by
Mark Ross on November 30th, 2009 at 1:20 pm :
Comments 000
Last week saw the release of the latest ValueNotes report, Legal Process Outsourcing: Crisis Creates New Opportunities for LPOs (November 2009), regarding the state of the LPO industry and representing the analyst firm’s third detailed research publication on this now fast maturing market. Following the predictions and postulations recorded in their prior reports, Offshoring Legal Services to India (2005) and Offshoring Legal Services to India, an Update (2007), what can we glean of Value (pardon the pun), from their most recent biennial LPO coverage? Here is my assessment of the report’s findings.
Impact of the Financial Crisis
The 2009 report’s release, and no doubt the time period during which the research was undertaken, coincides with a period of financial turmoil in both the wider global economic community, and of course the legal profession. When the 2007 report was released, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers were apparently in robust financial health, and the term “subprime” was hardly commonplace in day to day business speak. Profits per equity partner were at an all time high, new associate starting salaries at the AmLaw 50 were knocking on the $200,000 door and the concept of deferred start dates was simply unthinkable. How times change.
Without proffering novel information, the initial section of the report succinctly condenses the major changes affecting the global legal marketplace as a direct result of the great recession. Major corporations across a wide variety of industries have seen profit margins decline dramatically which in turn has impacted negatively on the world’s leading law firms. Certain practice areas have been harder hit than others:
“The number of global M&A deals in the first quarter of 2009 witnessed 5,914 transactions valued at $978.9bn, a decline of 41% and 48% respectively for the same period in 2008.” (ValueNotes Legal Process Outsourcing, November 2009).
I recall reading an op-ed piece over a year ago now in TheLawyer.com. In Law firms need to take advantage of tough conditions, Tony Williams, a former Clifford Chance managing partner, highlighted the example of a firm with a 25 percent profit margin with a fee income that fell just 20 percent, entirely plausible in the recent financial climate. This firm would witness its profit fall by 80 percent in the short term as costs simply could not be adjusted quickly enough to offset the revenue reduction. Add into the mix horrendous rises in indemnity insurance premiums and the tightening of credit witnessed over the last 18 months and one didn’t need to be Nostradamus to predict bleak times ahead. ValueNotes comprehensively details along a time continuum, the layoffs of partners, associates and support staff at the largest U.S. and U.K. law firms. In order to survive now, and hopefully thrive in the future, the report comments that law firms are,
“actively re-looking at their business models and developing strategies to remain profitable. Firms are offering alternative billing models, making technological improvements and entering partnerships with local and offshore service providers.”
Slowdown in LPO Revenue and Manpower Growth
In 2007 ValueNotes predicted revenue generated from the LPO industry in India alone to reach $640m by 2010. These estimates have been revised downwards substantially. Revenue is estimated at $320m for 2008, $370m for 2009, and expected to reach $440m by the end of 2010. The report rightly reminds us that these figures and others quoted in the report pertain solely to the Indian LPO industry. Clearly, although India is the dominant offshore destination, others such as The Philippines and South Africa cannot be discounted, and perhaps more importantly, these figures do not reflect the substantial legal outsourcing engagements to onshore destinations both in the U.S. and U.K.
In addition to slower than originally expected revenue growth, the overall manpower employed by the LPO industry (again, only in reference to India) has also witnessed sluggish growth. With the wonderful benefit of hindsight, forecasts a few years ago of 32,000 employees working within the LPO industry by the end of 2010 now appear wildly optimistic. The revised prediction for 2010 stands at 15,400. The LPO and KPO industries have not been immune to the global economic downturn. However, as the global economy continues along the path to recovery, while concurrently LPO becomes both an increasingly desirable strategic option for major corporations and law firms, the report anticipates that the there will be an upswing from the currently plateaued manpower levels towards a more consistent period of stable growth.
The report then proceeds to list each and every vendor (many of whose names my colleagues and I do not recognize) alongside estimates of their current manpower levels. Clearly these figures have been supplied by the vendors themselves and prospective customers would be wise to seek independent corroboration. However, immediately apparent on perusing the list is the wide variance in manpower levels, ranging from several LPOs with ten or fewer employees, to the larger, scale players with headcounts in the several hundred.
