Plug in your headphones, crank up the volume and ask yourself… are you ready for H day?

(may take a few seconds to load if you have a cheap computer)

How many of these images from the history of the Horses do you remember?

Posted in : Absolutely Meaningless Comedy, Outsourcing Events, Outsourcing Heros

What's happened to the industry analyst business?  You may recall a discussion right here two years ago when we berated the Chinese Internet purges and the impact they could have on the development of their own knowledge services and BPO industry.  While such censorship of free opinion-sharing is depressing enough in a controlled society, it's even more alarming when it's happening right on our own doorstep, when you see analyst heavyweight Forrester Research officially banning its own analysts from having personal blogs that touch upon issues related to their research coverage or technology markets. 

If you saw the recent passionate debate over at analyst relations guru Carter Lusher's Sage Circle site, you can read an official statement from Forrester's head of Corporate Communications:

"We believe we can best serve our clients in their professional roles by aggregating our intellectual property in one place – at Forrester.com.  Make no mistake: Forrester is committed to social media, and the number of our analyst bloggers is increasing, not decreasing. Analysts will still have the ability to blog outside of Forrester on topics not related to their coverage areas."

Analysts will still have the ability to blog outside of Forrester on topics not related to their coverage areas?  Hmmm… I really do want to know about their CRM analyst's stamp collection.

Aren't analysts supposed to create buzz?

I fondly recall the heyday of industry analyst business in the '90's, where the technology and services business thrived on innovation, on research, on unfettered opinion, where people had a vision and were unafraid to give forward-looking – and sometimes far-reaching - views regarding what was going to happen next, in a world that was being dramatically impacted by the onset of the Internet and web-enabled technologies, readily-available computing power and networking infrastructure, and steady globalization. 

The "rock star" analyst had arrived.  People paid good money to spend time with these people, to hear their views, use them as a sounding-board, or just to be associated with them.  And their growing corporate stables certainly didn't refuse the increasing moneys that came rolling in off the back of their growing relationships and influence.  The rock stars created buzz and drove the industry, challenging both vendors and customers to innovate and transform business models. 

However, like anything else, corporates like to monetize their brands to the max, scale their businesses and drive down their costs.  It's business economics one-on-one, and the big analyst firms are no different.

We want Bill, not Ben

Having their clients say "I want Bill, not Ben" was (and still is) infuriating to the analyst firms.  They want their clients to pay the same for the 28-year old fresh from her MBA, than they did for the rock stars of yesteryear.  And they're currently succeeding, as there aren't too many alternatives right now.

Most of the analyst rock stars have ventured off to start their own ventures in recent years, move into related industries, consult, run blog businesses or go work for vendors.  The "rock star model" simply wasn't scalable for the analyst firms - it look too long to develop them, and the risk of lost revenues were they to leave, proved too uncomfortable – not to mention the fact that they were hard to control once they realized their monetary value. 

However, just like any business utility, once you remove the personalization and the added value, clients wind-up only receiving the transactional services stipulated in the contract (sound familiar?).  If analyst firms trained all their analysts to be rock stars, surely they could scale their highly-profitable assets and have junior rock stars step in when the senior ones choose do move on?

I don't blame Forrester for their new policy - they're simply protecting themselves from analysts building strong personal brands and jumping ship to more lucrative climes when they become famous – even though there are only a small handful of blogging analysts who have ever chosen to do this.  Plus, their competitors haven't exactly embraced social media either.  Banning their analysts blogging on their industry issues is probably not illegal (am sure they considered all the angles before issuing this new policy), and they are free to choose how they run their business and manage their culture.  They're also probably getting paranoid that one of these days they'll get slapped with a law-suit from some vendor that got caught on the wrong end of some angry analyst tirade – although today, most vendors seem to be able to distinguish between a blog post and a Magic Quadrant… it's social media one-on-one.

Competent analysts should be trusted to write blog-posts

Another core issue here is trust.  Some analyst firms would rather have their analysts' work sit in editorial queues for weeks, than get their craft out to market while it's still relevant.  Rarely is a piece of analyst work altered in this process – simply modified slightly into a consistent look-and-feel.  C'mon… if an analyst cannot produce written materials that isn't fit for a blog, then you have to seriously question why that individual is an analyst in the first place.

