De-risk Your SASE Decision With One Accountable NZ Provider

By Larissa Kolver, Head of Cyber Security at Securecom

Author Introduction

From my personal experience, moving from evaluating technology to signing a contract is often where the real anxiety sets in. The risk isn’t the tech anymore – it’s the execution. Don’t let fragmented accountability undermine your investment. We explore how to de-risk your decision and eliminate the vendor “blame game” to ensure long-term success.

Outline

Moving from evaluation to formal commitment.
The hidden risks of multi-vendor contracts.
Essential elements for your Statement of Work.
Why governance matters more than discounts.
Structuring the partnership with TotalNET Zero Trust.
A pre-signature checklist for NZ leaders.

Key Takeaways

Contracting success relies on scope, not just price.
Single accountability eliminates vendor blame games.
Governance models determine long-term SASE value.
SLAs must cover performance, not just uptime.
Securecom TotalNET Zero Trust offers unified responsibility.
Defined scope prevents “scope creep” later.
Local NZ support is critical for rapid resolution.
Final due diligence mitigates deployment risks.

Introduction

You have navigated the complexity of the market, evaluated the technology, and identified the potential ROI. Now, you face the final and perhaps most critical hurdle: formalising the decision. The shift from “shopping around” to “signing on the dotted line” often brings a wave of anxiety for IT leaders and procurement teams.

The question changes from “Which technology is best?” to “How do we make this a safe, long-term decision for the business?”. At this stage, the risks are no longer about the theoretical capabilities of SD-WAN or Zero Trust, analysts and industry data have already validated those technologies. The real risk lies in the execution. It lies in the contract, the service levels, and the operating model you are about to lock in for the next three to five years.

Many mid-market New Zealand organisations discover too late that the “best” technology can fail if the partnership model is flawed. If you are stitching together a telco for circuits, a global vendor for security software, and a local integrator for hardware, you may be inadvertently signing up for years of administrative friction.

This article explores how to de-risk your decision during the contracting phase. We look at why single accountability is the ultimate safety net and how a managed offering, like Securecom TotalNET Zero Trust, structures the partnership to ensure the value you were promised is the value you actually get.

The Hidden Cost of Fragmented Accountability

In the legacy world, you likely had an MPLS provider, a firewall vendor, and perhaps a separate managed services partner. When a remote site went offline or application performance slumped, the “finger-pointing” began. The network provider blamed the firewall; the security vendor blamed the circuit; the internal team was stuck in the middle.

As you move to a Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) architecture, this risk does not disappear; it changes shape. SASE involves multiple complex components: connectivity, cloud security gateways, endpoint clients, and policy engines.

If your contract structure mimics the old siloed world, you risk creating a “governance gap.” The primary goal of the Decision & Contracting stage should be to close this gap by establishing Single Point of Accountability.

When you select a partner who acts as the Telco, the Integrator, and the Managed Security Service Provider (MSSP) in one, you fundamentally change the risk profile of the project. You are no longer buying “parts”; you are buying an outcome. In this model, if a user cannot access a cloud app, it is not a “network issue” or a “security issue”, it is a service delivery issue that one provider is responsible for resolving.

Defining Success: What Goes into the Statement of Work (SOW)?

The Statement of Work (SOW) is where your high-level expectations are translated into deliverable reality. A vague SOW is the enemy of a successful deployment.

To de-risk your decision, ensure your SOW goes beyond a simple bill of materials. It must clearly describe the journey and the destination.

1. Phased Migration Plan

Avoid a “big bang” approach. Your SOW should outline a phased rollout, perhaps starting with a non-critical site or a pilot group of users, to validate the configuration before mass deployment. This allows for “tuning” of policies (e.g., Web filtering or DLP rules) without disrupting the entire business.

2. Responsibility Matrix (RACI)

Modern SASE solutions are collaborative. Your internal team will still have a role, likely shifting from “box huggers” to policy architects. The contract must explicitly state who does what. Who creates a new Zero Trust access policy? Who ships the SD-WAN appliance? Who monitors the alerts at 2 a.m.?

3. Scope of Decommissioning

Value realisation comes from turning off the old stuff. Ensure the scope includes the decommissioning of legacy MPLS circuits and hardware. The savings from these actions are often what funds the new investment, so they cannot be an afterthought.

Service Level Agreements (SLAs) that Actually Bite

In a cloud-centric world, a standard “99.99% uptime” SLA on a piece of hardware is meaningless. The device might be “up,” but if the user’s connection to Office 365 is suffering from high latency, the service is failing.

When negotiating contracts for a modern network, look for SLAs that reflect User Experience.

