Showing posts with label outsourcing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label outsourcing. Show all posts

Friday, January 6

Services offshoring increases wage inequality

First the paper:

The effects of offshoring on wages remain a hotly debated issue. This column explores the case of UK firms between 1992 and 2004, recognising that offshoring in one particular industry may also affect labour demand in other industries. It suggests that services and materials offshoring increase the wages of high-skilled workers and decreases the wages of low- and medium-skilled workers, thus contributing to a rising wage inequality.

But this is such a d’oh research. You don't even want to think about offshoring, the idea of competitive advantage will immediately impact every industrial or service value chain. zillions of years back, when we started getting services (whether it be religious services or legal services or journalism etc. etc.) from elsewhere even within the country, this phenomena was noted. At end of the day, services are value adding aspects. Offshoring, outsourcing will obviously drive down the overall cost of services. This will mean that the cost stack will change shape and since the majority of the resource cost is at the bottom in terms of FTE, they will try to reduce that.

But, well, I suppose its good hear this.

Saturday, November 5

outsourcing versus location

Dear Kannu


here are a series of articles on the impact of offshoring / outsourcing on a national economy. Its a fairly light analysis but it is important for you to understand this. As you know, the western economies have been offshoring and outsourcing manufacturing, agriculture and services with gay abandon. Tom Friedman's very light book (which we have), the world is flat is a paean to globalisation, offshoring and outsourcing. On the other hand, this set of articles talks about why western economies are in danger of losing its place in the world while India and China eat their lunch. Michael Porter's competitive advantage tract is also a seminal book about how each country should concentrate on what it does best and import

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2011/08/17/why-amazon-cant-make-a-kindle-in-the-usa/

go down, there are 7 articles in the list.

There are pro's and cons to this argument and here are some thoughts.

  • importing and exporting has been going on since time immemorial. Our ancient civilisations in Greece, Egypt, Mesopotamia, Indus Valley, China, etc. all traded with each other. Here in England, we have evidence of trade going back centuries. So imports and exports always have been with us
  • Technology destroys industries, changes things hugely. Again, history tells us so. The cross over between the bronze age to the iron age was accompanied with huge ruction. The invention of the wheel was traumatic across humankind. When automated looms were introduced, they destroyed a vast textile industry. The telephone, fax, photo copier, digital camera, mobile / smart phones all have disrupted industries. So I am not surprised that availability of technologies such as software configuration management, global co development frameworks for s/w development, collaboration tools, etc. etc.
  • So this is no different, jobs and industries in countries have vanished or changed. Take for example the issue with chicken legs. Americans and Brazilians love chicken breasts but they don't like chicken legs. So what do the American and Brazilian poultry chaps do? they export the legs at a dirt cheap price. In countries like India and many in Africa, they love chicken legs but they don't like chicken breasts. So dirt cheap legs have flooded these countries and has destroyed the poultry industry in many countries. See here for an example: http://www.fin24.com/Finweek/Insight/The-squawking-begins-20110523
  • I went through a similar exercise while working in ABN AMRO. They offshored and outsourced to an amazing extent. But the core damage to this kind of exercise is that you loose your best people specially if you offshore/outsource on the basis of "manage my mess for less". The good chaps go, the new blood doesn't come in and people end up with managers and not the do'ers. So the lesson I took from that experience is that never outsource stuff that is crucial to you. In banking, technology is crucial, its critical, outsourcing that is not good. Offshoring is a different matter but needs different management styles, offshoring if done badly can destroy client and business value as people who are away from the client don't understand what they are doing. Asking for comprehensive documentation is frequently not possible or expensive or suffers from the other issue, too much detail is like a straitjacket, you have defined everything and changes becomes very difficult. Translating what the client/business wants to what the tech guys can deliver becomes more and more difficult.
  • But some of the underlying aspects that the chap mentions in his forbes articles are true, if you start taking out basic elements of the industrial value chain, then you will lose out the industry. Which is one of the reasons why some of the industries have gone off to China.
  • That said, quite a lot of industry is still in USA, Germany, UK, etc. but you have to be smart about it. If you are looking for investment opportunities, think about where the value is being added, so invest in firms like Rolls Royce which make high value added stuff onshore.

Anyway, go have a read, its interesting.

Sunday, March 7

IT Outsourcing actually increases a firm’s IT Spend

I have learnt the hard way that trying to outsource on the basis of “manage my mess for less” is a sure fire way of crashing and burning at worst and being more expensive at best. Anything that is crucial to your firm’s success, you do not outsource. In other words, only outsource which is a commodity and it is easy to switch suppliers such as perhaps storage management, electricity supplies, sewage, catering, cleaning, etc.

Lo and Behold, here’s a paper which provides some more data to back up the idea that outsourcing actually pushes up your costs. The data used is crucial and I quote:

ITOS and IT spending data were obtained from InformationWeek magazine, a weekly print magazine aimed at business technology professionals. Since 1991, InformationWeek has conducted annual surveys to gather current year IT budgets from a variety of the largest US public and private firms and government entities that use IT. It has supplemented this with firms demonstrating innovative use of IT. In 1999, InformationWeek began asking firms what percentage of their IT spending is outsourced. InformationWeek recently provided the additional firm-level data for the 1998 to 2005 time period for this study with strict disclosure restrictions on the authors precluding the sharing of specific firm responses. Data are used from respondents who provided both IT spending and ITOS information for one or more years between 1999 and 2005. Observations for non-public firms were eliminated and merged with corresponding Compustat financial data to calculate the various control variables shown to affect IT budget levels in Kobelsky et al. (2008b). This reduced the overall sample to 1959 firm-year observations for 647 firms in the period 1999 to 2005

The model comprises of variables:

• itb/sls = firm IT budget for each year per InformationWeek data divided by sales for that year (Compustat data12);

• itos dummy = 1 if IT outsourcing percentage per InformationWeek data is positive in Current Year, 0 if not;

• size = log of Current Year sales;

• ind_conc_ratio = four-firm concentration ratio for four-digit SIC;

• uncertainty = standard deviation of earnings before extraordinary items for previous 5 years scaled by sales;

• rel_divers = related diversification (within 2 digit SICs);

• unrel_divers = unrelated diversification (across 2 digit SICs);

• op_ros = operating return on sales, before depreciation (compustat data13/data12);

• debt_ratio = debt ratio (Compustat data9/data6);

• ave_sales_growth = average sales growth for last two years;

• automate = 1 for firms in automate industries, 0 otherwise;

• transform = 1 for firms in transform industries, 0 otherwise;

• hi_tech = 1 if high-tech firm, 0 otherwise;

• lo_tech = 1 if low-tech firm, 0 otherwise.

    • year = 1 for each year 2000-2005, 0 otherwise.

90% of the sample companies partake of outsourcing some or all of their IT activities. The authors find that while on a project level, they might see a reduction in the IT costs and spend, on an aggregate firm level, the IT spend actually goes up. Note that they do control for scope and volume changes by looking at the sales growth. Within two years of outsourcing, the IT cost level of firms who have outsourced is correspondingly higher than firms which have not outsourced. While the authors suggest that this is because of capabilities are enhanced, I have my doubts. One cannot improve IT capabilities in 2 years, it is simply not possible to evolve the business and IT side so quickly that a statistically significant improvement in productivity and quality can be observed. It is, in my opinion, clearly aimed at the fact that the business case is frankly wrongly specified and outsourcing doesnt really help as far as cost control is concerned.

Business cases are rarely expressed in terms of ratio’s, in other words, you will very rarely find that the managers concerned or the IT outsourcing firm are quoting you IT costs as a ratio to say the sales revenue or operating costs or profits of the firm. This is why I am very nervous whenever I hear that outsourcing is happening which is going to drive down costs.

There is a good argument to outsource to improve efficiencies, drive a centre of excellence, to improve productivity, but for cost purposes, the figures do not bear out the benefits.

Tuesday, July 7

Accelerating benefits from off/out sourcing

I was invited to speak at a conference by my friend, Amit Badani, a chap who is brilliantly connected and networked. Anyway, I thought of posting my bullets…

Accelerating the benefits of outsourcing: creating immediate impact and value addition whilst de-risking the outsourcing process

 

1. Acceleration of benefits realisation

Models:

  1. •Lift and dump – as is
  2. •Re-engineer and then migrate
  3. •Migrate and re-engineer
  4. •Re-engineer, migrate and then re-engineer
  5. •Continuous improvement

Constraints:

  1. •Size of the team
  2. •Type of and geographic spread of the function
  3. •Prior history
  4. •Cost constraints
  5. •Time constraints
  6. •Technology dependencies
  7. •Data dependencies
  8. •Service delivery dependencies
  9. •Risk Management
  10. •Quality, churn and availability of offshore resources
  11. •Legal constraints

 

2. Select Process for Immediate Impact

  • Internal complexity of process
  • Demographics of the offshore resource profile
    • –Type
    • –Number
    • –Qualifications
  • Clarity of benefits
    • –Monetary
    • –Quantitative
    • –Qualitative
  • The CIA rating of the process
    • –Confidentiality
    • –Integrity
    • –Availability
  • Links with other services ranging from technology, compliance, legal, operations, front office, etc.
  • Senior management pain points – what’s keeping them awake at night?

