Legal
Before hiring an MSP, ask at least 3 comparable law-firm references about response speed, security judgment, communication during disruptions, and whether problems stayed fixed after support closed. The strongest references use similar legal systems, have comparable attorney counts, and manage similar client-data responsibilities.
Which law firms should an MSP provide as references?
“John brought the right knowledge to my issue and resolved it in about a reasonable amount of time. I walked away confident the problem was actually fixed.”
Ask for references from firms that resemble yours in operational reality, not simply the MSP's largest or friendliest customers. A solo practice, a 12-attorney litigation firm, and a 75-user multi-office firm can have very different risks, support expectations, and decision-making needs.
Prioritize firms using systems close to yours: document management, practice management, timekeeping and billing, secure client portals, Microsoft 365, e-discovery workflows, or legal accounting software. The reference should explain how the MSP supports the tools that keep matters moving and bills accurate.
For Atlanta firms, local similarity can matter. Ask whether the reference supports offices in Midtown, Buckhead, Downtown, Perimeter, Gwinnett, or along the I-85 corridor; hybrid attorneys; and office moves, suite buildouts, or multi-tenant building coordination.
Do not accept a list made entirely of unrelated industries. Legal references reveal whether the MSP understands confidentiality, attorney-client privilege, work product, conflicts checks, litigation holds, and the urgency of a filing deadline.
Ask for both long-standing and newer clients. Long-term references can speak to consistency and strategic guidance, while newer clients can describe onboarding, documentation, communication, and whether the provider delivered what it promised.
The strongest references come from firms similar enough to make their experience meaningful.
What questions reveal whether the MSP responds reliably when legal work is interrupted?
Start with a concrete incident: ask about the last outage, cyber alert, email problem, or access issue that disrupted the firm. Then ask when the firm reported it, when a qualified technician engaged, how updates were delivered, and when normal work resumed.
Focus on outcomes instead of broad praise. “They are responsive” is encouraging but incomplete. A useful reference can explain whether attorneys could reach documents, communicate with clients, access remote systems, meet a court or transaction deadline, and continue timekeeping or billing.
- What was the business impact when the issue began?
- Who owned the issue, and how often did the MSP provide updates?
- What was restored first, and why?
- Did the MSP identify the root cause and verify the fix?
- What preventive change followed the incident?
Ask whether the MSP distinguishes routine tickets from matter-critical interruptions. A password reset and a partner unable to access case files before a hearing should not receive the same triage, ownership, or communication.
Madhav, a professional services client, described the outcome clearly: “John brought the right knowledge to my issue and resolved it in about a reasonable amount of time. I walked away confident the problem was actually fixed.” That confidence matters when legal staff cannot afford recurring interruptions.
Key reference-check benchmark: Contact at least 3 comparable law-firm references and ask each for one specific disruption example.
Dependable support is proven by incident handling, not a generic promise of fast service.
How can references confirm that an MSP protects confidential legal data?
Ask references how the MSP helps protect confidential client information across email, endpoints, cloud storage, mobile devices, remote access, and backups. The answer should connect security controls to daily work, not rely on vague assurances that the provider takes cybersecurity seriously.
Ask whether the MSP regularly reviews multi-factor authentication, access permissions, endpoint protection, patching, backups, phishing exposure, and administrative accounts. Look for a proactive operating rhythm that reduces business email compromise, ransomware, accidental disclosure, and unauthorized access.
References should explain how the provider handles departures, new hires, outside counsel, temporary staff, and remote workers. The right person needs access to the right information without unmanaged exceptions becoming permanent risks.
In Georgia, a data incident can create pressure beyond technical recovery. A firm may need to evaluate breach-notification obligations, client communications, professional-responsibility considerations, insurer requirements, and contractual security commitments. Ask whether the MSP helps the firm prepare before an event instead of reacting after one.
