Note from the Author: Today’s article is part four in a series of articles discussing outsourcing metrics. We encourage your to read our other three articles: An Overview on Outsourcing Metrics, Operational Metrics, and Key Performance Indicators.
Sustainable, successful outsourcing is all about leveraging other companies’ core competencies. Despite the labor arbitrage low cost country sourcing provides or the abundant availability skilled and unskilled labor in foreign countries, outsourcing is a fundamentally the purchase of another company’s superior service, technology, or product. Vertically integrated companies are simply non-existent. Our companies’ suppliers design products, manufacture components and finished goods, manage logistics and inventory, provide customer service, facilitate payments, and provide administrative human resources, finance, and IT support. While each new senior executive’s arrival will reopen the debate of his or her company’s core competencies (witness the CEO changes at Dell and Yahoo!), the simple fact is that no company can do everything, much less everything well.
Outsourcing provides your company the ability to obtain a level of specialization and performance it could otherwise never achieve - and with a shocking degree of immediacy. The challenge for clients who purchase these services is the transformational journey necessary to take advantage of the capabilities their suppliers provide. One of the chief gripes expressed by many vendors is that their clients fail to adopt some of the best practice processes they are capable of delivering. Vendors will offer free consulting assessments, networking and educational events with experts and other clients, and inexpensive pilot projects - almost anything to get clients to bite. As a result, clients leave quality, service and cost on the table - all elements that drive client satisfaction.
The rationale is simple. Companies who outsource typically see Read the rest of this entry »
We know that managing your vendors, clients, and operations keeps you busy and challenged. Our hope is to provide you with a simple resource to improve your performance.
In the recent months, our readership as grown organically and because outsourcing experts are recognizing the contribution we provide. We’ve received numerous emails that suggest we’re on the right track.
We appreciate your readership - thank you.
For those too busy to check back often, we encourage you to take advantage of the subscription options in the right hand column. Have 360° Vendor Management delivered to your inbox, RSS reader, Google, or Yahoo! webpages. The feeds are powered by FeedBurner, a Google company.
If there are topics of interest to you, let us know by commenting below or sending us a note.
Good outsourcing contracts contain service level agreements, which define performance parameters of the services companies procure from their vendors. In previous popular articles, we addressed the general structure of Outsourcing Vendor Metrics and provided more detailed information on Operational Service Levels and Metrics. However, operations are data rich environments with a multitude of metrics that an experienced vendor manager could use to manage the vendor. While typically 4-7 different metrics will be memorialized in the contract as formal service level agreements that trigger penalties and incentives, these alone are insufficient to effectively manage the vendor.
The rationale is quite simple. Believe it or not, but outsourcing vendors have tremendous pricing discipline. They analyze Net Present Value and Internal Rate of Return on their investment in the client contract. All factors are included, such as labor, facilities, technology, telecommunications, etc. More importantly, savvy vendors develop probability models of anticipated performance against service level agreements (which is what they do with your internal performance metric data - if you give it to them). They use SOX-driven corporate guidelines when developing these models which force them to assume some degree of failure. This failure is then built into the price - essentially allowing the vendor to obtain desired financial performance even when performance fails to meet client expectations. This dramatic difference in rewards and incentives between clients and their vendors should encourage clients to drop “partnership” and “partner” from their lexicon, except for the fact that overcoming this financial gap requires true relationship building.
In a nutshell, service level penalties are insufficiently severe to drive vendor performance. That means successful vendor managers must use other levers to compel vendors to perform. One of those levers is a comprehensive key performance indicator program.
Read the rest of this entry »