 

3. Value Addition over and above the identified benefits

Some processes which can be selected to provide benefits over and beyond normal labour arbitrage benefits.

  1. Automated reconciliation of data
  2. Netting processes
  3. Capital utilisation
  4. ABC analysis of profitability, sales, costs, resource usage, etc.
  5. Process standardisation
  6. Infrastructure standardisation relating to communications such as call centres and help desks, underlying technology infrastructure such as networks, servers, data storage, etc.
  7. Reduction of operational risk
  8. Automated capture of initiating transactions such as replacing paper with web forms or XML type of interactions
  9. Centres of excellence
  10. Process based organisational structure
  11. Revenue leakage
  12. Cost avoidance
  13. Productivity enhancements
  14. Volume absorption
  15. Service Catalogues

Monday, March 2

The 25 Riskiest Outsourcing Hubs in the World

Now this was interesting:

After a year that saw terrorist attacks in Mumbai, kidnapping for profit in Mexico, and the unexpected meltdown of Satyam, one of India's biggest IT services firms, corporate America's cries for the CIO to get things done "better, faster, cheaper" offshore may begin to be drowned out by the more moderate mantra of today's outsourcing customer: "safer, more stable, more secure."

  1. Bogota, Colombia
  2. Bangkok, Thailand
  3. Johannesburg, South Africa
  4. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  5. Kingston, Jamaica
  6. Delhi/Noida/Gurgaon, India
  7. Manila/Cebu/Makita, Philippines
  8. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
  9. Mumbai, India
  10. Jerusalem, Israel
  11. Curitiba, Brazil
  12. Dalian, China
  13. Juarez, Mexico
  14. Brasilia, Brazil
  15. Chandigarh, India
  16. Colombo, Sri Lanka
  17. Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
  18. Quezon City, Philippines
  19. Accra, Ghana
  20. Pune, India
  21. Chennai, India
  22. Hanoi, Vietnam
  23. Bangalore, India
  24. Hyderabad, India
  25. Kolkata, India

I do not have access to the book so I cannot really comment on the methodology involved, but I would be very hesitant to take this at face value, as with everything, ranking of such cities is very judgemental and not to be relied upon to actually base your long term service delivery decisions upon.

Technorati Tags:

Tuesday, July 15

Public service provision by public sector?

There seems to be an inherent assumption that public services such as hospitals, police, roads, infrastructure, garbage collection and so on and so forth have to be provided by the public sector as well, soup to nuts. And this is what bugs the heck out of me.

Recently, at a club for technology, public sector and business executives, a minister came in to talk to us about how the public sector is responding to globalisation. Incidentally, this is a great club, you get to hear some great people and meet even better people. Quite a lot of my knowledge of the public sector provision and senior government workings comes from this wonderful institution, but this time it was a bit of a rambling speech.

What it boiled down to was that globalisation was hitting public services with change on a very dramatic basis while the public sector delivery model was clearly not up to the mark to keep on supporting this. So what he is pushing the public sector to be more risk taking, more entrepreneurial in public service provisioning.

Now, nobody actually objects to public service provision, not if they do not understand what a nation - state is all about. It is about common values, language, culture, geography, history and yes, even public service provision. The fact that there is just one currency note type across the country and everywhere that note is accepted and that it needs public service to make sure that it is fine means that public services are required.

Same with the concept of universal public provision with the post office. In other words, this is a provision which means that the state has to make sure that a letter posted in one part of the country will get to another part of the country, irrespective of the distance travelled, deliveries will be made on regular intervals and so on and so forth. What is actually required is different from country to country. But it is there. Here's a fascinating discussion over what to do with this provision and how to standardise it across Europe. But most importantly is that how do you fund it?

And this is my problem, if the government run public sector does not know how to handle it or provide that public service provision, then instead of trying to get all risk takers and corporatist about it, just put in a regulatory model overseeing the service provision and farm that out to the private sector. Why press the public sector to get excited about this?

Now this is at variance with what is actually happening on the ground. See here for a fascinating story. The private and voluntary sectors are providing a stonking £80 billion of public services, 6% of GDP and I quote:

A government-sponsored study by DeAnne Julius, the economist, revealed on Thursday that those sectors supply a third of public services – everything from National Health Service treatments to bin emptying, IT, back-office functions and RAF pilot training. The market is worth £79bn, employs almost as many people as the NHS and accounts for 6 per cent of gross domestic product, making it a larger industrial sector than pharmaceuticals, automotive or electricity, gas and water. It also has considerable potential for further growth both at home and abroad, the study is expected to conclude.

So the minister and the actual situation on the ground are totally different. And something that I like. Now you might quibble over whether or not the garbage collection is a public service or not but hey, the British public has agreed to do so (and I agree with that) and has outsourced it to private provision while making sure that the service delivery is purchased by government. Neat, no? and as you can see from the article, they are trying to sell this model across the world. Shame the minister did not know about this.

Thursday, January 24

Eastern Europe, FDI and outsourcing

1. Ozlem Onaran and Engelbert Stockhammer, The effect of FDI and foreign trade on wages in the Central and Eastern European Countries in the post-transition era: A sectoral analysis for the manufacturing industry, Structural Change and Economic Dynamics Volume 19, Issue 1, , March 2008, Pages 66-80.
Abstract:
The aim of this paper is to estimate the effect of FDI and trade openness on average sectoral wages in the manufacturing industry in the CEECs in the post-transition era. We utilize a cross-country sector-specific econometric analysis based on one-digit level panel data for manufacturing industry in the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, and Slovenia for the period of 2000-2004. The results suggest that in the short run, productivity has a weak effect on wages, unemployment a strong one, FDI a positive one that is driven mostly by the capital intensive and skilled sectors, and international trade none. In capital-intensive sectors the effect of productivity seems stronger than in labor intensive ones, and the effect of unemployment seems stronger in unskilled sectors then in skilled ones. In the medium-run, the effects of productivity remain modest and that of unemployment stronger. Interestingly, the effect of FDI turns negative. Exports have a negative effect on wages and imports a positive one. However this negative effect can also be an indicator of inverse causality, and should be interpreted cautiously.
Keywords: Openness; European integration; Wage bargaining; CEECs

2. Matija Rojec and Joze P. Damijan, Relocation via foreign direct investment from old to new EU member states: Scale and structural dimension of the process, Structural Change and Economic Dynamics Volume 19, Issue 1, , March 2008, Pages 53-65.
Abstract:
The paper analyzes two issues related to the relocation via FDI from old to new EU member states. The first is the nature and scale of the relocation via FDI, i.e. the existing and future potential for relocations. The second is structural characteristics of the relocation process, i.e. which industries are in the heart of the process. We apply the so-called flying geese model (FGM) framework to analyze the structural trends in inward FDI to the new member states. We claim that it is mostly efficiency-seeking FDI in manufacturing, which is the bearer of the relocation process. The existing stock of efficiency-seeking FDI in the new member states is very small in terms of overall EU-15 outward FDI, but at the same time results in rather high level of foreign penetration in the new member states. These limit the existing and future scale of relocation to the new member states. In terms of the structural aspect of relocation, efficiency-seeking FDI in the new member states is increasingly in medium tech and in lower end segments of high tech industries, while the attractiveness of these countries for low tech labor intensive production is gradually vanishing. Low tech industries will be increasingly relocated outside EU-25.
Keywords: Foreign direct investment (FDI); Relocation process; Low tech industries

3. Martin Falk and Yvonne Wolfmayr, Services and materials outsourcing to low-wage countries and employment: Empirical evidence from EU countries, Structural Change and Economic Dynamics Volume 19, Issue 1, , March 2008, Pages 38-52.

