The Outsourcing Blog: Horses for Sources

Consulting the Oracle: Tibor's talktrack (Part II)

  In the second-part of this two-part interview, Oracle's Tibor Beles discusses how service providers can be successful at platform-BPO offerings, how the broader BPO industry can improve, in addition to discussing the shifting dynamics with software licensing models.  Tibor is also a blackbelt in martial arts (not the Six Sigma category), but spends more time hitting tennis balls these days with his teenage daughter. He also loves political thrillers, but he didn't elaborate whether that was through his day-job, or reading Le Carré novels -:)

Phil Fersht (PF): Do you see platform-based BPO as a major threat to the BPO pureplays which are not experienced in broad-based ERP enablement and implementation services?

Tibor Beles (TB):The first question calls for a long answer but I will try to keep it short. An aggregate BPO service provider must be passionately committed to process and IT excellence in its chosen function. Offshoring for labor arbitrage alone has limited benefits.

Consulting the Oracle: Tibor's talktrack (Part I)

We've had a number of discussions with some of the SAP executives over the last few years regarding its highly-publicized BPO partner-program.  Meanwhile, there's been a crack Oracle team quietly working on developing its own BPO strategy, led by its enigmatic commander Tibor Beles.  After being been educated on the nuances of Hungarian beer in a Budapest bar recently, I decided it was time to drag Tibor away from his Karate sessions to talk about his team's progress...

Phil Fersht (PF): Tibor, why does Oracle have a group dedicated to BPO? What's the game-plan here?

Tibor Beles (TB): Our customers demand more choice when it comes to leveraging Oracle software. In addition to the traditional on-premise deployment and hosted/managed applications our customers expect us to offer BPO services powered by the software they like and are familiar with. As we don’t want to be a BPO provider, we have created the BPO powered by Oracle choice by partnering with leading service providers. Our goal is to place Oracle software under the hood of their offerings.

Forget Platform BPO, it's really about the Business Services Cloud (Part II)

We inspired a lot of offline debate when we discussed the challenges facing BPO providers delivering so-called "Platform BPO" solutions.  Bottom-line, if BPO service providers are competing for commodity services engagements which are underpinned by software platforms that are widely deployed by several other service providers, they face a major challenge of differentiating themselves to win new clients and avoid a price-war for new business.

At the enterprise level, selecting a BPO provider to process transactional business services for a major Oracle or SAP-based engagement is dependent on the providers' global scale, brand and competency.  For these large-scale transactional BPO engagements (i.e. accounts payable, payroll etc), it's largely a commodity market these days.  However, the battle is on to provide industry-specific solutions, such as health insurance processing and revenue-cycle management, banking-specific services (i.e. netting, lock-box services), retail merchandising, legal services, healthcare informatics etc etc.

For example, I had a great conversation last week with Mark Stiffler, CEO of sales compensation provider Synygy. He was faced with two choices for his business:  either to provide an on-demand managed service to his clients, or license his software through BPOs in the channel.  Sales compensation is an area that can be delivered on a set of standard processes, with some unique personalization to the client.  It's also an area where there's a hell of a lot of value an outsourcing provider can add

Forget Platform BPO, it's really about the Business Services Cloud (Part I)

The recession has upped the ante for today's BPO providers: the move to providing business services in a cloud-like model is accelerating, and the real challenge for today's service providers lies in answering the following questions:

1) Do we want to play in the BPO space? 

2) How do we play in this market?  What's our angle?

3) How can we compete?  What's our differentiation?

The challenge today is whether a provider is adding value beyond low-cost processing services.  If you are only really providing an arbitrage solution, someone is going to come along and offer it for even less money, and someone else will eventually come along and provide it for even less.  It's a no-win game, unless you want to become the lowest-cost provider in town and make a razor-thin profit margin.

What's interesting is this coming together of the IT/BPO model.  And it's becoming much more sophisticated then simply providing a platform and some low-cost processing services.  It's about  integrated business services where the provider delivers the hosting, the application skills and the business services needed to help clients achieve specific business outcomes.

IT services providers have made a living differentiating themselves by providing expertise in technical areas that allowed them to charge a premium to their clients.  However, as technical skills became a commodity, some IT services providers are moving up the value-chain by providing expertise that apply technical skills to specific business needs, while others have opted to scrap around for the low-cost "price per developer per hour" commodity business.  Those IT services providers which think they can get away with charging a premium for commodity development services are having a rude awakening in today's post-recessionary marketplace.  Most clients today are insisting on greater transparency with the costs of services. 

This is where BPO gets interesting,

Mixing it with the big boys: A Tea-interval with Tiger

Not too many service providers have had a bigger impact on the world of Business Process Outsourcing in recent years than General Electric’s former offshore captive, Genpact. And much of this rapid growth to a billion dollars of revenue and a global delivery network, can be credited to one individual – the tenacious “Tiger” Tyagarajan (simply known as Tiger to anyone who knows him).  And what an apt name for the wee fellow.