End-to-End Performance: You need guarantees regarding the availability of the cloud gateway and the latency to key SaaS applications.
Support Response vs. Resolution: Don’t just settle for a “time to respond” metric. Look for partners who offer meaningful commitments on resolution times, backed by direct access to Level 2 and Level 3 vendor support.
Local Nuance: Ensure the SLA accounts for New Zealand business hours and local support availability. A global “follow the sun” model often means waiting for an engineer in a different time zone to wake up.

Structuring the Partnership with TotalNET Zero Trust

This is where the specific operating model of your chosen partner becomes your greatest risk mitigator. Securecom TotalNET Zero Trust is designed specifically to solve the “fragmented accountability” problem for NZ mid-market organisations.

The Integrated Operations Centre (IOC) Advantage

TotalNET Zero Trust is not just a resale of software; it is a managed service delivered through an Integrated Operations Centre (IOC). This IOC aggregates the multi-carrier connectivity, implements the SD-WAN, and manages the Netskope SASE security stack.

For the decision-maker, this means one contract covers the entire data path. Securecom takes ownership of the “Telco” role (the circuits), the “Integrator” role (the deployment), and the “MSSP” role (the security operations).

De-Risking with a Proven Blueprint

Custom engineering is risky. TotalNET Zero Trust utilises a “cookie-cutter approach”, a standardised, field-proven blueprint for deployment. This standardisation reduces the risk of configuration errors and accelerates time-to-value. It means you are not paying for a science experiment; you are buying a configuration that is already working for other New Zealand enterprises, delivering up to 40% WAN cost reductions and 5x bandwidth gains.

The “Power of One” Technology Stack

The contract is also safer because the underlying technology is unified. TotalNET Zero Trust utilises the Netskope platform, which converges ZTNA, SWG, CASB, and FWaaS into a single client and single engine. This “Power of One” architecture eliminates the technical risk of trying to stitch together incompatible products from different vendors, a common cause of project failure.

Governance: Building a Relationship, Not Just a Transaction

Finally, the contract should mandate a governance structure. SASE is not a “set and forget” technology; it evolves. New threats emerge (like AI-driven data leakage), and new business units come online.

Your agreement should stipulate:

Monthly Operational Reviews: To review capacity, threats blocked, and immediate ticket trends.
Quarterly Strategic Reviews: To align the roadmap with business goals. For example, “We are acquiring a new company; how do we fold them into our Zero Trust architecture?”

This governance ensures that the provider remains a strategic partner, continuously optimising costs and security posture long after the initial deployment.

A Pre-Signature Checklist for NZ Leaders

Before you sign, run through this final due diligence checklist to ensure you have fully de-risked the decision:

Single Point of Accountability: Does the contract clearly state that one partner is responsible for both network connectivity and security performance?
Local Support Verification: Have you confirmed that support is provided by a local NZ team with direct escalation paths to the vendor (e.g., Netskope Level 3)?
Scope Clarity: Is the migration plan phased, and does it include the decommissioning of legacy MPLS and hardware?
Compliance Alignment: Does the solution meet your data residency requirements (e.g., local data plane capacity in NZ)?
Reference Validation: Have you spoken to a reference customer who has migrated from a similar legacy environment?

Conclusion

The decision to modernise your network is a strategic leap forward. It promises to reduce costs, secure your hybrid workforce, and enable digital transformation. However, the bridge between “promise” and “reality” is built during the contracting stage.

By insisting on single accountability, clear SLAs, and a unified technology stack, you turn a complex migration into a manageable, predictable process. You move from simply buying technology to securing a partnership that will underpin your business agility for years to come.

Next Steps

How do I get started with TotalNET Zero Trust?

Contact us today to discuss how Securecom TotalNET Zero Trust delivers real business outcomes https://www.securecom.co.nz/contact-securecom/

TotalNET Zero Trust Blog Series

Are you ready to simplify and secure your network for AI, cloud and hybrid work?

About the Author:

Larissa Kolver PMP®, AgilePM® – Head of Cyber Security, Securecom

Larissa is a seasoned cyber resilience leader who blends disciplined project governance with hands-on security engineering with over a 10-year career across financial, health and safety and technology sectors. At Securecom she heads the Security Operations function, translating continuous attack-surface insights into actionable remediation plans that executives can measure. Larissa is passionate about turning board-level risk appetite into practical cadence – replacing once-a-year checkbox tests with data-driven assurance tied to every release. Her mission is simple: help Kiwi businesses stay one step ahead of attackers while keeping compliance costs in check.

Email: larissa.kolver@securecom.co.nz

Ready to modernise secure access?

Book a TotalNET Zero Trust assessment workshop and receive a clear, ROI-driven roadmap to simplify your network and security stack.

"*" indicates required fields

How to de-risk your SASE decision with one accountable NZ provider