Once an analyst has proven that she can be trusted (i.e. after 6 months), surely it's time to let them leverage social media to drive awareness to their work and engage in intelligent debate with other smart people? 

The implications to the traditional analyst model could be severe

All-in-all are some powerful implications that this type of policy could have on the analyst business:

1) The traditional analyst firms are losing touch with today's social-media driven society.  Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but most of the research we see these days isn't telling us a whole lot we didn't know already (and am sure I am equally guilty here).  People simply aren't as desperate to read it as they once were.  Sectioning it off behind a firewall for big-paying subscribers is only going to damage their relevance in a marketplace which is increasingly driven by rapid, to-the-point, relevant and compelling insight.  For example, our post covering the ACS/Xerox news hit the media before everyone (about 8.00am), got thousands of web-hits and generated some very interesting debate. By the time the big analyst houses put out their take on the merger, it was old news, and few people took any notice.  Hey – it was already old news by 11.00am that morning, let alone two days' later!  If these analyst firms cannot trust their own analysts to give their opinion in events in a rapid manner, then they will fade – and fade fast in this environment. 

2) Ambitious analysts will lose their energy if they are muzzled.  While some veteran analysts are happy picking up a pay-check and toeing the corporate line to keep their jobs, the younger breed are eager to impact their market and get their name out there.  Removing their ability to blog is taking away a major outlet for them.  Analyst energy thrives on the recognition of their craft, and cutting them off at the knees is surely a de-motivator for many.  Simply-put, the top analyst firms will lose their ambitious talent if it's muzzled from our new socially-media driven world.

3) New boutiques will spring up.  The other – and most damaging – implication is a likely appearance of new boutique analyst firms that heavily use social media to reach eyeballs, research markets and share opinion and debate.  Altimeter Group set up shop last year and is already turning away new clients.  Their model is based on popular "rock star" analysts with successful blogs. Other new research firms are mooted to be in the works, with some customers eager for a change from the staid old model of dry reports, and toned-down opinion. 

The Bottom-line

The technology and services industry is desperately searching for its mojo, and analysts can help provide the catalyst.  Muzzling their views by keeping them from using social-media channels is a worrysome trend and will hold back the Forresters and co. in the long-term. However, won't their loss be others' gain?  You do just start to wonder…

Posted in : Business Process Outsourcing (BPO), Social Networking

We've had some great contributors to the Horses over the years, and I was delighted to get a call the other day from one of the legends of outsourcing lore, offering to share some of his career learnings with us. 

I'd like to think he rates us that highly, but it's more likely the two feet of snow that submerged his local golf course was what really inspired Mike Atwood to lend us some of his thoughts about globalization, the development of capitalism, and our favorite topic:  outsourcing. 

I recall my first meeting with Mike a few years ago at an Admirals Club in Atlanta, when we were off to impress a potential client with our knowledge of the industry.  All Mike said that day to me was, "you'd better have some good charts"… and the rest is history.  Mike's experience with outsourcing spans 35 years, much of which was spent leading three major divisions at EDS, before turning his hand to sourcing advisory work in recent years, where he's served as a Principal with Everest Group, and leading Hackett's ventures into the advisory space.  Mike has also worked extensively in Tehran (during the Shah's days), Jeddah and Mexico.  Without further ado, let's turn the stage over to Mike to hear his take on how…

Adam Smith got it right!

Over 350 years ago he observed and defined the concept of markets, specialization of labor, demand, all of it.

As capitalism grew we saw these concepts first in the industrial revolution. Entrepreneurs saw that they could manufacture goods, weave cloth, and generally produce things by breaking a job down into parts and then using their capital to create machines that produced regular, repeatable pieces in large quantities with smaller and smaller amounts of labor.

However the costs of the factory, machinery, and early on even energy were fixed or sunk costs. Labor and transportation were the variables. So they looked to minimize these costs. Factories moved from Britain to New England, then to the South, and lately to China. All following cheaper labor.

We study this in our history and it all seems natural. At the turn of the 20th century some corporation attempted to gain a competitive advantage by vertically integrating. Henry Ford developed the Rouge River complex looking to have raw materials come in one gate and finished automobiles go out the opposite gate. GM bought up every company it could find that made auto parts and even bought a forest for the wood trim in its cars. But Adam Smith got it right. Labor specialized companies came into being that did only one thing and did it well, and they both are struggling to survive.