I can recall, just a few short years’ ago, when Tiger was fronting Genpact’s US business and taking on the major incumbent BPO providers such as Accenture, ACS, HP and IBM, with tales of Six Sigma excellence and Virtual Captives; dazzling firms such as Kimberly-Clark,

Wachovia and Cadbury Schweppes in the process. And when he’s not absorbed with cricket statistics

New-age influence peddling: Ray and Jeremiah join Charlene's Angels

After our little debate the other day about who is influencing decision-makers these days, I found Ray Wang's new career move worth mentioning...

Ray's joined former Forrester Research "rock star analyst" colleagues Charlene Li, Jeremiah Owyang at consulting outfit Altimeter Group, headed by Internet pioneer Deborah Schultz.  They also announced the launch of "The Hanger," a physical space intended to bring together the ecosystem of emerging technologies, thought leaders, business and service providers to innovate and bring new ideas to life.   I asked Ray (pictured) this morning why he's doing this:

"Because the rate of technology obsolescence now outpaces the pace of technology adoption, organizations need new enterprise strategies to cope with the massive forces of change they face".

I also asked Ray if he'd say exactly the same thing after a few shots of tequila... This ecosystem development of today's influencers and thought-leaders is the culmination of the impact social media has had on the technology industry.  People want immediate relevant, impactful advice and information - and from people whose opinion they trust.  The question now is how consulting and advisory firms can make money providing it, and where today's decision-makers go to be "influenced".  Interesting times... let's keep the discussion rolling.

Introducing new-age BPO: the standardization/personalization balance

The new wave of BPO deployment has arrived quicker than many of us anticipated. The recession has driven some common-sense into a BPO value-proposition that was previously centered predominantly on some form of labor arbitrage, with many service providers muddling their way through to attempt to run their clients' process for less cost - and make some sort of profit.  Sometimes they pulled it off, other times they failed.  Many are currently in a state of semi-transition, with the success of their BPO engagement still hanging in the balance. 

Now we've clearly arrived at a turning point in BPO development, which we can put into the following three categories:

1) Straight Lift and Shift:  the antiquated form of BPO where client takes "as-is" processes, hands them off to a provider, which subsequently attempts to run with lower staff costs.  In many cases it's a simple "re-badge" of existing personnel, with the provider simply employing smaller numbers of the existing delivery team to make a profit on the deal.  In most modern cases, the provider will supplement onshore staff with offshore.  There is little (or no) enhancement of software applications to standardize workflows and add a modicum of transformation into the engagement.

Likely outcome:  Inefficiencies with processes are magnified considerably, change-orders and procedural changes are cumbersome and expensive, client finds it challenging to reduce onshore headcount, and anticipated cost-reduction is not reached.

2) Lift, Shift and Transform:  Same as Lift and Shift, but the client and service provider work together to re-map existing processes onto a pre-defined new set of processes. 

Is this a good climate to take a career "risk"? Or is it riskier staying where you are?

My definition of corporate failure in this market:  "We're gonna ride out 2009 and go for it next year."  What are you going for?  What are you riding out?  If you want to remain successful, you better get your act together now and formulate a game plan. 

Too many firms are sticking to their old business models, in denial that they need to do anything different (besides firing a few people), and cling to the vein hope that their fortunes will dramatically turn around in 2010...by doing NOTHING.  And I can be 100% sure that everyone reading this is either working for a firm with that attitude, or knows someone who is.  Smart executives sense stagnation, and a lot of top talent is re-thinking whether their current employer has what it takes to prosper in a post-recessionary economy.  (P.S. a prize is available for the first person to reveal this icon of executive innovation from the '80s...).

And the top tier isn't always offering the most appealing place to work in this market - am seeing several top executives broadening their horizons for unique companies geared for growth in this new economy.  Start-ups and small companies, for example, which are plugged into the new economy are becoming vogue.  Many people are realizing that no job is particularly secure anymore, so if you're going to take a risk, why not now? 

Is this "2001 all over again" for outsourcing?

As we've predicted, based on our surveys, many tough discussions with buyers and general chit-chat, sourcing evaluation is now picking up, and we can expect to see a wave of deals in Q4 this year and Q1 next year (and beyond). 

First, the sourcing advisors, management consultants and analysts get busy with their clients showing much more urgency, and then we can expect to see some deals happen.  Based on my conversations with the advisory community over the last couple of week we're now in that former category.  I've even had a couple of people come to me with the question "Is this 2001 all over again".  My answer is:  "In some ways yes, but the types of deals and the global delivery execution is markedly different this time". 

Now why is this?

Post 9/11 we saw a major spree of ITO, call center and end-to-end HR BPO wave.  ITO worked, call center is stuttering with offshore value, and HR BPO - in its past form - failed 

The IT infrastructure outsourcing deals were onshore mature contracts with established providers such as IBM, CSC and HP, experienced at driving economies of scale with their delivery models. The application development and maintenance deals back then were among the first to truly leverage offshore

It’s time for disruption, not stagnation

2009 is going to be remembered as the year of cost-containment. Most client discussions are not very sexy – it’s largely about cost, as opposed to innovation or revenue generation. McKinsey recently revealed 70% of its current client engagements are cost-reduction focused, only 30%focused on revenue-generation (the opposite of a year ago).