Changing vendor landscape
The report comments that for the first time in the lifecycle of the industry a number of service providers have withdrawn from the market and closed shop. The formative years of the industry, from 2005-2007, witnessed aggressive expansion, with numerous start-ups appearing on the scene. ValueNotes comments that in excess of 20% of the total number of service providers have now ceased operating altogether or at a minimum closed down their LPO operations. I was interviewed for this report and, as I state in it:
“The coming 12-24 months could prove to be tough for many of the smaller LPO providers, several of whom may simply give up the chase and withdraw from the market altogether. Others will look for an opportunity to achieve the scale increasingly viewed as a prerequisite by potential clients, by either merging with a competitor, or selling to a larger, more stable provider. This activity, together with consistent growth by the leading, large-scale providers of legal and knowledge process outsourcing services will continue to push the industry as a whole further down the path towards consolidation.”
The report correctly identifies scalability and multiple service capability as a prerequisite for attracting business from major corporations and the U.S. and U.K.’s leading law firms. A rapidly globalizing legal profession has reached a tipping point where legal outsourcing is now recognized as a viable and efficient option for the delivery of certain types of legal services. As major law firm and corporate procurement of legal outsourcing services becomes increasingly the norm, LPOs without the scalability to match both the increased demand and sophistication of the buying community will suffer. Purchasers will be inclined to opt for providers who can offer scalability through a global, multi-shore delivery platform. While there may remain certain niche areas of demand that the boutique, one geographical delivery center providers can satisfy, for larger scale projects or enterprise wide engagements, multiple locations, backed by access to a scalable workforce will become a prerequisite.
In order to achieve both the requisite scale and end to end capability identified as desirable by those procuring LPO services, the report identifies an upswing in M&A and strategic partnership activity within the LPO industry. Integreon’s recent acquisitions of ONSITE3 and Datum Legal are highlighted as activity enabling the provision of an end to end enterprise solution all under one roof.
ValueNotes comments that over the course of the last 3 years several of the largest U.K. law firms have announced outsourcing initiatives. On review of the dates of these public pronouncements, it is readily apparent that the pace of these declarations is picking up. 2009 will be viewed as the tipping point year, when major law firms were let loose from the shackles of reticence and began to acknowledge that their public embracing of outsourcing was clearly viewed by clients as indicative of being forward thinking, innovative law firms of the future. The report references Integreon’s recent deals with Simmons & Simmons and Osborne Clarke, as well as Pinsent Masons’ South African initiative with Exigent and CPA Global’s Rio Tinto engagement.
Key Takeaways
In an economic climate where numerous industries have taken a backward step, the slower than originally expected growth within the LPO industry should not be viewed as disheartening. In the early days of the industry, backed by a vigorous entrepreneurial spirit, the vendor landscape mushroomed dramatically. The last 12 months have witnessed the first signs of contraction. It has taken Integreon over a decade to achieve the scale, infrastructure, and end to end operational capabilities which affords us the position of now being the largest provider of Legal KPO services to major corporations and global law firms. As ValueNotes correctly comments, it will be those LPO companies that are able to acquire scale and provide operations from a multi-shore global base, as well as satisfy the desire of clients by providing a full suite of legal support services, which survive and subsequently thrive. Over the coming 12-24 months many of the smaller players will struggle to remain in the game, as client requirements become ever more sophisticated, and the move from piecemeal, short term projects, towards longer term, multiple FTE contracts, picks up pace.
Filed under Knowledge Outsourcing (KPO), Legal Economics, Legal Outsourcing (LPO), Onshore v. offshore, Outsourcing Industry News
by
Matthew Banks on November 19th, 2009 at 4:49 pm :
Comments 000
In a move that reflects long time practices in the US legal market, interest is apparently growing amongst UK law firms for use of temporary project based staff. Leading City firms in talks to bring in teams of contract lawyers (LegalWeek, 29 Oct 2009) prompts us to consider the differences between the legal process outsourcing (LPO) and local temp staffing models.