Abstract:
This paper presents further insights into the employment effects of the international outsourcing of services to low-wage countries based on a sample of manufacturing and non-manufacturing industries for five EU countries. For the non-manufacturing sector, our results indicate that while the total of internationally purchased services is not important, purchased services from low-wage countries have a statistically significant but rather small negative impact on employment. In terms of the magnitude of its impact, the results suggest that outsourcing of services to low-wage countries has decreased employment by 0.2 percentage points per year from 1995 to 2000. However, we do not find any negative effect of the change of internationally purchased business services from low-wage countries on the demand for labour, suggesting in turn that other types of purchased services are responsible for the negative employment effects. For the manufacturing sector, while purchased services from low-wage countries is not significant, the outsourcing of intermediate materials to low-wage countries appears to have a relatively small negative impact on the demand for labour. The effect is more pronounced for intermediate materials from China and the East Asian countries than for those from Central and East European countries.
Keywords: International outsourcing of materials and services; Trade in intermediate inputs; Labour demand; Cross-country analysis

4. Wilfried Altzinger and Michael Landesmann, Relocation of production and jobs to Central and Eastern Europe--Who gains and who loses, Structural Change and Economic Dynamics Volume 19, Issue 1, , March 2008, Pages 1-3.

Keywords: Relocation of jobs; Central and Eastern Europe; Foreign direct investment; European integration


Technorati Tags: ,

Tuesday, January 8

10 Outsourcing Predictions for 2008 (and One to Grow On)

A very good article on outsourcing predictions for 2008. No surprises and no quibbles either actually (strange no? lol)




– Stephanie Overby, CIO
December 17, 2007
It's been a dynamic year in the information technology outsourcing industry. The Indian rupee rose to record levels while the U.S. dollar declined against most major currencies, impacting global IT service providers and customers alike. Merger and acquisition activity went into high gear (with the exception of poor Affiliated Computer Services, which tried—and failed— for the second time to go private). The consolidation activity was most notable for the inroads Indian providers made into the U.S. market by buying local providers. And Mumbai-based Tata Consultancy Services announced a $1.2 billion IT service deal with The Nielsen Company, technically the biggest offshore contract to date, hinting at the increasing maturation of the outsourcing market. Buyers of IT services also began to look beyond India to balance their offshore outsourcing portfolio, from Shanghai to São Paulo and more than a few spots in between.
MORE ON Outsourcing
ABC: An Introduction to Outsourcing
Secrets of Offshoring Success
According to the predictions IT outsourcing analysts are making, the headline for 2008 in the IT service market could be "the more things change, the more they stay the same." Experts expect the rupee to continue its rise, keeping global IT service providers and customers on edge. Industry consolidation will continue. The offshore outsourcing market will continue to develop, in India and beyond.
But don't expect everything to remain status quo in 2008. This could be the year call centers shape up, IT service providers figure out a way to provide more of the innovation their clients crave, and outsourcing customers finally get smart. Read on for more trends to keep an eye on in the new year, and add your own forecasts.
1. That Darn Dollar
The India rupee has risen more than 11 percent in value against the U.S. dollar so far this year. In the absence of government intervention, it has nowhere to go but up. The continued decline of the dollar could be difficult for service providers to absorb. During 2007,
Infosys reported a currency impact of 2.8 percent on Q3 profitability, Wipro contemplated six-day workweeks, and EDS and Mphasis considered billing clients in rupees, while customers kept a close watch for other symptoms of currency stress. If the currency gap widens next year, expect Indian outsourcing providers (and multinationals with a big presence on the subcontinent) to start indexing their prices to local salaries, promoting other offshore locations like China and Latin America, delay hiring of new staff, and building currency hedges into contracts, says offshore outsourcing consultancy neoIT.
Oh, and Canada? With the loonie having edged off the greenback, the U.S. neighbor to the north's days as an attractive nearshore outsourcing destination are numbered.
2. Caution: Consolidation Ahead
They're cash-rich. They have high market valuations. And they're hungry for customers. They're the industry's leading providers and you can expect them to gobble up smaller competitors in 2008.
Tier-2 providers like ACS, Perot Systems and others have struggled, unable to attain the 30 percent growth of global providers and lacking the scale of
IBM or EDS. As a result, they will become acquisition targets for larger providers or private equity firms, says neoIT. (Third time may be the charm, ACS!)
U.S.-based providers may be more likely to acquire midsize providers than their offshore brethren. Wipro got attention for its
purchase of U.S.-based infrastructure service provider Infocrossing in 2007, but caution will rule the day for Indian vendors in 2008. They'll be unlikely to purchase a vendor with more than $1 billion in annual revenues, posits neoIT.
Indian IT service providers, however, will continue to set up local delivery service centers in the U.S., Europe and Latin America, says outsourcing adviser EquaTerra. Likewise, American and European service providers will continue expanding their offshore presence to remain price competitive. PA Consulting Group predicts the emergence of more alliances between Western and Indian companies this year, as well.
3. The Politics of Outsourcing
During the 2004 U.S. presidential election, offshoring was a major topic of debate. Outside of the political arena, leading industry providers and their customers avoided big announcements in hopes of deflecting potentially negative publicity. (They weren't always successful. Thanks a lot, Lou Dobbs!)
The 2008 election? Not so much. Offshore outsourcing hasn't made the short list of issues being debated by would-be leaders in 2007 and neoIT doesn't expect it to gain traction. Nonetheless, industry leaders and offshore customers will continue to hold offshore cards close to chest. NeoIT expects large companies to avoid announcing substantial agreements or employee reductions during 2008. Apparently, the phrase "no publicity is bad publicity" still does not apply in the IT service field. The result could be a backlog of unsigned agreements pushing into 2009, says neoIT (which could put customers in the driver's seat during negotiations this year).
4. Passages Beyond India
Let's just establish this fact first: India will remain the market leader in offshore IT services. Period.
However, as the Indian market continues to be impacted by wage inflation, talent attrition and infrastructure strains, clients are looking outside the subcontinent for alternatives, say experts. Some companies with captive centers in Bangalore worry that the costs there could equal what they'd spend at home within five years, says neoIT. Thus, 2008 will be the biggest year to date of expansion of IT service delivery capabilities beyond India. Think Latin America, Central and Eastern Europe, China, and to a lesser degree, the Middle East and Africa.
And while everyone else has been focused on India for the past half a decade, alternative locations across around the world have been quietly investing in the necessary infrastructure (roads, airports, telecommunications, education, etc.) to attract IT and business process services, says neoIT. That's good news for customers who suffered through India's growing pains if, indeed, these emerging locations can leapfrog India on those issues. Of course, none of these new offshore destinations, with the exception of China, has the potential scale of India. But for now, the intent is to supplement India, not replace it.
5. Flight from the Big Cities
In India and beyond, outsourcing hot spots have become oversaturated, so many providers and customers are looking to set up shop elsewhere. Call it the
exodus to the tier-2 cities and expect to see more of it in 2008.
The Indian economy overall is growing at 9 percent a year. A shortage of talent is emerging in the top cities across India, local universities are no longer providing an adequate number of qualified candidates, and recent tier-1 city grads are increasingly wary of starting at the bottom on the graveyard shift because they've got other options, according to neoIT. That's creating movement into smaller, less saturated cities.
And India is not alone. Monterrey, Mexico, for example, is projecting a shortfall of software engineers in 2008. And the same story is occurring in dozens of outsourcing hot spots around the world.
As a result some IT service providers are jumping to second-tier cities from the get-go, in an attempt to sidestep the rush to set up shop in a major metropolis. "You can take some of the best practices from India and look at second-tier cities to set up a large center," says Juan F. Ferrara, chief operating officer for the Americas for India-based IT service provider Genpact. "You're already seeing that in Brazil and Argentina...where [companies] are already in second- and third-tier cities."
6. The New, New Sales Pitch: Transformation
Forget cost cutting and efficiencies. Outsourcers are going to pitch themselves as partners in business transformation. Think you've heard that before?
You have.
But this time they mean it. So say the experts. Customers want more than cost savings. They want access to great talent, vertical expertise, process maturity, flexibility, the great and powerful "value add." IT buyers want an outsourcing provider who can actually enhance the client's revenues and not just their own, says PA Consulting. So if vendors want to keep attracting those clients, they're going to have to pony up.
"All companies are realizing that an IT outsourcing contract is valid for about as long as it takes the ink to dry on the signature page," says Shawn Fields, vice president of managed services at Norcross, Ga.-based Optimus Solutions. "Vendors who understand this and build flexibility into their contractual structure that allows their clients to change services will find themselves distancing their companies from their competitors. Innovation will emerge as a deciding factor for ITO [IT outsourcing] competitors."
Even in areas that are typically cost-centric, like offshore application development and maintenance, the emphasis will shift pure labor arbitrage projects to higher-value work such as process improvement and application portfolio rationalization, according to the Everest Research Institute.
The catch is, of course, you'll have to pay more.
Just like we told you. Forrester notes that rates for consulting services are already on the rise, and warns that IT service buyers can expect to spend more on outsourcing services in 2008 while deciphering which market changes warrant the upcharges and which don't.
7. Remote Infrastructure Management (RIM) Grows Up
Remote infrastructure management (exactly what it sounds like: managing servers, databases, networks and security, and applications from offsite) has been possible for several years. But next year may be the year when buyers really grasp this alternative to infrastructure outsourcing. These asset-light deals—so called because the provider does not take on the assets such as the client's data centers or desktops as part of the contract—will increase as clients get used to the idea that the "command and control" center can be physically removed (and in the case of this largely offshored RIM option very far removed) from the physical data center.
To date, this segment of the outsourcing market has been growing at about 20 percent a year, according to neoIT. The Everest Research Institute predicts the RIM market will pick up to the tune of 60 to 70 percent growth in 2008. Besides increasing comfort levels with the RIM concept, neoIT also suspects that an economic downturn in the U.S. could fuel greater demand for the lower-cost infrastructure outsourcing option. And the transitions can happen on the fly: most data centers and network operating centers (NOCs) are managed with a common set of tools, service providers already possess operational expertise in them, and adaptation to any client-specific needs can happen relatively quickly, says neoIT.
Asset-light deals could be a boon for IT service providers, as the profit margins are better than the traditional infrastructure outsourcing model. However, there is a downside for vendors. An asset-light deal brings in about 70 percent less in total contract value to the provider than the traditional, assets-included deal, says Everest Research Institute. Net result: better profit margins, but less top-line growth. But, experts say it's the way of the future. As a result, traditional infrastructure outsourcing will itself show a decline...but not until 2010, says Everest.
8. Call Center Call to Arms?
Call centers are the most mature segment of the offshore outsourcing industry. And yet...they're not. Clients have become dissatisfied with the sweatshop mentality that leads to turnover levels from 60 to 150 percent a year, says neoIT.
Part of the problem is, of course, the
nature of call center work. One industry provider reports that it loses half its staff during the first 100 days of work, says neoIT, but turnover levels out after that.
Nonetheless, clients are demanding improvement. And providers are beginning to respond, says neoIT, by creating more
"client-centric" solutions, such as unique scripts and efforts to connect employees to the client's corporate culture. NeoIT predicts that call center operators will up the ante in 2008, assessing new locations and allocating personnel to customer-specific solutions centers instead of having massive pools of personnel taking calls for multiple clients.
9. The Death of the Megadeal (Really)
The end of the
outsourcing megadeal—those $1 billion-plus contracts that get the most attention from the media—has been portended for three years now, but this year may be the year those predictions finally come true.
Why?
It's simple. "Few Fortune 100 companies remain that could sign new megacontracts," says Ross Tisnovsky, vice president of IT outsourcing Research at Everest Research Institute.
Of course, big outsourcing deals won't disappear. The focus will be on their renewals and renegotiations, and outsourcers will take the pricing gloves off to woo clients away from their incumbent providers. "We expect buyers will gain pricing benefits due to the pressure suppliers will have to grow signings and contend with increased competition for contract renewals," says Tisnovsky. "We also foresee long-term price decline in the (large enterprise) infrastructure outsourcing market due to an influx of new suppliers and increased competition."
10. Green Clauses Hit Contracts
Although "green" IT service is little more than
marketing hype to date, the trend will take root and become measurable and attainable, says neoIT. While that's debatable, one thing is certain—interest is going to increase among outsourcing customers this year. More than 21 percent of publicly traded companies that outsource have added "green policies and performance" demands to their vendor contracts in 2007, and 94 percent plan on adding such clauses during renegotiations, according to the Brown Wilson Group.
That may light a fire under outsourcing providers to decrease their carbon footprints by creating greener data centers, investing in environmentally friendlier buildings and campuses, and developing eco-friendly processes and policies.
This is an area where smart small to midsize IT service firms will put a stake in the ground. "A smaller player can be audited more easily, can take carbon reduction measures more easily and can be more flexible about changing traditional practices," says U.K.-based outsourcing researcher Mark Kobayashi-Hillary. "It could be a great source of market differentiation." .
11. Outsourcing Buyers Get Smart(er)
In 2008, many outsourcing customers will be entering third and fourth generation outsourcing contracts—either renewing, rebidding or restructuring their deals. And according to PA Consulting, many of those IT organizations have honed their internal capabilities for vendor management and governance over the years. That maturity means they're making smarter decisions, negotiating better terms, demanding better business-driven metrics and getting better at outsourcing lifecycle management. They may also start to create contract terms that shift more of the risk to their IT service vendors, says neoIT.
Of course, there will be plenty of new entrants to the outsourcing market in 2008 who may choose to learn their own outsourcing lessons the hard way...and plenty of challenges in this dynamic market to test the veterans' hard-won skills as well.
© 2007 CXO Media Inc.