I strongly believe our businesses, while being diligent about cost-containment, must use this opportunity to make fundamental changes to their business operations in order to emerge more profitably in the future. Simply ripping away cost elements and failing to improve access to global corporate data and processes, is a massive wasted opportunity to be more competitive over the long-term.

I wrote recently about how the lay-off culture that has afflicted both the US and UK in recent years, where many firms treat their labor as a variable cost that can be scaled-up or down at will, depending on the next quarterly forecast. I cannot stress enough the damage this can cause to businesses as the economy recovers. One common theme that has dominated discussions with business leaders recently has been their surprise at the amount of visible cost they have been able to take out of their businesses as they move from a revenue-generation to cost-containment strategy.

It’s not solely the cost of labor that is highly visible – it’s the costs of technology, travel, infrastructure, real-estate etc. that can often be easily driven-down in a desperate business climate. Less visible are costs associated with poorly-integrated business processes and procedures, of dated analytical tools, of ERP systems incapable of supporting global process templates, and so on.

Being Frank about Global Sourcing: An interview with Cognizant's CEO (Part I)

Observing the rise of the new wave of service providers over the last few years, the one that has scared the living daylights out of all of the incumbents is Cognizant. 

Now a $3bn company with deep footprints in the world'slargest global financial institutions, consumer businesses, manufacturing and healthcare organizations, Cognizant can no longer be considered an upstart.  It's now part of the industry elite; quietly and cleverly aligning its value proposition to the post-recession era.  As CEO Francisco D'Souza points out,  we're in a time of not only cyclical change, but also secular change.

I've had the pleasure of talking with Frank a few times over the last couple of years and have been impressed by his high-energy, thoughtful and common-sensical approach. I was even more surprised when I received emails from an "FDSouza" on the Horses... took a couple of times for me to realize who this guy was.  To cut to the chase, Frank is one of the youngest IT and BPO industry leaders of the modern age, having risen through the management ranks of Cognizant to assume the role of President and CEO at the beginning of 2007 when the company was announcing its landmark Kimberly-Clark engagement.  And when Frank isn't busy hacking his way around the local golf course, or playing with his kids, he managed to find some time to share some of his views of the global sourcing industry with us...

Wipro and Oracle partner to blow-up the BPO delivery model

Folks - I can exclusively reveal to you today that Wipro BPO and Oracle are shortly going to announce a partnership dubbed "simPlify", whereby Wipro will deliver PeopleSoft HR to both mid-market and high-end clients via a hosted utility BPO service, that will cater for 20 major countries.  They will also partner with The Hackett Group as part of the arrangement to provide performance benchmarks for HR processes.

The mid-market play is a true move towards "one-to-many", whereas the enterprise play will be a more customized approach.  Clients will need to invest

Kicking off the "Innovation" discussions: Oracle's Roger Turnham

One of the nicest guys in the BPO industry is Oracle's Roger Turnham.  He's been Oracle's brains-behind-the-scenes since BPO was a mere twinkle in Larry's eye four years' ago.  Many of you have been dazzled by Roger's Texan charm as the software giant develops its BPO partner program for service providers.  He also has some very interesting views on innovation strategies that can add significant value to a BPO engagement.  I am going to hone in on the "I" topic over the coming weeks, and asked Roger to kick off the discussions... over you you Mr T:

Innovation: What’s in a Name?

Over the past four years I’ve sat through BPO panel discussions on innovation, I’ve listened to some of the world’s largest BPO customers complain that they can’t get it, while BPO providers claim great success in delivering it. Either somebody’s lying or the word is like evolution: It’s so broad a word that it can mean anything you want it to. To extend the analogy: Evolution is a word that means everything from change over time to the origin of matter, to a cosmic explosion that created everything, to why some of us are big and others blond and – my personal favorite – how goo turned into you. If “innovation” is like evolution, it can mean anything, or everything, or nothing.

So, what is it?

SaaS versus BPO: is this where tech-geeks finally interact with services-nerds?

So there was a bit of Phil-bashing going on this week - from SaaS lovers - after my post that discussed some of the potential issues with SaaS delivery versus outsourcing.  I also got several messages of "thanks for nailing this one for us" from services folks.  To clarify my point, I would like to emphasize I am a huge fan of SaaS delivery and strongly believe that SaaS services will enmesh with some areas of BPO to create the genuine business utility models for the future.  BPO provides that level of business-customization for those business processes that are enabled by the SaaS app.  I believe the issues are more about IT folks understanding the basics of business service delivery - and vice-versa.

My concerns with SaaS delivery are how companies govern their business processes that are supported by SaaS application delivery.  It is a serious step