The article reports that major UK law firms may consider using temporary lawyers for more of their routine legal tasks. After the significant lay-offs over the last year and the change in the economic landscape, law firms are naturally apprehensive about venturing back into the full time recruitment market, at least until there is a sustained upturn in the volume of legal work (and even when that happens, many analysts feel that firms will not return to those old recruiting methods).
Beyond market conditions, clients demand greater efficiency. Sound familiar? Temp staffing in the UK is another example, along with LPO, of alternative models for delivering certain legal tasks. For perspective on the LPO approach, see our post earlier this week, LPO - No Longer a Case of ‘If’ but ‘When’.
Providers of project based staffing used to be called “temp agencies”; now they are labeled as “virtual law firms”. Same service, new name? No doubt they take away the strain of sourcing and vetting, take permanent staff off book, improve utilization numbers and no doubt they are capable attorneys who are offered quickly and locally…… but that is where the benefits stop. Relative to legal process outsourcing, temps lack several important benefits, some of which can truly transform the strategic approach of law departments and firms:
- Even if a provider is sourcing and vetting the lawyers, the team must still be project managed by the purchasing law firm.
- The purchasing law firm still carries the cost of infrastructure (facilities and IT).
- Lacking in this approach are any inherent process efficiencies (and improvements), metrics, continuous improvement methods, documented procedures, or quality control systems. This is contract staffing, not the offering of a methodology or a best practice operation.
- Integrated technology is not part of the offering.
- The temp lawyers are not dedicated full time staff. With the advent of LPO, purchasers can retain a core dedicated team on a full time basis at such savings who bring continuity of knowledge and staff, which in turn brings repeatability and scalability. That team can be ramped/flexed up and down.
I see the benefit in some cases of embedded, local teams. That is why we and other outsourcing companies provide onsite services, embedded into clients’ teams but managed and part of the LPO best practice process.
In short, my perception is that the LPO is a service and temp staffing is temp staffing. I’m sure there’s room for both but LPO likely will have the bigger long term impact on making law practice more cost-effective.
Filed under Legal Economics, Legal Outsourcing (LPO), Outsourcing Industry News, Outsourcing Tips
by
Matthew Banks on October 28th, 2009 at 11:45 am :
Comments 000
The news of Rio Tinto’s Legal Process Outsourcing (LPO) initiative has been widely reported. For a detailed report, I recommend Richard Susskind’s interview with Leah Cooper, the Rio Tinto General Counsel behind the initiative.
The number of major outsourcing arrangements between leading LPOs and blue chip global law firms, banks and corporations has increased but the topic is rarely discussed publicly. The Rio Tinto arrangement is one of the very few widely publicized.
Cooper’s approach to her challenges (as well as her messages to the industry) will resonate with GCs around the globe, who face similar pressures of increased workload but constrained budgets. LPO enables law departments to meet rising workloads whilst reducing costs. It opens up a “new way of working” where quality can be achieved at reasonable cost by reallocating legal tasks to partner providers.
Indeed, as I listened to this interview I kept coming back to Cooper’s notion of “a new way of working”. Whilst I do largely agree with her comments, I have a slightly different take on how GC should think about legal outsourcing.
The “P” in LPO: Process is Not a Dirty Word
Cooper doesn’t like the “P”. She sees her LPO team as a genuine extension of her in house team, contributing to the overall workload and undertaking tasks that a junior lawyer within the in house team might otherwise undertake. She rightly points out that the “P” downplays or downgrades the importance and nature of the work.
I agree that LPO is not about administrative form filling. Nor is it restricted to organizations with massive volumes of standardized documentation. Process, however, is integral to LPO: it is core to the how LPO lawyers perform tasks, even complex ones. Moreover, process should be core to lawyers everywhere but typically is not. The legal market finally seems to be waking up to the importance of this. Law Firms Look at Process Management in The Legal Intelligencer (20 Oct 2009) discusses project management and process, including law firms that are now adopting Six Sigma, a tool some LPOs, Integreon included, have used for some time.