All this to be taken with a grain of piquant salt!!!

Saturday, October 13

India outsources outsourcing

A very good and thought provoking article on Indian outsourcing. Some quotes:

The ability of an industry in a developing country such as India to export "managerial and entrepreneurial capital" to wealthier nations is unprecedented, say economists. Arvind Subramanian, of Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, says that India exports 12% of its GDP ($120bn) in foreign direct investment. Professor Subramanian says this is part of India's "anomalous pattern of development". Countries typically specialise in industries such as IT only when their income per head passes $15,000 and they do not export investment until per capita GDP touches $45,000. The comparable figure for India is only $900. "India finds comparative advantage in skills and managerial capital ... how precocious is that?" he wrote this year.

The other strange feature is that the Indian economy, booming at 9% a year, is not driving the growth of India's software firms. Barely 2% of Infosys's income comes from India. Instead Wall Street banks asking for "Spanish language support" or China's booming economy sway investment decisions. Mr Gopalakrishnan says Infosys's "non-English-speaking revenues contribute about a fifth of the total. It is growing fast and we have to build up expertise in languages."

Technorati Tags: ,

Sunday, September 9

multi vendor sourcing, a short comment

I saw this note on Linked in:

Multi-sourcing for a large application

I have worked with outsourced/Captive models for some years now. I am entering uncharted waters with Multi-sourcing. Both vendors are outsourced partners. I have read literature about multi-sourcing at an organizational level and it's advantages.

My multi-sourcing is in the context of the same application. Current team size is about 50 resources. Anyone out there with experience of this situation. I would like to hear about your success/pain-points and hope to learn from them.


And I dashed off some quick thoughts here, they arent edited or cleaned up, but you will get the idea! :)

Its a pain, but it is worth it. You will see an increase in management time, and be ready to have a very good PMO structure. Invest in some very good change management folks. Let your bosses know that some structural investments in MIS, request processing etc. need to be made, dont let your firm get tied up to the vendor provided MIS, request processing, reporting aspec. If you do, then you lose the benefit of multi-sourcing and makes it difficult to switch. Every change in contract, review and add another condition, how difficult would it be to switch to another vendor and who will pay for that?

Make sure everything is extremely transparent, dont let the vendors browbeat you about commercial confidence, the rates bit aside, there is nothing confidential. Make sure all the vendors are meeting you and your PMO team on a daily/weekly basis, following the model "get all the thieves around one table".

Build in innovation frameworks and have a competition between vendors, that will allow you to reduce (but not avoid) obselesence...

best of luck!




All this to be taken with a grain of piquant salt!!!

Sunday, September 2

E-invoicing network to save EUR243 billion in EU supply chain costs

Now see this, a classic example of the place where a government CAN step in and drive region/country/continent wide efficiency change. Here is the main report and below you can see the exec summary. This kind of industry wide standardisation of protocols and communication frameworks is a huge saving for companies (mind you, it is a bit challenging for the SME sector), but is also hugely beneficial for all the intermediaries in standard business such as insurance firms, transport people, customs and banks.

Good step, this. The amount of damage and loss due to non-standardised invoicing is huge. I know it from my own experience. For some reason, I had to delve deep into the invoicing processes, documents and procedures for a huge chunk of change that we spend. And it is so inefficient that i cannot believe that nobody else has thought about this before, something akin to how SWIFT/FIX works. But it is extra-ordinarily difficult for a single firm to push this so a governmental approach is great for this.

Also, I would strongly suggest that a country like India should join into this initiative. Why? because a significant chunk of processing already takes place in India and if it can make sure that the domestic Indian firms follow this process, then great, the Indians not only make a jump in following the standard, but also to influence the standard way earlier.

Remember how MiFID is soon going to be come the international standard for investment advice and financial institutions? Similarly, this will allow India to show how great it is in following business process/documentation standards.

All this to be taken with a grain of piquant salt!!!


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
European electronic invoicing (EEI) is set to be a fundamental enabler in contributing to European competitiveness. Realising electronic invoicing could significantly reduce supply chain costs by 243 billion EUR across Europe4, as well as helping to streamline business processes and help drive innovation.