Then came the internet, the fall of the Berlin wall, and a decade of comparative peace and prosperity in the world. The world got wired; transportation was made a competitive market and everywhere in the world is reachable in less than a day at a 1500 dollar cost.

India took stock of its resources and saw what it had the most of was people. They accepted the western doctrine that education was the path to prosperity and developed a university system that graduates over 500,000 engineers each year. Many of these people left the country to find employment and rapidly became valued employees in most western companies.

And in about 1995, people started asking, why can’t I do this in India? Jack Welch went to India and came home actively pushing all the GE units to send their accounting, clerical, and engineering work to India. At the same time several call center companies had grown up in the west. These companies learned how to manage a call center monitor the agents and generally do a better job, and they got business. There major cost was labor so it was a natural for this business to migrate to India as telecommunications costs dropped. Eventually it got so cheap that this seemed like the only place to be especially since most of the population had some English skills.

Now we have centers in India, China, Argentina, The Philippines, etc the country worries that all our jobs are going overseas, but it is just the market doing what it always has. Labor is specializing and capitalists are hiring specialized companies to do specialized jobs that don’t provide any competitive differentiation. Adam Smith got it right.

Mike Atwood (pictured right) has spent over 35 years in the outsourcing field. He led 3 major units at EDS providing outsourcing services to clients. He has spent the last 7 years as an advisor assisting clients as they decide how to offshore, develop a captive center or outsource.

Posted in : Outsourcing Advisors, Outsourcing Heros

For all 1055 of you who perservered through completing our survey, and then being subjected to six lengthy diatribes about what it all means, we can finally put this little study to bed with a FREE WEBCAST on Friday 5th March at 11.00 AM Eastern standard time. 

Posted in : Outsourcing Events

As we discussed during the previous five chapters of this encyclopedic journey to over-analyze our industry, customers are looking beyond the old simplicities of outsourcing to find new and creative ways to find new performance thresholds. 

One of these areas is to exploit BPO opportunities within industry-specific domains, especially where there is opportunity to bundle both BPO and IT services together under a single vendor’s provision to generate more efficient business outcomes. 

To cut to the chase, the industry-specific (vertical) process domains are where some of the newer vendor entrants are infiltrating, almost unnoticed, into the BPO industry.  Most of the strong IT services vendors have been developing BPO niches in specific verticals where they have developed some strong process acumen and client credibility, and have the determination to invest in becoming best-in-class within that industry. 

We’ve seen plenty of examples, for example, in both the financial services and life sciences industries, where some of the offshore IT services vendors have been seeking to expand their footprints, and layer-on BPO processes to their existing IT relationships.  What’s more, some of the IT services shops have begun to realize that BPO is a great lead-in to help themselves to future IT work within clients. 

For example, if you’re already crunching data for clinical trials, why not also manage and develop the supporting applications and infrastructure?  Bottom-line, customers see more opportunity within some domain-specific areas, and our recent “Seeking a New Normal in Outsourcing Delivery” survey points to a continued upswing in BPO demand within verticals:

Industries undergoing major fundamental change are moving aggressively into domain-specific BPO opportunities.   One-in-ten financial services firms, and one-in-five from life sciences, are looking to move into some form of domain-specific BPO this year for the first time.  These are typically areas where there is some immediate labor arbitrage opportunity, based on the availability of processing expertise offshore.  For example, in financial services, we’re seeing a lot of trade settlement transactions and mortgage processing move into BPO scenarios, and in life sciences, many of the data storage and management processes that enable the drug-to-market cycle, are similarly evolving towards this delivery model. 

Why these industries specifically?  Simply put, the financial services sector has gone through such a fundamental change in its very infrastructure, that moving into a BPO environment is no longer the strange, abhorrent procedure and experience it once was.  Similarly, in life sciences, the major drugs companies know their blockbuster drugs models aren’t going to last forever, and are facing toughcompetition from lower-cost generic manufacturers.  Hence, they are similarly exploring new and radical means to improve productivity, source new revenue opportunities and drive-out cost.

The success of existing domain-specific BPO engagements is driving broader scope-increase.  Over half of all the financial services and life sciences firms surveyed, are looking to expand existing BPO engagements this year, and very few are seeking to pull work back onshore.  Firstly, it’s easier, and far cheaper, for operational executives to add scope within a BPO engagement, than hire new staff onshore, when they need more work done.  Secondly, in many cases, these engagements started small, often with only a handful of staff provided by the vendor, so it’s only a natural extension of the engagement to add more staff and additional process scope as the BPO environment develops.  However, this doesn’t necessarily entail massive increased spending overnight, but more a gradual incremental increase in engagement scope.