The benefits of process include consistency, predictability, quality, productivity and defensibility – these benefits apply across many legal tasks of varying complexity, not just tasks which by their nature are substantively straightforward, standardized and routine. For example, one of our current projects involves a multi-national corporation with a suite of 20 “medium complexity contracts” used regularly in its business. The company has different attorneys around the world following different processes using different templates in different locations, accepting different edits with different results. The LPO process brings a method which is common, documented, repeatable and scalable. Beyond labor cost savings, working with an LPO helps the company reduce work volume plus improve consistency and therefore decrease risk.
Smart buyers of LPO services are not simply looking for Day 1 cost savings – they demand long term transformation and improvements. A key value add of LPO is creating these longer term productivity and efficiency improvements by combining process expertise with legal know-how. It’s the same core task but delivered in a more modeled and structured fashion. Richard Susskind discusses this in detail in his recent book, The End of Lawyers?
“Process” captures implementation and transition planning, workflow, performance metrics capture and tracking, communication, and reporting. All of these are not ends in themselves – they are genuine tools for improving performance.
So if you don’t like the word “process” then call it “method” or “systemization”. Whatever we call it though, it’s an essential ingredient to delivering and managing legal services – whether from an LPO, law firm, or law department.
The “O” in LPO: “O” Means Outsource, not Offshore
“O” is for Outsourcing, not Offshoring. Outsourcing is about an approach, not a location. The offshore element of the Rio Tinto deal is what grabbed the headlines, but Cooper explains that quite a few projects have actually been performed onshore in the US, and are still achieving cost savings when benchmarked against the cost of the law firm model.
LPO is not exclusive to India, nor those tasks which are suitable for offshoring. The “new way of working” is broader than that. We believe that outsourcing is a global phenomenon and LPO should be no exception. Outsourcing could be onsite at the customer’s office; it could be onshore, multi-shore or offshore.
Offshoring to India is highly successful and can be a great way to reduce cost and create efficiencies, but it’s not the only way. Organizations want the right fit for their requirements, not a one dimensional solution. Different locations offer different attributes and mature LPOs offer law departments and law firms an explanation of the differences and a choice. One size does not fit all; one shore does not fit all.
So What about the “L” You Ask?
The “L” of course is for Legal, which should not be confused with traditional business outsourcing, such as commonly associated with offshore technical support or call centers. Legal outsourcing requires domain expertise. So for example, Integreon’s legal outsourcing services are supported by our staff of full time, licensed lawyers, who can work on-site at client or law firm offices or at any of our secure facilities located onshore, including in such familiar places as midtown Manhattan and London, or in equally secure and lower cost offshore locations.
“Legal Process Outsourcing” therefore implies professional, experienced legal staff delivering quality, cost effective services from the client’s choice of locations.
Filed under Business Process Outsourcing (BPO), Knowledge Outsourcing (KPO), Legal Outsourcing (LPO), Onshore v. offshore, Outsourcing Industry News
by
Chris Niccolls on September 11th, 2009 at 9:53 am :
Comments 000
 |
A recent Reuters article, U.S. banks play catch-up on hiring effort, tells us that Wall Street is ready to hire again, citing a number of high level staff acquisitions and even the return of staff poaching. Well, when the bankers get hired again, the middle office is usually poised for expansion. Anyone who has spent time in investment banking knows that this means everyone’s favorite E-Ticket ride, the Wall Street roller coaster, is getting ready to take on a new crowd of riders! And what a ride it will be, filled with new twists and turns and that oh so dizzying drop at the end… WOW! So, buckle up everyone and let’s see what we can expect this time! |
The drop over the last year was a pretty steep one, so there’s going to be a lot of organizational rebuilding ahead. The problem is that when you’re rebuilding, so is everyone else, which raises costs and extends time lines. It would be nice to bring back all of the good workers who were terminated, but some those have since moved out of the industry while others may now work for your competitors. Eventually, you start to think about poaching staff (it’s not really poaching if they used to work for you), but then other managers start to have pretty much the same thoughts (everyone used to work somewhere).