At present EEI penetration and adoption in Europe is limited. Technical complexity, legal uncertainty and operational constraints hamper a common European approach. The impact on efficiency should not be underestimated.

As Denmark has demonstrated the introduction of e-Invoicing in the Public Sector alone has saved an estimated 100-134 million EUR per annum. Without a common European Framework for EEI the risk is that
the current fragmented, complex and costly situation concerning European e-Invoicing will continue.

A policy level cross-European activity on e-Invoicing is needed to help counter act current fragmentation, to tackle barriers to EEI and establish the basis for innovative market driven solutions. The formation of a EEI Steering Committee under the EC will do exactly that. In combining knowledge and expertise to harmonise approaches it should be possible to establish an umbrella EEI Framework. This Framework would setout a conceptual structure that supports the provision of the e-Invoicing services in an open and
interoperable manner across Europe.

This report sets out the key barriers inhibiting the adoption of EEI. Only via the participation of policy makers and experts in the EEI Steering Committee, to be formed later this year, will these be successfully addressed.

Monday, August 13

Does outsourcing really increase time to market?

I am seeing a measure of faith in outsourcing being a way to increase the time to market for new products. I have to admit that I do not believe that that is the case on a generic basis. Frankly, in the greater scheme of things, given the amount of exclusions that one has to make to that statement, it is akin to saying, believe in God and life will be better. Erm, yes, that does work, but you need to work hard, you need to have some money, some companionship, no floods, etc. etc.

Let us see the factors which will influence the speed to market:
  1. product complexity, more complex the product, less is the speed to market.
  2. number of products per "manager unit", higher the number, less is the speed to market
  3. geographic coverage of clients, greater the coverage, less is the speed to market
  4. type of customer, institutional clients are much more difficult to sell to, so speed to market is lower there.
  5. regulatory interplay, if there is any regulatory or governmental interplay, then you can basically wave goodbye to fast time to market.
  6. process complexity, if process being outsourced is complex (with lots of feedback and approval loops) means slower time to market
  7. number of discreet processes, more the number of processes, lesser is the time to market.
  8. where is the outsourced process being handled? if the outsourced location is difference culturally, linguistically, time zone, country wise, etc. etc, then speed to market is slow
  9. are there more than 1 outsourced partners? (repeat question on each partner), quite a lot of value chains have multiple outsourced partners, and if that happens, then the speed to market is inversely proportional to the cube of the number of outsourced partners.
etc. etc.

Then comes the issue around the new product itself
  1. what is the new product? is it identical to the previous products in terms of product characteristics and client demographics. If not, then you have a challenge.
  2. if the product is not identical, what is the difference which will impact your outsourced partner?
  3. what is the frequency of the new products?
  4. does your outsourcing contract cover new products? what has been the previous experience?
But personally speaking, until and unless your product is very simple, process chain being simple and small, localised, with very good management, vendor management etc. etc. speed to market is not a factor for pushing outsourcing, I am afraid.

I am a great believer in kicking the tires of business cases. One of the best ways of doing so, specially on a multi-year business case, is to tie the proposer's and the steering committee's annual remuneration/bonus to the delivery of the business benefits. Outsourcing can work but it has to be so heavily managed that if you miss something, then it will seriously impact your business. And the worst bit is, it wont sink your business, it simply will mean that it will slow down your business. Far too often, outsourcing is done on the basis of "manage my mess for less", and people forget that less cost means less service as well.

One way of remembering this is to think about medical services, how would you feel if your doctor has outsourced his surgical practice to a veterinary doctor in Siberia?. Speed to market can be increased by adding more veterinary doctors, but will that necessarily help the business? This is a silly analogy, but I hope you get the idea! :)

All this to be taken with a grain of piquant salt!!!

Thursday, August 9

Nokia to outsource chip development

So Nokia is also going down the Nike way? It is indeed curious, how fast life is changing and our industrial landscape is getting modified. Companies such as Nike and Nokia, both global brands with product strategies which are rapidly going global rather than regional have clearly shown that it makes more sense for them to concentrate on the customer side of the market and product design rather than the product manufacturer.

In the same fashion, financial insitutions are also outsourcing their research, their processing, their information technology, and so on and so forth. What will be left will be a very high value add, very thin layer of client interaction managers responsible for client relationship management and revenue generation. Then you will have a circle of compliance, legal and administration and finally a set of vendor / partner relationship managers who will make sure that the downstream process and value chain is working in a tickety boo fashion. Bits are already in place but I would say that the full evolution has about 3 years still to run and we will soon see (post full MiFID impact in 2009), of a Nike/Nokia in the financial markets.

Nokia to outsource chip development

By David Ibison in Stockholm and Maija Palmer in London

Published: August 8 2007 19:09 Last updated: August 8 2007 22:58

Nokia, the world’s largest maker of mobile phones, is to stop in-house development of semiconductors for most of its mobile phones and outsource the business to third parties.

The Finland-based company said the move would free an undisclosed sum for research into more complex chips needed for its advanced multimedia, internet-enabled handsets.

Nokia will use four chipset suppliers – Texas Instruments, Broadcom, Infineon Technologies and STMicroelectronics. Chipsets are combinations of integrated circuits that operate together.

The Finnish company also said it would licence coveted modem technology for the first time, so generating additional revenue.

The decision to broaden its range of chipset suppliers and licence proprietary technology for high-speed WCDMA/HSDPA mobile phone chips will be an opportunity for chip companies such as STMicroelectronics and Broadcom to enter a new market.

Only Nokia, Ericsson Mobile Platforms and Qualcomm are believed to have the technology to make cost-effective WCDMA/HSDPA chips.

“We will have more players in the industry who will be total solution providers,” said Niklas Savander, Nokia’s executive vice-president for technology platforms.

On Wednesday, Nokia shares closed 4 per cent ahead at €22.48 in Helsinki. Broadcom rose 9.8 per cent to $35.98 by the close in New York and STMicroelectronics shares were little changed at $16.91. Infineon rose 2.7 per cent to €11.36.

However, Texas Instruments fell 0.3 per cent to $33.73 and Qualcomm slipped 0.3 per cent to $40.15.

Richard Windsor, an analyst at Nomura, said: “This is the most negative news for Qualcomm, which makes excellent margins in WCDMA chipsets.”

He added that the company will now face much greater competition and pricing pressure in the long-term.”

Nokia’s move to broaden its range of chip suppliers is also negative for Texas Instruments, which has been Nokia’s sole supplier of 3G and Edge semiconductors but will now have to compete with others.

Nokia plans to transfer 200 staff to STMicro.

Wednesday, August 8

Offshoring and Outsourcing, we have moved on from a pure cost basis

I have talked about offshoring and outsourcing before many times on this blog (see the keyword search on offshoring or here) and how simply looking at this from a cost perspective is wrong, medieval and went out with the dinosaurs. This article, from Bank Systems and Technology, provides much more detail on this phenomena that is rapidly evolving. This article looks at a particular part of a financial institution, namely Finance and Accounting insourcing to their customers. Turnaround is fair play and the idea that you do what you do best is gaining currency. So the Indian vendors such as TCS, WIPRO, Infosys pick up IT while the western financial institutions go after the processing elements.


All this to be taken with a grain of piquant salt!!!

The Toll of a New Machine

As somebody once said (I think it was GB Shaw or GK Chesterson but not sure), "I frequently quote myself, it adds spice to my conversation". So quoting Herr Professor Dr. Bhaskar Dasgupta, "the fate of all intermediaries is to be intermediated out". So whether you are looking at a grocer, financial institution, hair dresser, teacher, and very many other providers of service, their roles will slowly disappear. The knife grinder has disappeared, the potter is slowly vanishing, the teller in a bank branch is slowly becoming rare, the last time I visited a hair dresser was 6 years back (no, that doesnt mean that I am bald, that just means that I have a home trimmer which i use on me and my son. Mind you, i have been married 15 years so the length and shape of my crowning glory is not that important but my son is discovering girls and he will soon abandon Daddy''s hair dressing salon and go get a haircut which will be expensive, weirdly coloured and misshapen but cool. But that still does not detract from my point).

Self service devices are like that. Here's a nice story of how even fast food is now being dispensed by automatic self service machines. We already have those, in my office, we have a circular machine which dispenses yogurt, sandwiches, special drinks, pies and few other manky things that I would only use if it was snowing outside, there was shoot at sight orders and I was feeling hungry. But the fact remains that if I wished, i do not need to go outside the office and food can be dispensed to me in a safe, hygienic manner when i want it. All because of self service devices. Think about it, this is nothing but outsourcing by the firm. You go to a restaurant in the first place because you want to outsource your kitchen. You go to a fast food restaurant because of the "fast" bit, you have outsourced time from the expensive restaurant to the greasy spoon.