The Bottom-line:  industry-specificity is clearly a major driver in outsourcing, but the financial pressures on vendors to maintain their profit margins may override its development.  The capability to deliver genuine domain-specific process acumen to clients is quickly becoming a major differentiator in the market.  However, investing in the talent to truly scale these capabilities is expensive, and the margins aren’t as appealing at those currently being displayed by several vendors delivering the easy, operational work.  While some vendors are clearly content with a thin veneer of vertical capability, others are stealthily picking verticals where they feel they can gain an edge over the competition.  But it’s a gradual development, and you have to wonder whether every vendor has the patience and attitude to invest in the depth of talent they need, when they’re more concerned with satisfying Wall Street’s short-term demands.

While financial services and life sciences are both becoming saturated, we’re already seeing many new BPO opportunities arise in industries also going through fundamental change, for example retail, manufacturing, healthcare and media.  Moreover, the move to greater domain-specificity is intrinsically tied to the business utility model of the future, where we are starting to see signs of the convergence of SaaS, Cloud and BPO/ITO models within an engagement structure.  The need for clients and vendors to define, develop and implement holistic end-to-end process solutions is slowly coming to the forefront… and industry-specific BPO is ultimately just one piece in a larger jigsaw.

Posted in : Business Process Outsourcing (BPO), Cloud Computing, Financial Services Sourcing Strategies, Healthcare and Outsourcing, hfs-industry-2010, IT Outsourcing / IT Services, kpo-analytics, SaaS, PaaS, IaaS and BPaaS, Sourcing Best Practises, the-industry-speaks

I've recently had two rather disturbing conversations with friends interviewing for client management positions with outsourcing vendors.  In both cases, they were only being asked to bring in new logos from selling low-cost IT/BPO services, as opposed to working with existing clients to up-sell more consultative, higher business-value offerings. 

Both these chaps are senior-level execs who are highly experienced, well networked, and can engage in C-level conversation.  You would have thought several of the offshore-centric vendors would be clamoring for people of this caliber to raise their level of conversation within their existing accounts, rather than utilize them to go after a handful of remaining logos.  Most of the top-tier vendors have relationships with most of the major enterprise buyers these days, so you would have thought their strategy should be centered on developing deeper footprints with them, as opposed to simply increasing the number of low-end operational engagements (or at least a combination of the two).

While some vendors are talking a big game regarding how they intend to broaden their outsourcing services and consulting work with clients, a lot of their current management clearly don't have a lot of confidence to bring on the talent to help them do just that.  As several vendors seek to raise the bar and become more innovative service partners, they have to be brave and look to bring on the talent that can engage in the right dialog with clients, at senior levels, in order to get there.  While it's important to remain loyal to the client managers who scaled the business, vendors need to find ways to empower them to bring in new talent to deepen their client relationships.  It seems the politics of client protectionism is still rife within outsourcing vendors and could seriously impede their ability to broaden their relationships over the long-term.

2010 will really see the men separating from the boys in this business, and it's those vendors which have the appetite to bring in the talent to raise the bar, and become more innovative with their clients, who will forge ahead.  It seems some vendors are content to stay right where they are and pick off low-value work.  Our next research series will ask customers to rate the caliber of their vendor executives, and whether they are bringing the right level of business acumen to the table to raise performance.

Posted in : Business Process Outsourcing (BPO), IT Outsourcing / IT Services

Trust the Brits to tone-down the hype of the outsourcing sales pitch, with BSkyB broadcasting organization being awarded $313m in damages for a $75m EDS (now part of HP) CRM implementation with didn't quite pass muster.   So is this a major warning shot for vendors over-hyping their capabilities to win deals, or is EDS simply falling foul of failing to satisfy Rupert Murdoch?

While several people are calling this verdict a one-off, I take the view that this sets a dangerous precedent for the outsourcing business, when you consider the sheer volume of complex outsourcing deals that are currently (and soon to be) in play. 

Another one of these verdicts (especially if it's State-side) and we really could see a damaging domino-effect of lawsuits that could change the whole way deals are priced, negotiated and delivered. I even met with a consulting firm the other day, which is making a killing "rescuing" contracts, but in reality is mediating between vendor and customer to annul the broken marriage. 