Ask whether the provider has tested recovery from a failed device, deleted file, service outage, or ransomware scenario. A backup protects the firm only when it can be restored in a timeframe that preserves client service and operations. Review the MSP's approach to cybersecurity services, data backup and recovery, and recovery planning alongside the reference conversation.
A strong legal reference can describe how tested controls and recovery protect client trust.
How should we evaluate an MSP's communication, planning, and accountability?
Ask references who owns the relationship after the sale. Find out whether the MSP provides a consistent point of contact, explains priorities in business terms, follows through on recommendations, and makes responsibility for each next step clear.
Good communication matters when a firm must make a security, budget, or operational decision. Ask whether the provider explains the risk, available options, estimated impact, and recommended path without burying leadership in technical jargon.
Ask whether the MSP surfaces issues before they become outages. Examples include an aging firewall, unsupported workstation, weak email configuration, incomplete backup coverage, unreliable Wi-Fi, or a capacity constraint that will affect a growing practice.
Therese, a commercial real estate client, reported that “Brian clearly explains what is happening and shows you ways to help prevent the issue from happening again. He is great to work with.” Seek that communication pattern: clear explanation, prevention, and a relationship built on trust.
If your office is relocating or expanding, ask references whether the MSP coordinated cabling, internet service, Wi-Fi, access control, video surveillance, and building-management requirements. In Atlanta's dense commercial corridors, those details can determine whether a new suite is ready for productive work on opening day. GDS also supports structured cabling and low-voltage projects and works with commercial real estate environments.
The right MSP reference describes clear communication, follow-through, and better decisions before problems become expensive.
What red flags should we notice in MSP references from other law firms?
Be cautious if every reference sounds rehearsed, cannot name a specific support event, or focuses only on friendliness. Strong customer relationships include specifics: what went wrong, how the provider communicated, what was fixed, and what changed afterward.
Treat a lack of legal references as a prompt for deeper review, not an automatic rejection. Ask why the MSP has limited legal experience, how it will learn your environment, and what safeguards it uses when supporting document management, trust accounting, or sensitive client data.
Another warning sign is a reference who says the MSP is great when called but cannot identify preventive reviews, security recommendations, documentation, or testing. Reactive help can keep individual tickets moving while leaving the firm exposed to repeated interruptions and unaddressed risk.
Listen for communication gaps during incidents. If a reference felt uncertain about status, ownership, scope, or next steps, that concern can become more serious when partners, clients, courts, or counterparties are waiting for the firm to act.
Compare what references say with the MSP's proposal. If the proposal promises monitoring, backup, compliance support, local assistance, or strategic planning, ask references to verify that those services were delivered in a way that benefited the firm.
References are valuable when they expose how the MSP behaves under pressure and whether its promises match the client experience.
Frequently Asked Questions
How many MSP references should a law firm check before signing a contract?
A law firm should check at least 3 references, with a preference for firms similar in size, practice needs, technology stack, and office model. Include one long-term customer if possible. Ask each reference the same core questions so you can compare responsiveness, security practices, communication, and strategic follow-through fairly.
Should we only ask for references from other law firms?
Legal references should be the priority because they can address confidentiality, document access, billing workflows, client expectations, and matter-related urgency. References from comparable regulated businesses can add useful perspective, especially on security and recovery. Still, they should supplement, not replace, conversations with other law firms.
What is the most important question to ask an MSP reference?
Ask the reference to describe a real disruption and exactly how the MSP handled it. Request the timeline, communication pattern, business impact, technical resolution, and preventive follow-up. This single question reveals more than general satisfaction because it tests competence, accountability, and whether the provider helped the firm regain confidence.
Can an MSP reference help us evaluate cybersecurity services?
Yes. Ask how the provider handles MFA, endpoint protection, email security, access changes, patching, backups, and incident communication. Then ask for an example of a security concern the MSP found before it caused harm. The best references connect technical safeguards to client confidentiality, uptime, and firm reputation.