Now McDonalds have outsourced even that function further by removing the human interaction element. So you decide what you want, punch in the number, and out pops the food. As long as you are not looking at material transport, this is offshoring. Ah!, but material transport is also available in the
form of order-in food. Pick up a phone and call in your order or type in your order (which can well be taken or managed out from Vietnam) and somebody in a central location near your city will deliver a piping hot
piece of cow meat between two pieces of baked carbohydrates with some limp veggies and organic pastes in the middle. But you lose out on the "going out and dining experience" if you eat in. Then again, you can do the same by having a drive by meal pickup and eat your burger in your car while parked in the parking lot. What has happened? well, the various intermediaries (spouse, cook, chef, cashier, security guard, cleaner, etc. etc. have all been outsourced, offshored)

As the article mentions, the usage of technology is what is driving the productivity gains for the USA. In other words, more efficient and tight and lower cost the process value chain, the more output one human can do. And this is one of the reasons why the USA is such a prodigious economic giant and growing rapidly. So what will we see going forward? Well, let me give you some ideas here. A walk in closet where you can go in, get a medical check, and then a tube pokes into your tummy and a liposuction is done. Whoosh. Finished. How about security checks at airports being carried out from a central function? A central desk in Milton Keynes validating every passenger with an iris scan or other biometrics for airport or train travel and only calling in somebody to check if the data doesnt match, if a warning is flashed up or the equipment fails. No security checks (this is already in place in Heathrow, Amsterdam and some other places in a limited fashion). How about using your biometric login device to your home computer to be expanded to provide automatic vital signs (blood pressure, blood test, chemical analysis, etc. etc.) information to your GP's system and the
central GP function then picking up the phone and dealing with your medication over the phone/internet? All the human interactions are being reduced, 1 doctor able to handle more patients, 1 security guard managing to handle more passengers, etc. etc.

In case of financial institutions, financial products need to turn into self service devices which are activated by events and handled appropriately. If the financial records show that you are going to hit 16, then an automated family plan kicks in and a range of options is presented to the family banker (not the individual banker as I expect my child to live with me for far longer, he wont be able to afford his education or
flat for a long time), and the family banker calls me up to arrange for a meeting. A company's cash outflow can be modelled and based upon an x% of fixed events (wage outgoings, regular invoice payments, regular utilities payments, taxes, etc. etc.), you can provide automated cash balances, reports, credit risk, and so on and so forth. How about an automated stock price tracker tied into the stock option manager tied into a private banking product suite tied into the executive's son's university education funding tied into death duties tax planning? Life is getting complicated, and what customers want is the complication to be taken away and replaced by simplicity and less worry. To borrow a web 2.0 term, its a mash-up time for financial products.

But I want to stress the last 4 points from this fascinating article on self service devices:

Automate to simplify, not to be cute.
Bite off less than you can chew.
Use automation to improve the task at hand.
Remember, automation doesn't mean standardization.

Very important design principles. Happy reading and look forward to the just right glass of beer on tap! :)