And where will all of the support staff sit? You may have already reduced your space. So you’re competing with bankers for seating too, which is never a good thing. You’ll also need to consider other support functions that may be spread throughout the firm in IT, HR, Accounting, to say nothing of secretaries, word processors and researchers.
When a decision is made to hire 100 new bankers, are plans made for the 30 or 40 support staff they will need to do their jobs? At least you can avoid a drop off in quality from all of the new staff by getting your dedicated training team to develop a comprehensive training and evaluation program. Hmmm …You do HAVE a dedicated training team, don’t you? Well, if not, then you’d better get cracking because in 30 or 40 months it will be dismantling time again when the roller coaster starts to head downhill once more.
And that’s the ride… over and over again. But for those of you who are not thrill seekers, there are alternatives. Rather than the breakneck ups and downs of the I-Banking cycle, an alternative is to keep a core middle office staff and work with a Knowledge Process Outsourcing (KPO) provider who can smooth out the ups and downs of each cycle.
A good KPO has dedicated trainers and domain experts who can help you plan for upcoming changes and provide the staff you need to execute the plan. Because some banks look at outsourcing strategies as a “temporary” fix that is only applied at one stage of the I-Banking cycle, they have to keep building their services over and over again. And that’s a very expensive way to do business.
A better approach may be to build a balanced blend of in-house, onshore and offshore resources that serves your bank during any part of the I-Banking cycle. The result can be a more efficient organization that delivers greater consistency and responsiveness in support of your bankers, and in turn better service for your clients. Of course, for those adverse to outsourcing strategies, there is always the roller coaster.
Filed under Economic Trends, Knowledge Outsourcing (KPO), Outsourcing Industry News, Outsourcing Tips
by
Mark Jewell on September 3rd, 2009 at 11:58 am :
Comments 000
Earlier this year, FreePint and Integreon partnered to survey business research managers about outsourcing, barriers to its adoption, and the satisfaction level of those currently outsourcing. FreePint recently published the results in a report called VIP Report: Survey on Outsourcing.
Integreon is making available a free copy of the report; click here if you would like to request a copy. To receive the report, you must complete the registration form with the required contact information, including an e-mail address with a business/corporate domain name, and agree to subscribe to the Integreon blog. This offer is valid through Oct. 31, 2009.
Summary and Findings of FreePint Report on Business Research Outsourcing
The survey targeted managers of knowledge and information services but also included managers of document preparation (word processing, etc.), legal support, and pitch support (graphics, presentations, etc.). The majority of respondents were senior-level decision-makers spanning a range of industries, including legal, financial services, management consultancies, and pharmaceuticals. A total of 71 managers responded with nearly 40 percent from corporations with more than 1,000 employees. About one-third were in the US, one-third in the UK, and one-third elsewhere in the EU, Australia, Canada, or other countries.
The findings reveal disparate views about quality and the cost of outsourcing. On the one hand, the 40 percent of organizations that do outsource are satisfied with outsourcing quality and cost effectiveness. On the other hand, the 60 percent not outsourcing cited quality and cost concerns as the most important factors influencing their choice not to outsource.
We can’t explain this seeming contradiction though suspect it says more about outsourcing perception than reality. It may reflect negative perceptions of offshore outsourcing. Some recent surveys (e.g., see our blog post Cost Arbitrage is No Longer Enough (Black Book of Outsourcing Rankings and Findings) suggest that customers look for high cultural compatibility, which typically favors onshore outsourcing. The survey was not designed to tease out differences in onshore and offshore outsourcing. We welcome reader views on other explanations for the seeming inconsistency.
One other result particularly intrigued us: Among those who outsource, the majority of the work continues to be done in-house; respondents who outsource report that over 75 percent of the work remains in-house. This finding supports a key outsourcing benefit, namely, to free high-end professionals for their “highest and best use.” Outsourcing is ideal for handling important but routine tasks that can otherwise overwhelm more valuable strategic work.
Overall, the survey results suggest that organizations considering outsourcing may gain benefit from reviewing the upsides reported by those already engaging in outsourcing. With 2010 budget planning just around the corner, this may be the right time for those organizations to take a fresh look at how outsourcing can facilitate achieving their quality and cost efficiency goals in the new year.