My fear is that the outsourcing industry is currently operating in a pressure-cooker situation for the following reasons:

1) Outsourcing vendor sales executives are under enormous pressure to hit sales targets this year;

2) Vendors are finding it harder and harder to differentiate themselves and are promising ambitious business benefits based on business outcomes, process transformation and innovation to get their noses in front during sales pursuits;

3) Some vendors are drinking too much of their own Kool-aid right now to realize they may be over-promising;

4) Customers too often fail to realize how challenging their outsourcing experience is going to be for them, and vendure headlong into engagements that are geared for failure.

My mantra is very much centered on the fact that we need to steer the vendor/customer relationship away from punitive contractual clauses, away from the letter of the contract, and focused on collaborative working partnerships.  Customers are ultimately hiring vendors to work with them, and both parties need to find behavioural ways to make their outcome successful.  Responsibility for the business outcomes of outsourcing engagements rests with both parties and the industry cannot afford to have more of these fractured relationships aired in the courtroom. 

Posted in : Uncategorized

Has it occurred to you how unromatic and unsexy outsourcing can make you feel sometimes?  Fed up with those rate cards, those legal wrangles and those penalty clauses, when all you really want is a nice big hug?

Well, the team over here at the Horses wants to make you feel loved this year on Valentine's Day.  So drop us an email and we'll make send you a free copy of our recent "Seeking a New Normal in Outsourcing Delivery" survey findings… whether you're a customer, a vendor, or even a consultant… we love you all equally (well sort of).

Posted in : Absolutely Meaningless Comedy

I took a rather embarrassed peek at the very first post I wrote on the Horses and, having been revived from the camembert fumes of consultant-speak from yesteryear (did we really write like that?), I realized that we were actually onto something back then. 

The only major difference today is that this is no longer a game for the glitzy F100, when clients could demand their vendors take their existing processes, and simply run them at lower cost, with very little change to the actual way they did things.  And if the resulting savings weren’t quite as good as originally promised, and the books weren’t getting closed promptly, the vendor always bore the full brunt of the blame.

The big difference today, is that more clients are tending (though not always) to take more responsibility for the success of their BPO engagement.  If clients take flawed processes and run them offshore,  it’s only going to expose how flawed they were in the first place.   Plus, if you’re put in charge of managing a BPO engagement today,  you’re charged with making it work, not coming up with reasons for failure.  If you can prove you can do this successfully in one firm, many other firms will want to hire you to do it for them too.  I’m trying to convince a good friend of mine to guest here and talk about how he’s managed to oversee two major F&A BPO transitions for two companies, because it’s truly becoming a lucrative – and scarce – expertise for customers today.

Like anything else, we have to learn through trial and error, and F&A BPO is certainly no exception.  Once clients realized they weren’t making anything near the savings they initially thought, it forced them back to the table to work with their vendors to understand why it was the case.  In nearly every instance, it wasn’t the fault of the vendor for supplying inadequate personnel, but more the inability of the client to use the BPO as an opportunity to iron out those flaws, examine some better process flows for getting things done more effectively, and to work more collaboratively with their vendor to implement them.  In the case of F&A BPO, most the work today is relatively transactional, so the argument not to look at more standard ways of doing things doesn’t wash anymore.  How many ways can you “transform” an accounts payable workflow? 

As we discussed in Part I of this series, many customers, especially in the mid-market ($750m-$3000m revs), now view outsourcing an a change agent to go beyond simply driving out cost.  They want to exploit the opportunity to globalize processes and become more effective in the way they do things.  And as the supplier based has matured and started to move into smaller-scale engagements, the impact on customer demand, emerging from the economic crisis, is eye-opening:

Figure 1:  Mid-sized customers are ready to exploit Finance and Accounting BPO

So, what does this mean for the BPO industry?

No turning back for the large customers.  Our study clearly signifies that many large-scale customers have now outsourced some elements of the F&A, with only 7% moving in for the first time in 2010 (see Figure 1).  However, 40% of current F&A BPO customers are going to increase their engagement scope this year.  This is a strong endorsement that once customers take the plunge, they are seeking to enhance their engagements.  And when you drill deeper into the numbers, it’s clear that customers are seeking to add more capability to support management reporting and analytics. 