The Toll of a New Machine
if (document.layers) {document.write(''); document.close();}
coreAdsCreate('wnsz_20', 'loc', '100');
By Charles FishmanProvided by FastCompany.com
The intersection of Interstate 4 and Florida's Highway 27 is a well-known spot, the point where the clutter of Orlando's theme parks exhausts itself and the old Florida of citrus groves and sandy ridges picks up.
There is a McDonald's at this intersection, and in a booth on a recent Friday, Don Vaughn is having lunch with his daughter-in-law and granddaughter. They've driven 12 miles to this McDonald's, drawn by the power of a dawning technology.
"It's fantastic," says Vaughn, a local. "I love it. It's the new age."
"We tell [the machine] the way we want it," says Chrystal, Vaughn's daughter-in-law, "and we know it's done right." Done right, in Chrystal's case, means no onions.
The liberating new-age technology in use right there inside the McDonald's--a pair of kiosks bolted to the floor near the front counter--allows customers to use a touch screen to order their Big Macs and Happy Meals exactly the way they want them. Vaughn, Chrystal, and Heather drove to this particular McDonald's--as they do regularly--just to order their food on the touch screens themselves.
In the tumult of lunchtime at a busy McDonald's, and in the tumult of the U.S. economy, the slim, silver machines would be easy to overlook, though each is as tall as a person and sports a colorful screen. There are just 85 of them, installed in 48 franchised restaurants, all without the help of McDonald's itself.
The company quietly putting self-ordering computers in McDonald's is Kinetics Inc., whose self-service technology has already swept through the airline industry, with results that have amazed executives and customers alike. Every day, hundreds of thousands of airline customers check themselves in, cheerfully doing work that used to be done by thousands of airline ticket agents. Kinetics' self-service vision could have the same impact on the fast-food business as it has had on airlines--and fast food and airlines are just the start. Besides checking ourselves in for flights at the airport, we may soon be checking out rental cars at our destinations without talking to anyone, and then checking into hotels at a lobby kiosk that, first, displays a diagram of all the rooms available and then, after we choose one, pops out a room key.
If you look at the dozens of Kinetics self-service machines lined up at Delta's terminal in Atlanta, or Northwest's in Minneapolis, or Continental's in Houston, you'll begin to understand the role they're already having in a powerful economic trend: the ability of U.S. businesses to do more and more with the same, or fewer, workers. Labor productivity grew at an astounding annual rate of 9.5% during the third quarter of last year, the largest quarterly leap since 1983. That's an unsustainable pace (and it dropped to a more typical 2.6% in the fourth quarter), but it is part of a steady trend that has productivity increasing in the past two years at more than twice the historical pace. Crudely put, the numbers mean the work that required 100 people in 2000 requires just 89 people today.
Kinetics and its kiosks are capitalizing on this productivity trend and driving it. The company, which makes about two-thirds of the nation's airport self-check-in machines, is an all-but-unknown Lake Mary, Florida, outfit. Although Kinetics does everything itself--from designing and manufacturing its own machines, to servicing them in the field--it is tiny. Last year, tens of millions of airline customers checked themselves in on machines that were designed, produced, and supported by just 67 employees.
But the impact of Kinetics and its kiosks isn't as obvious or as scary as the sensationalist headline those numbers might suggest--"67-Person Company Puts Thousands of Airline Employees Out of Work!" True, airlines have been shedding jobs in the past few years, but that's largely due to industry woes that have nothing to do with automation. And it's unlikely that these machines will mean the end of ticket agents, rental-car clerks, or the front-desk staff at hotels. Instead, those jobs will change--and eventually, there may be more of them, not fewer, because of self-service. That seems counterintuitive, but employment has actually grown in other service businesses that have been automated. At the dawn of the self-service banking age in 1985, for example, the United States had 60,000 automated teller machines and 485,000 bank tellers. In 2002, the United States had 352,000 ATMs--and 527,000 bank tellers. ATMs notwithstanding, banks do a lot more than they used to and have a lot more branches than they used to.
Instead, the story of Kinetics offers a glimpse of the continued power of computers, automation, and the Internet to transform our lives as both workers and consumers--a power that, far from having plateaued, is only just getting started. Information technology hasn't touched lots of things that are just waiting to be automated, computerized, or kiosked. That they will be automated seems inevitable. But the results aren't so clear. Will all these smart machines create more jobs and free workers to tackle more rewarding, more complex tasks? Or will we gradually see the disappearance of a whole category of frontline workers? Will kiosks leave customers feeling well cared for and more closely linked to the businesses that use them, or frustrated and trapped in a real-world version of voice-mail hell? The answers have a lot more to do with how a company uses such machines than with the technology itself.
Kinetics, which delivered its first machines to Alaska Airlines in 1996, has transformed a kludgy, aggravating part of the air-travel experience that has long resisted improvement. In December, 70.3% of Northwest Airlines' passengers checked themselves in for their flights, the majority using Kinetics' kiosks, the rest online, a function made possible by Kinetics' software. That's up from 50% in May and 20% in 2001.
Entering an arena dominated by muscular global players such as NCR, Diebold, Siemens, and IBM, Kinetics has consistently beaten the giants in head-to-head competition for business. Kinetics' technology is running not just the self-check-in machines of Alaska, Continental, Delta, and Northwest, but also AirTran, Hawaiian, and Frontier. In March, Kinetics won the business of United Airlines, which had been using IBM. United plans to begin installing Kinetics' machines immediately. The company's software makes possible the newer Internet check-in process for many airlines; it runs the ticket-issuing system for Orbitz; and, along with its hardware, is spreading to gates at many airports to speed boarding.
Unlike many information-age companies, there is nothing virtual about Kinetics. The company takes pride in doing every-thing: Employees write the software, design the hardware, and staff a storefront factory in Lake Mary. A field group of 12 technicians keeps the airport kiosks running at what Continental says is 99.5% reliability. And CEO, president, and founder David Melnik says privately held Kinetics is profitable and has been so almost since its first contract. "Companies multiples of our size don't have the impact on culture and business that we do," he says. "That's a pretty radical thing. I think it's pretty cool."
At Continental Airlines, 66% of U.S. passengers check themselves in at Kinetics kiosks. "We never thought it would go above 25%," says Scott O'Leary, Continental's senior manager in charge of airport self-service for passengers. As for the lines that used to bedevil even business travelers, says O'Leary, "We are essentially queueless." And once customers are standing at a kiosk, he says, "the mean check-in time is 66 seconds. For customers with no bags, it's 30 seconds." At big airports, your plane is more likely to stand in line to take off than you are to check in.
Self-service has begun to pop up in so many places--photo-processing kiosks in drugstores, self-testing kiosks to renew driver's licenses, automated toll payment--that the technology has quickly gone from novel to unremarkable. But self-service often feels like the opposite of service, or it feels as if the customer has been made an involuntary, unpaid worker. Whatever the efficiency of pumping your own gas, doing so doesn't make the experience of filling your tank any better; depending on the weather, doing it yourself is often downright unpleasant.
But here's something every airline passenger knows: Kinetics' machines actually improve the task they automate. They don't just make the experience quicker, they make it better. Jeffrey Lammers, who used to design nuclear weapons and until February was Kinetics' head of hardware engineering, says, "You won't find anyone who flies a lot who won't just hug these machines."
The self-service kiosk shows you a seat map of the plane you're boarding--you see where your seat is, you see what seats are still open, and you're free to pick one you like better. And only you know that after your first choice--aisle, far forward, but not bulkhead--and your second choice--window, far forward, but not bulkhead--your third choice is any row where there's an empty middle seat. Except not farther back than row 20, because you don't want to wait 15 minutes to get off the plane. And then there's your fourth, fifth, and sixth choice. No ticket agent has the patience to walk through this with any passenger, let alone every passenger. The kiosk handles it in seconds. And it can be programmed to operate in 12 languages. "It's the end of the 'veil of secrecy' at check-in," says Continental's O'Leary. "It's a quick, informative check-in, instead of standing in line for customer service." When this kind of automation is done right, Kinetics' CEO Melnik says, "People don't perceive it as technology, they perceive it as an enabler in their life."
Melnik, 39, is one of those smart, restless souls who stumble into entrepreneurship because it makes so much more sense than working for companies that are too big, too slow, and too hesitant. A college dropout whose real passion is marine biology (for a while, he performed as "Flipper Boy," cavorting with dolphins at the Miami Seaquarium), he started the company that became Kinetics in 1988 after working as a sales agent for a Tampa travel agency. The experience of selling and delivering airline tickets to small businesses got him wondering why those tickets couldn't be handled more like money in ATMs and less like a special product that had to be "produced" at a travel agency. "I got interested in this, and it hooked me," he says.
Melnik worked with NCR on several projects, including plans to bring an early kiosk to the Trump Shuttle in New York's LaGuardia Airport. He worked with Siemens on a project for Lufthansa. He also worked as a waiter, accepted startup funding from his mother-in-law, and lived for several years off the teacher's salary of his wife, Cindy. He can write software, and he can "bend metal" to make kiosks.
It took nearly eight years of persistence for the technology, the airline mind-set, and the customers to catch up with Melnik's vision. He sold Alaska Airlines on those first machines, called Orcas, using a cardboard mock-up.
How this kind of simple but powerful self-service technology ripples through businesses and the economy always looks easier to predict than it is. The first passenger elevator in the world, created by Elisha Otis, was installed in a New York department store in 1857; it wasn't until 1950--nearly a century later--that the Otis Elevator Co. came up with the technology for self-service elevators. In 1955, 500,000 people in the United States were working as elevator operators, jobs that were almost all gone less than 10 years later.
But as it turns out, the impact of even the most pervasive self-service, on productivity and on customers, is easy to misinterpret. Kinetics' machines improve the productivity of airline ticket agents--but not by allowing the ticket agents to do more work, more quickly. They allow the ticket agents to preside over more work being done--in this case, by the customers. And it may be this sort of productivity improvement that helps make possible the "jobless recovery," in which companies manage to grow without hiring new employees or without recalling those who have been laid off.
Indeed, when you use a self-check-in machine, you can't help but wonder about the thousands of airline employees who have lost their jobs since September 11. Last year, Northwest flew 12% fewer passengers than in 2000. But it did so with 25% fewer employees. If Delta had been staffed in 2003 the way it was in 2000, it would have employed 2,500 more people. Since the end of 2000, Kinetics' three biggest customers--Delta, Northwest, and Continental--have shed some 37,000 employees, enough people to run all of Northwest today.
Of course, the airlines are a complicated case--their business was out of whack before the September 11 attacks, and the attacks hit the airline business harder than any other. But even where the impact of such machines looks obvious, labor tends to squirt around the economy in unpredictable, even counterintuitive, ways. Although Continental now has 780 kiosks in 130 airports, with the machines handling the vast majority of passengers, the airline has reduced the number of airport agents by only 4% since September 11.
Melnik likes to say that each Kinetics self-check-in machine, at an initial cost of between $6,000 and $10,000, takes the place of two-and-a-half ticket agents, because the machine is available (at least) from 6 a.m. to 9 p.m., seven days a week--or about the number of hours that many agents would work. But that both understates and overstates the machines' impact.
Kinetics has installed 3,800 self-check-in machines for airlines--but 9,500 ticket agents have not lost their jobs. At the same time, at airports in Atlanta and Houston, where there are banks of dozens of check-in machines, the kiosks handle surges of passengers easily and quickly. No airline can have 50 or 100 ticket agents waiting to take bags and issue boarding passes; but many airlines have that many check-in terminals in individual airports.
At Continental, O'Leary acknowledges that the airline is using Kinetics' technology to grow traffic without adding staff and costs. "It's absolutely true that before self-service, we were adding staff and [airport] real estate like you wouldn't believe," he says. "Once you have self-service deployed, you can absolutely contain those costs. But we still argue we are getting better productivity and service out of our existing agents."
O'Leary is sensitive to the perception--from both staff and passengers--that Kinetics' kiosks take jobs. But he argues that they're really just eliminating tedious, repetitive work and freeing agents to deliver real customer service to passengers who don't like the machines, or have more complicated issues. "My position has evolved," he says. "Watching anyone do clerical transactions over and over again just looks like wasted time. Having [a ticket agent] punch the same combination of 122 keys over and over and over again--that's just wasted effort in the 21st century. It's not the society I think of as productive."
Here's how persuasive the self-service machines were to Gary and Kim Moulton, who own the McDonald's at the intersection of Interstate 4 and Highway 27 in central Florida, and five more McDonald's in that area. The day in early 2002 when the very first machine was delivered and hooked up, the Moultons ordered nine more. "I said, 'Tell us when you can install the rest of them,' " says Gary.
For the Moultons, the self-service ordering machines have been one surprise after another. "The first surprise was, the first day it went in, customers said to us, 'It's not just fast, it's not just accurate--this is fun!' " says Kim. One college girl was so amazed by the machines, she ran up and hugged Gary. "She said, 'Thank you, this is the greatest,' " he recalls, still amazed at the reaction. (The Moultons' favorite customer response comes at their highway store, from tourists: "We don't have these up north.")
The Moultons expected the kiosks to handle 25%, maybe 30% of their volume; the average across all six stores after two years is 45%, and at a couple of them, more than 50% of customers order themselves. People routinely stand in line for the kiosks, even when the counter is clear, with people ready to take orders.
These machines are the work of Todd Liebman, who started a company called Quick Kiosk, which he sold to Kinetics last year. Liebman is now head of a Kinetics division targeting "quick service" restaurants. Fast-food machines are both simpler and more complicated than the airline machines. They are simpler because they don't have to constantly and quickly access vital, secure databases such as passenger manifests. They are more complicated because even a McDonald's lunch menu offers many more choices than an airplane seat map. You can specify the elements of your burger--cheese, lettuce, ketchup, mayonnaise--in a range of choices from none to extra. Everything from breakfast to dessert has a picture.
The machines have actually increased the Moultons' labor costs--in two ways. Volume overall is up so much that they have had to add kitchen staff to make more food. And the Moultons have added "kiosk representatives" to greet customers and help them with the machines. "We've basically had to add two people per store," says Gary. "One in the kitchen, one for the kiosks, and we haven't been able to take anyone off the front counters." But if labor costs have gone up, the Moultons' cost of labor as a percentage of sales has dropped. "We've outpaced the labor costs with the increase in sales," says Gary.
That's the double-reverse flip of the productivity improvement: The kiosks make everyone at the Moultons' restaurants so much more efficient--customers, kitchen staff, counter staff (who still take all cash payments and deliver everyone's food)--that the Moultons have used the machines to increase their payroll. During the breakfast and lunch rushes, the kiosks give the Moultons all kinds of headroom to keep customers flowing and lines down.
In fact, unlike the airport, where you've already picked your airline before you face check-in lines, the kiosks in a McDonald's can quickly increase business. One of the key factors in picking a fast-food lunch spot is the wait. The front counter is a choke point. "I had a customer come up to me in one of our city stores recently," says Gary. "She said, 'I love these kiosks, but it sure is hurting your business, because there are no lines at lunch anymore!' "
The final surprise is that customers who use the kiosks spend more money. Because the Moultons' volumes are so high, and have remained that way for so long, they know this is not some quirk of self-selection. On average, customers who use the machines spend $1 more per check. "With the size of our typical order, that's a 30% increase," says Gary. "That's huge."
The Moultons have a couple of ideas to explain why kiosk checks are bigger. The color kiosk screens are a great sales tool--you can put the new McDonald's premium salads right in the center: 20% of customers who initially don't order a drink and are offered one (with a picture) buy it. Then there's the embarrassment factor. A substantial customer might be reluctant to upsize the fries, or order two Big Macs, or an extra apple pie, from a counter person. The kiosk can't snicker, even to itself.
In some ways, the job issues are less stark at fast-food restaurants than at airline ticket counters. "You are always going to need a substantial number of people to run a McDonald's," says Liebman. "You aren't going to automate the cooking of the food, you aren't going to automate the delivery of the food, not any time soon." The McDonald's kiosks take payment by credit card; for cash, in terms of speed, it's still much quicker to have a customer step to the counter and hand over money to a person than feed bills and coins into a machine. And although it's easy to lament the steady erosion of personal contact in commerce, McDonald's is rarely the source of richly satisfying service encounters.
Kinetics CEO Melnik has been working on travel kiosks for more than 10 years and sees the kiosk business as a graveyard of silly ideas. "We are an industry built on failures," he says. "People are enamored with kiosks. There are kiosks all over the place that no one uses: kiosks at the mall for shopping, kiosks for community information, kiosks for job listings."
Kinetics has been successful, Melnik says, because it isn't trying to trick-up an ordinary experience with a "multimedia experience." "We focus on transactions that already exist," he says, and he wants machines that make those transactions steadily simpler. "I think that 10 years from now, serving yourself will be the default, versus now, where it's the exception," he says.
And when you raise your eyes from the airline business--where Kinetics has had a dramatic impact while selling 1,341 machines in 2003, manufacturing an average of just 5 a day--the market size, and the potential for transformation, is stunning. Kinetics is already talking to rental-car, cruise-ship, movie-theater, and hotel companies. The fast-food business alone could keep Kinetics busy for years. The top five fast-food chains by revenue--McDonald's, Burger King, Wendy's, Taco Bell, and Subway--have 48,000 restaurants in the United States.
It's easy to envision the typical fast-food restaurant installing a couple of kiosks inside. But for impact, the real key is the drive-through lane, where a Kinetics touch-screen kiosk, mounted on a pole and weatherproofed, could solve a problem that has confounded engineers for 40 years: our inability to be heard through the drive-through speaker when we shout, "No mustard!"
Sidebar: So You Want to Hire a Robot: The Dos and Don'ts of Self-Service Automation
Here are many reasons Kinetics' self-service check-in machines have swept through the nation's airports in just the last three years. Americans are much more comfortable with computers than they were even five years ago. And the airlines desperately needed a more effective and efficient way of getting passengers through airports. But Kinetics also thinks about self-service in ways that have made its kiosks particularly appealing--to both passengers and airlines. Its principles of self-service design could be effective in all kinds of settings.
Automate to simplify, not to be cute. From vending machines to ATMs, the key is to automate a task that already needs to be done, not to invent a task and then provide a computer to do it. In both airports and fast-food restaurants, kiosks provide a service that customers already need. And they do it with a complete lack of self-aggrandizing flourish. It's not about the technology, it's about the task.
Bite off less than you can chew. The first versions of Kinetics' machines in airports didn't allow customers to upgrade to first class or go on standby for a different flight. Kinetics gave customers a chance to learn the system, and to develop confidence in a new technology, before adding layers of complexity. Now airport machines offer upgrades and alternate flights, and some airlines even use them to automatically rebook passengers when there are weather or equipment delays.
Use automation to improve the task at hand. Airport kiosks change the experience of checking in by showing passengers a map of the airplane, where they are sitting, and where there are open seats. They make checking in not just faster, but better. McDonald's customers who use a Kinetics kiosk to place their orders have absolute confidence that the "no onions" request has been made. In both cases, kiosks provide not just convenience but a sense of power and control.
Remember, automation doesn't mean standardization. With each of its airline clients, Kinetics sits down with a fresh sheet of paper. It tries to understand the priorities of each airline independently, in order to craft a self-service experience that matches the airline's needs. For airlines that carry mostly business fliers, passengers are offered the first-class upgrade option quickly; for airlines carrying mostly tourists, the "How many bags are you checking?" screen may come sooner. Part of self-service is paying attention to how many different selves you might be serving.
Charles Fishman, a Fast Company senior writer, takes his airline seats aisle, far forward and his burgers with no mayo.