For the report table of contents, click here.
To request a full copy of the report from Integreon, click here.
Filed under Business Process Outsourcing (BPO), Knowledge Outsourcing (KPO), Legal Outsourcing (LPO), Onshore v. offshore, Outsourcing Industry News
by
Liam Brown on May 12th, 2009 at 3:09 am :
Comments 000
Outsourcing is back in the news. Come to think of it, when has it not been in the news? Two US national mainstream media had important articles last week.
Outsourcing: Thriving at Home and Abroad (Business Week, 4 May 2009) reports that outsourcing is thriving in the current economy. “Companies looking to cut expenses in the face of soft demand are keener than ever to hand off parts of their operations to lower-cost providers.” That is old news; what’s new is the locations those companies are selecting. Political considerations, internal and external customer perception, availability of talent, currency exchange rates, disaster planning, shrinking cost differentials between domestic and offshore locations, relative inflation rates, now drive companies to consider smaller domestic US cities such as Indianapolis and Boise. The drivers have consistently been, as the article touches on, increasingly sophisticated customers taking “a more nuanced approach” to their operations and sourcing strategy. Core processes are kept captive and non-core processes are outsourced (the so called “hybrid captive/outsourced approach”); some non-core processes are outsourced to multiple providers to mitigate risk (the so called “multi-sourcing approach”); and some processes are sourced offshore while others are sourced onshore (the so called “right-shoring approach”).
Obama’s Plan on Corporate Taxes Unnerves the Indian Outsourcing Industry (New York Times, 6 May 2009) reports on how the Obama Administration’s proposal to tax offshore profits is causing consternation in India. The article suggests the impact of the proposals may not be that great, though they are not yet fully understood. As we read the tax proposal, to the extent it has an impact, it would impact the profits of companies operating offshore captives so it might actually drive demand for third party providers of offshore services such as Integreon. What really caught my attention, though, was the speed at which this tax proposal appeared and at which it has the potential to change the sourcing location landscape - much faster than company operations planners can respond.
The lesson we draw from both articles supports the strategy we have long followed; namely, be flexible about location and have a choice of countries and continents. Companies should select location based on factors such as culture, time zones, cost, business continuity, exchange rates, relative inflation rates, skill availability, turnover, and taxes. Because these factors change over time, sometimes quite rapidly, companies must retain flexibility. For example, the Indian Rupee has had dramatic swings in value versus the US Dollar. And, as the Business Week article points out, the economic downturn has suddenly shrunk the cost arbitrage advantage of India over the US (though it is still large).
For these reasons, we now operate delivery centers in India, the Philippines, US, and UK, with more locations likely in the future. We are not dogmatic about the “best” location.
For onshore locations, we have long been enthusiastic about the types of cities Business Week describes. In 2007, we acquired an existing outsourcing business in Fargo, ND. The location in Fargo was a big factor in our acquisition decision - we recognized that we could hire, and more importantly, retain long-term highly skilled workers there at costs significantly lower than in major US cities.
We have also just opened a delivery center in Bristol, UK. While Bristol is a major city, costs there are up to 30% lower than in London, so it reflects the same thinking - find the right onshore locations that offer a good mix of skill, cost, and cultural compatability.
To drive home the point that location decisions depend on many factors, consider electronic discovery services. For our EDD business, we employ specialized employees, operate server farms, and need to take quick delivery of digital media. For these reasons, we operate delivery centers in “high cost” domestic cities such as New York City and Washington DC.
Global supply chain economics are complex and change rapidly. We encourage those considering outsourcing to think carefully about the right destination(s) for their work and to select a service partner that offers a range of choices, with the location flexibility to accommodate your needs as the evolve. We believe that optimized value chains will operate the right processes, in the right places, with the right people, using the right technology. Each value chain will differ - one size definitely does not fit all.
Filed under Business Process Outsourcing (BPO), Captive v. 3rd Party, Economic Trends, India Business and Economy, Onshore v. offshore, Outsourcing Industry News
by
Lokendra Tomar on November 25th, 2008 at 11:19 am :
Comments 000
How should knowledge process outsourcers (KPOs), their clients, and their employees respond to current crisis in financial markets?
