing a hybrid strategy that blends in-house talent with external expertise can enhance overall effectiveness and drive even greater success. By adopting this approach, companies can achieve significant long-term returns on investment.

Impact: lower fixed costs, better return on investment, and spending that flexes with need.

3) Talent hiring, retention, and training

Winner: Outsourced

The UK market for experienced analysts is thin. Even when the budget is there, recruitment takes time, and retention is uncertain. Small teams often face burnout and constant disruption due to staff turnover.

Managed security providers recruit from a broader pool, offer structured career development, and invest in continuous training. Analysts work across multiple environments, gaining pattern recognition that a single-organisation team might take years to develop.

Impact: predictable skills pipeline, higher analyst quality, less time lost to recruitment.

4) Tooling, integration, and automation

Winner: Outsourced

Security operations rely on a joined-up stack: SIEM for centralised log analytics, EDR for endpoint telemetry, SOAR for playbooks, Identity and Access Management (IAM) for access control, and Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting and Conformance (DMARC) for email and brand protection.

Many organisations buy these tools but never fully integrate them. Managed providers arrive with these systems pre-connected and tuned. That means fewer false positives and faster Mean Time to Detect (MTTD).

Impact: higher productivity, cleaner alerts, more time for strategic work.

5) Compliance and audit readiness

Winner: Outsourced, with shared responsibility clarified

Boards want proof of Cyber Essentials Plus and ISO 27001 compliance. The former demands independent testing of five control areas. The latter requires continuous monitoring and improvement.

A managed provider maps security operations directly to control objectives, producing audit-ready evidence without pulling internal teams away from delivery. This speeds up certification and reduces the risk of a failed audit.

Impact: faster certification, cleaner evidence, less executive time spent chasing controls.

6) Governance, control, and visibility

Winner: Tie — with a tilt to outsourced if transparency is strong

Loss of control is a valid concern. It is resolved through strong governance: shared dashboards, clear escalation paths, and defined RACI (Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed) roles.

If a provider offers full telemetry access and service level agreements aligned to business priorities, outsourcing gives both capacity and control without the overhead of managing shifts and performance internally.

Impact: maintained oversight, reduced management burden, faster response.

7) Scalability and resilience

Winner: Outsourced

A zero-day exploit or a supplier breach can generate workload spikes that swamp small teams. Managed security providers have deeper rosters, surge playbooks, and tested Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery (BCDR) plans to absorb the hit.

This resilience is shared across clients, so organisations get elastic cover without paying for idle capacity in quieter periods.

Impact: faster recovery, reliable coverage during staff absences, and higher operational resilience.

8) Security as a productivity driver

Winner: Outsourced

Security enables productivity by reducing unplanned work. Fewer false positives, faster Mean Time to Repair (MTTR), and faster Mean Time to Contain (MTTC) all mean less downtime. Automation removes repetitive tasks so engineers can focus on roadmap delivery.

Conosco’s portfolio covers SOC, Threat and Vulnerability Management (TVM), penetration testing, IAM, DMARC, executive threat assessments, BCDR, firewall and mobile security, and training. Together, these services raise operational resilience while improving delivery velocity.

Impact: more planned work delivered, calmer on-call, better ROI.

When in-house makes sense

Large enterprises with the budget and appetite can build and run their own SOC. They can retain niche skills, fund twenty-four by seven coverage, and maintain advanced tooling. Even then, many keep an external provider on retainer for surge and specialist support. For most UK organisations, outsourcing is the faster, more cost-effective, and lower-risk path.

Side-by-side verdict

The evidence points one way. Incidents remain routine, hiring remains hard, and automation drives measurable savings when applied well. DSIT data shows most small and medium UK organisations already lean on external providers. For this audience, the managed model delivers faster capability, stronger coverage, and better productivity with a governance framework that boards can defend.

Schedule a short discussion to map your estate against an operating model that turns security into a productivity driver