Mitigating Outsourcing Risks: II

Last time ("Mitigating Outsourcing Risks: I," Point Lookout for April 15, 2009) we explored outsourcing risks associated with knowledge migration. In this Part II, we examine risks associated with the processes we outsource. As in Part I, the term "customer" refers to the organization that decided to outsource something, and "vendor" refers to the organization that carries out the outsourced activity.

Here are three risks associated with the processes we outsource.

Process stiffening

Outsourcing agreements typically include assumptions about the nature of the outsourced processes. These assumptions can vary widely — they might pertain to the frequency of changes in requirements, or to the requirements themselves, or to how well documented the processes are. Changes to these assumptions usually entail negotiation with the vendor. Sometimes those changes go beyond the scope of the contract, which makes the negotiations challenging. In effect, these sometimes-hidden assumptions can stiffen the processes that are outsourced. In dynamic organizations, process stiffness is a liability.

Vendors and customers who can make assumptions explicit during initial contracting will be able to devise more flexible and durable contract arrangements.

Wagging the dog

Occasionally the vendor wants a change that the customer didn't request. For instance, the vendor might want to cease support of an operating system or operating system version. Usually, continued support is available at a higher price, but that might not make economic sense to the customer. In this way, vendor priorities can become customer priorities, whether the customer likes it or not. The tail wags the dog.

Contracts that address this issue are more durable. They permit both parties to plan for change from the beginning of their collaboration.

Insulation from improvements and economies

Once a process is outsourced, the vendor might have an incentive to improve it. If lower-cost methods for producing the required deliverables are consistent Intent on maximizing short-term
expense reductions, many customers
lay off those who might have
understood the vendor's improvementswith the contract, the vendor might be able to retain all or some of the resulting savings. Often, the vendor is not even obliged to transfer knowledge of the improvements to the customer. Even when knowledge transfer occurs, many customers might no longer have employees who can understand what is transferred. In effect, the customer is insulated from process improvements and cannot benefit from them. When the customer moves to a new vendor, those improvements are often lost.

Customers who retain employees who are fully capable of understanding the details of the activities that were outsourced, and who are allocated to supporting the outsourcing relationship, have a better chance of capturing any process improvements the vendors produce. Intent on maximizing short-term expense reductions, many customers are unwilling to maintain such staff. But even those customers who do maintain an internal capability must rely on the willingness of their vendors to disclose any such improvements.

When modeling the economics of a decision to outsource, these risks are important. Including them in your decision process will produce higher-quality results.   First issue in this series   Top    Next Issue

Are your projects always (or almost always) late and over budget? Are your project teams plagued by turnover, burnout, and high defect rates? Turn your culture around. Read 52 Tips for Leaders of Project-Oriented Organizations, filled with tips and techniques for organizational leaders. Order Now!

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness:

Let Me Finish, Please

We use meetings to exchange information and to explore complex issues. In open discussion, we tend to interrupt each other. Interruptions can be disruptive, distracting, funny, essential, and frustratingly common. What can we do to limit interruptions without depriving ourselves of their benefits?

Finding Work in Tough Times: Marketing

We aren't accustomed to thinking of finding work in tough times as a marketing problem, but it helps. Here are some suggestions for applying marketing principles to finding work in tough times.

When It's Just Not Your Job

Has your job become frustrating because the organization has lost its way? Is circumventing the craziness making you crazy too? How can you recover your perspective despite the situation?

How We Waste Time: I

Time is the one workplace resource that's evenly distributed. Everyone gets exactly the same share, but some use it more wisely than others. Here's Part I of a little catalog of ways we waste time.

Red Team Reviews of Uphill Briefings

In preparing for uphill briefings, briefers can benefit from preliminary reviews. When we review the briefing early in development, the briefing team can address vulnerabilities and exploit opportunities. A Red Team review is one style of preliminary review.

See also Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness and Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming May 14: Working with the Overconfident

A cognitive bias known as the Overconfidence Effect causes us to overestimate the reliability of our judgments. Decisions we make based on those judgments are therefore suspect. But there are steps we can take to make our confidence levels more realistic, and thus make our decisions more reliable. Available here and by RSS on May 14.

And on May 21: Mismanaging Project Managers

Most organizations hold project managers accountable for project performance. But they don't grant those project managers control of needed resources. Nor do they hold project sponsors or other senior managers accountable for the consequences of their actions when they interfere with project work. Here's a catalog of behaviors worth looking at. Available here and by RSS on May 21.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenDJpmhgyaDTwBQXkhner@ChacmGoYuzfZpOvDQdRkoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info