Once you’re using a BPO to do our work for you, why hire new staff?  Another reason why so many customers are looking to increase scope is the simple fact it’s easier, cheaper and more flexible to have your vendor provide the staff, as opposed to hiring it yourself.  Moreover, the process many firms have to go through these days to have staff requisitions approved is often so prohibitive, that it’s a lot less hassle to contact your outsourcing PMO to ramp up a few FTEs on an engagement.

As the high-end saturates, attention turns to the mid-market.  When you consider that close to a quarter of mid-market customers will seek their first forays into F&A BPO this year, you know where this industry is headed.  Vendors have got much more organized with how they push more standard processes at the mid-tier, and they are becoming more adept at taking on smaller-scale employee transitions and still turning a healthy profit.  While just a couple of years ago, most the top tier service providers would only look at engagements with a minimum of 50 FTEs involved, most will now dabble in must smaller affairs, especially where there is strong future upside to increase scope and cross-sell other services.  Moreover, some customers are bundling F&A BPO with IT systems development work (see Part IV of this series), which allows for vendors to take on smaller-scale BPO engagements as part of a larger contract.

The Bottom-line:  F&A BPO has opened up to the broader market, but the tough transitions for clients really start

With the industry-at-large widely looking at F&A BPO, it’s clear that the main difference today is customers being more prepared to change their existing processes to move onto a more standard delivery model.  Those services vendors that adopt the old “lift and shift” mentality when taking on smaller engagement in this space will quickly fall-short – there simply isn’t the same wiggle-room in the mid-market to throw bodies at the problem. 

The core to success with smaller-scale engagements stems from encouraging customers to standardize much of their workflows onto process maps vendors can understand, and have the vendor staff-up quickly to service them.   The transition for clients will often be painful, but at least the realization is there that they have to do things differently and take more responsibility for their own outcomes.

Posted in : hfs-industry-2010, the-industry-speaks

For once I am stumped for a catchy title, and am opting for some good ol’ jargon-laden gruyère to tee-up Part IV in the series discussing our New Normal in Outsourcing Delivery survey.  At least I’ve avoided the ‘T’ word lately, to grant myself a morsel of poetic license to indulge in a little schmolz… 

But we all love the term “Cloud” (c’mon, you know you do…).  It gives us a nice fluffy visual of ripping out all that complex, clunky computing chaos from our organization, and having some nice services vendor deliver us everything we need for our business… leaving us with simply a screen, a keyboard and lots off additional space in the office to set up that Fussball table… or a Twister mat in the corner… 

Why Cloud Computing is the future of outsourcing delivery 

While I am probably the first cynic to de-odorize the latest cheese fumes that infuse our industry, I have to admit I am rather taken with the whole philosophy of Cloud Computing.  Cloud signifies the coming-together of business process and IT delivery in a fully outsourced model (see earlier post).  Cloud’s not simply about outsourcing the heavy-duty computing grunt – it’s about the delivery of real business services, enabled by the applications needed to support them, powered by the requisite computing and network infrastructure to host and deliver them. 

If Cloud was only about gutting the clunky, expensive and environmentally-unfriendly infrastructure, and having Amazon and co. deliver the computing power, then it’s really just an infrastructure utility offering.  However, if you’re going to have your data and applications hosted externally in the Cloud, do you really need to manage them yourself anymore?  It all depends whether you need to customize the applications yourself because it gives you some sort of competitive advantage.  For example, do you really gain a competitive edge with the way you run your benefits administration, or process your insurance claims, or isn’t it time to find a services vendor that will host the app, the associated infrastructure and even process the transactions for you?   If you feel your edge is customer service, or great internal employee care, then you can keep inhouse staff to take care of that, but what’s the point in managing all the related IT and back-office processing if someone can do it for you? 

To refer back to the fundamental principle of outsourcing, if a third-party services vendor can perform a task for you at lower cost, and to an equal or higher standard, and the costs and risks of transitioning into the outsourced environment are outweighed by the business benefits, then there’s little sense in doing it yourself.  And if that vendor can add genuine consultative value to improve that task and add to your overall business performance, then we’re talking about real business effectiveness, and not simply a cost-arbitrage scenario.  