Monday, August 6

Rise in outsourcing creates surge in India analyst hiring

We talked about outsourcing before, but this is one example where the reason for offshoring and outsourcing is not just low cost but also high quality. Hiring financial analysts is no joke. No financial institution will be willing to take substandard research, specially when this research is crucial to getting client revenue $'s. Looking at the numbers that just this firm is talking about, and compared to very large numbers of loss of analysts in NY and London, people need to reconsider where and what high value add jobs can be done and where and what services are required.



Rise in outsourcing creates surge in India analyst hiring
Mike Foster06 Aug 2007
A research outsourcing firm based in India is planning to increase the number of its analysts by 50% to

600 over the next 12 months after a surge in front-office outsourcing by investment banks and fund managers.

Amba Research, located in Bangalore, is expanding fast to keep up with demand. Co-founder Andrew Houston, former head of Asian research at JP Morgan, said investment banks deliver the biggest portion of Amba’s revenue but it services a larger number of asset managers as well as 50 hedge funds.He added: “It’s fair to say we do work for half the world’s 15 largest investment banks.” Asset managers that use Amba include Old Mutual and SG Asset Management.More analytical work is also being outsourced to such companies as Evalueserve and Irevna, majority-owned by Standard & Poor’s.Evalueserve has a broad-based offering of knowledge-based services and operates in India, China and Chile. Irevna, like Amba, is more tightly focused on securities research. It is run by Selvan Swamy, who used to invest in technology for Apax, a private equity firm. Smaller rivals include Adventity and Copal Partners, a banking specialist.Taking account of large banks and asset managers, such as Fidelity, which have set up captive operations, as many as 5,000 financial analysts are being used in emerging economies, led by India. Amba employs analysts in India, Sri Lanka and Costa Rica and decided to set up an office in the central American country so discussions can take place in the same time zone as the US. The staff are paid $10,000 (€7,310) to $25,000 a year, against the $250,000 it can cost to hire a relatively junior analyst in Wall Street or London.At the bottom line, taking account of office costs, investment banks and asset managers can end up with cost savings of two thirds.Amba works hard to reassure clients on confidentiality and analysts are kept in the dark on the identity of clients for whom they are working. When required, they work in rooms accessed by swipe cards that are dedicated to a single client.Amba’s name does not appear on research, although clients like to discuss the outcome with the firm in some depth. Houston said equity research is Amba’s principal line of business. It often comprises research into small companies, where banks have either been reducing their coverage or seeking to economise.Amba also carries out credit research and quantitative research, which assists asset managers with portfolio construction. Houston’s co-founders are Anada Aithal, former head of Goldman Sachs in India, as well as Brad West and Mohan Alexander, who used to work for Deutsche Bank. Private equity firm Helion Venture Partners recently paid several million dollars for a stake in Amba, implying the group could be floated in five years.The heady prices that Indian outsourcing specialists can command is reflected in the $250m business solutions provider RR Donnelley paid for OfficeTiger of India last year. Last week, General Electric raised nearly $500m by floating its Genpact computer services company on the stock market.
Article tags:
India Research