Client Perspective
Choose your vendor carefully - If there was ever any doubt, the current turmoil shows that that service quality and price should not be the only factors customers consider . Long term vendor financial stability is critical as well. Vendors with only a few hundred employers who depend on a handful of clients may find it difficult to survive even a single client loss. Depending on how much business they lose and their financial backing, a key client loss can put at risk continuity of service to remaining clients. Buyers should seek vendors with scale, good financial backing, and a broad customer base.
Outsourcing as a survival tool - Outsourcing is not just about cost savings - it can be a company’s lifeline too. Unless you remain competitive, you may not survive as a business. You may be able to save more jobs (and create new ones) by outsourcing if done smartly and with the right vendor. Choosing the right vendor will help you improve business economics, achieve flexibility, innovation, and help create growth (jobs). The downturn could last quite some time so it is important to consider both your cost basis and operating efficiency, even as your deal with what may be emergency circumstances.
Vendor Perspective
Reduce client concentration - While it’s always good to get more business from existing clients, look to balance the client mix. Otherwise, if your biggest client accounts for 40% of revenues and suddenly disappears (which seems to happen very often these days), you may not be able to survive the impact. Diversify into more verticals and geographies. Winning new business in this economy may be hard, but point your sales team in the right direction now.
Enhance capital - Clients will start asking more probing questions about the financial stability of your business and access to capital. Cover your financial bases. Work towards moving to profitability and get an investor who can be there to support you on your long term business plan/strategy
Leverage opportunities to consolidate /buy cheap assets - A major economic downturn is a time to be simultaneously conservative and bold. Be conservative in managing operating costs but be bold in buying good assets (companies, people), especially when many outstanding properties are available at the lowest price in years. Tight operations coupled with strategic acquisitions will pay handsome dividends when the economy eventually turns around.
Employee Perspective (for India-based personnel)
A downturn is not the end of the world. It’s not first time it’s going to happen. The economy will recover and KPOs will grow again at a rapid clip. This is perhaps first time that global events have had a direct impact in India, specifically immediate job losses. Previously, these types of incidents were limited in scope and barely would even be covered in the press. Now, however, the impact has been pronounced, both in captives and third party vendors. KPOs are not the only ones affected by the global turmoil; many other sectors have shared in the turmoil (e.g., consider what has happened with domestic Indian airlines). The pervasive impact of the Western downturn on the Indian job market shows that the Indian economy is now more tightly integrated into a US/global environment. So it is natural that Indian jobs in many industries will rise or fall based on events in US/global markets.
But, there is hope among this bad news. Outsourcing is expected to pick up even more strongly in the months to come and that should drive new job creation.
Filed under Business Process Outsourcing (BPO), Economic Trends, India Business and Economy, Knowledge Outsourcing (KPO), Legal Outsourcing (LPO), Outsourcing Industry News
by
Lokendra Tomar on July 29th, 2008 at 8:00 pm :
Comments 000
Large India-based outsourcer Infosys is now trying to move from a ‘profit’ focused business model to a ‘growth’ focused business model, perhaps in response to competition and market downturn (see Profit-focused Infosys now looks to growth in LiveMint.com, 29 July 2008). In our view, this means
- Showing flexibility in pricing to win bigger contracts but at the same time
- Maintaining operational cost focus
Infosys has grown to such a big size now that it can no longer afford to ignore large (but low profitability) contracts which sometime requires transfer of assets, employees etc. TCS has been aggressive in going after these types of contracts and have won some big deals in the past. Infosys’ strategy now is a tacit admission that it can no longer afford to maintain high (abnormal) profitability without sacrificing growth.
The ‘growth’ model has been a forte of Cognizant in IT industry, which has publicly maintained that they will re-invest profits for higher growth. This model has had very good success and Cognizant has been one of the star performers both in terms of share price and operational performance.
At Integreon, we do not see any immediate impact of this shift on our KPO and LPO business, but we keep a close watch on the bigger outsourcing industry.
Filed under Outsourcing Industry News
top of page