Cloud’s value will only be reached when vendors and customers are honest with themselves 

The challenge posed to the outsourcing industry to find new performance thresholds, is shared equally by both customers and services vendors: 

1) Customers:  do you know how to take business performance to the next level, and are you having the right conversations with the right services vendors who have the process depth and delivery model to help you determine what that next level is?  Do you have full confidence in the solutions being touted by the vendors with whom you are talking, or are you afraid you’re simply being heavily “sold”?  Have you seen real evidence of their capabilities to deliver real business effectiveness? 

2) Services vendors:  have you determined where you’re truly distinctive in the market and can bring real business performance improvement to your clients beyond simple cost-efficiencies?  Or are you simply following the crowd and adding a thin veneer of industry jargon over your standard capabilities?  And if you choose to ignore the hype and focus on standard service delivery, will you get squeezed out of the market in the future by smarter competitors with deeper process and delivery capability? 

The question is how long it takes for our customers and our services vendors to dig deep and find honest answers to these questions.  We knew back in 1995 that e-commerce was the future of retail, but it really took a decade for it to become widely-adopted.  Cloud will likely take 3-5 years to become fully-formed as a business utility offering, but we can be sure its seeds have been sewn and its roots already taking shape, as our new study essentially reveals: 

Figure 1: The roots of Cloud in an outsourced environment: Two-thirds of  customers now evaluate ITO/BPO solutions as bundled options 

 The roots of Cloud services can be found in today’s blended ITO/BPO engagements 

Just a couple of years’ ago, it would have been unthinkable that so many customers would be entertaining the concept of “hybrid” BPO/ITO solutions, where they would seek to outsource business processes alongside the IT componentry that supports them.  Only a handful of customers had “bundled” both their BPO and supporting apps management with a single provider.  And these tended to be in cases where large customers had opted to “lift and shift” entire shared services operations over to their service provider and it was simply easier (and contractually more attractive) to lump everything over to one vendor to take care of everything.  Today, as Figure 1 illustrates, close to two-thirds of customers are evaluating their outsourcing options looking at both both ITO and BPO in a more blended model and nearly one in five are doing it extensively (that’s a lot of engagements). 

In many engagements today, we are seeing both ITO and BPO feed off each other, where services vendors are getting much more proficient at cobbling together hybrid teams of systems architects and business process analysts to develop broader engagements that tackle end-to-end business process flows.  Many of the more recent BPO engagements we are seeing have been extensions of existing ITO relationships, where the incumbent IT services vendor has brought in BPO teams to layer on business services. 

Being predominantly a BPO person myself, I am getting increasing calls from infrastructure guys trying to find out how “BPO fits in with their Cloud strategies”.  Simply put, BPO provides that layer of flexible personalization to a Cloud/SaaS offering that can make it workable for a business.  I may be somewhat biased towards BPO offerings, but I am going to put a stake in the ground and declare that those service vendors which successfully develop Cloud offerings, that are supported by deep BPO expertise, are going to win out in the long-term.  While today, these “bundled” offerings may not be anything nearly as sophisticated as fully-integrated Cloud solutions, pulling together the business process and supporting IT apps and infrastructure, within an outsourced model, is the first step on road to achieving integrated Cloud services. 

Moreover, services vendors need to decide whether to provide the data center and networking capability themselves, or manage it via partnerships.  Customers care about where their confidential information is housed, and many will prefer it to be within the confines of a trusted service vendor.  Don’t be surprised to see some partnerships and mergers between strong infrastructure services and BPO vendors in the coming months as the move to Cloud services picks up more steam. 

To cut to the chase, Cloud Computing presents the biggest opportunity for today’s services vendors to deliver blended IT/BPO services, where they can not only drive down costs through labor arbitrage and the removal of IT hardware with its associated energy costs (that surmount to 60% of the costs of maintenance), but also to improve business performance through holistic, integrated business solutions.  The ability to demonstrate real industry business process depth to compliment a robust Cloud infrastructure is the only way to do it, and the time to develop that acumen is upon us.  2010 will see separate the men separated from the boys in this market.  Vendors pushing standard labor arbitrage services under a thin veneer of “Cloud marketing” will quickly get cast aside as the table-stakes get a lot tougher. 

Posted in : Business Process Outsourcing (BPO), Cloud Computing, hfs-industry-2010, IT Outsourcing / IT Services, kpo-analytics, SaaS, PaaS, IaaS and BPaaS, Sourcing Best Practises, the-industry-speaks