The International Association of Outsourcing Professionals (IAOP), has published its list of top 100 global service providers for 2008 in the May 5th FORTUNE 500 issue of FORTUNE magazine. Although the two top spots were bagged by US based companies (Accenture pipping IBM at the post), what is most remarkable is that five of the top 10 service providing companies were Indian.
Bangalore’s Infosys with its over $60 million turnover for the year came close on the heels of the top two.
[Read more →]

Figuring in the Black Book of Outsourcing has become something to aspire to and a sure fire way to success.

Competing for Top Ten honors in their Top Legal Process Outsourcing (LPO) Vendors list for 2008 were over 80 LPOs worldwide, but CPA (Computer Patent Annuities) has turned up at the top of the list. The firm has been ranked number one in the “Contract & Legal Document Review” category today. And to drive in the point further it has also been awarded the number two overall position.

“Our survey results demonstrate that CPA has clearly impressed clients with its high level of innovation (http://www.cpaglobal.com/ceo_guide), trust, and reliability,” said Doug Brown, Managing Partner, Brown Wilson Group, and Co-Author, The Black Book of Outsourcing (Wiley Publishers). “Law firms and corporate legal departments look closely at these critical areas when choosing which legal process outsourcing providers with whom to partner.”
[Read more →]

Both, natural and man made calamities could cause concerns for outsourcing companies. But whereas such companies can make plans and take precautions in case of a natural calamity (which could now be predicted fairly accurately) it isn’t so easy with a man made one.
Assassinations, coups and the like can cause a lot of turmoil and chaos in a country and no matter how well prepared for it one may imagine oneself to be there is always the unexpected to be expected. Not only can such disasters be detrimental to the interests of a particular country but they can also set the entire country years back in respect to outsourcing.
So what are some of the precautions outsourcing companies can take to mitigate their chances of loss?
[Read more →]

As outsourcing becomes more widely practiced the complexities and risks multiply proportionately. Some of the risks are pretty obvious and are foremost in the mind of the outsourcer thus receiving more attention.
But there are some other not so obvious risks, which, as a result, may not be studied and looked at as closely. They, however, for this very reason, could be more detrimental in the long run.
The possibility loss of Institutional Knowledge Loss is one such risk, and the amount of risk is proportionately higher when the quantity of outsourcing tasks is greater. As a result of this type of loss the outsourcer could lose the ability to maintain insight into technology and fundamental business processes.
[Read more →]

One would not deny that there are several risks in outsourcing, but are they insurmountable and are they worth it? That is ultimately up to the individual firm to decide. All too often outsourcing is considered as having a high failure rate and the experts say this is most often due to differences in expectations between the outsourcer and the service provider, and insufficient due diligence on the vendor by the outsourcer and vice versa.
It is extremely important, therefore, that both, the client and the vendor carry out due diligence on each other.
In all likelihood the outsourcing vendor has been selected on the basis of certain criteria; now due diligence will reveal the vendor’s potential and competence. The study will reveal whether the goals and purposes and desired results will possibly be met.
The vendor’s due diligence will, in turn, allow him to evaluate the proposal, and perfect the final proposal upon which the relationship will depend.
The vendor uses this opportunity to weigh the soundness of the conjectures, and extent of the undertaking. He will have a better idea of the type of work required, at what cost and what the terms and conditions of he outsourcing project will need be.
This due diligence for both parties should include the actual viewing of infrastructure, examination of documentation, cross referencing, and interviewing important staff.
In either case, due diligence will allow for modifying and improving both, the buyer’s objectives, and the seller’s final proposal. It will allow both to evaluate the outsourcing relationship besides minimizing the chances of failure of the relationship and the outsourcing project.

There appears to be a backslide in the number of outsourcing megadeals being made each year.
Gartner, Inc. the world’s leading information technology research and advisory company reports that 2007 saw fewer outsourcing megadeals (those valued at over $1 billion) being made last year than in 2006. Whereas 12 megadeals were endorsed in the previous year, only 10 were reached in 2007.
Compare this to 16 such deals in 2003.
In all the average contract value had has dropped from $2.6bn in 2006 to $1.2bn in 2007, which works out to the lowest level since 2000. The total contract value works out to just $12bn.
However, these outsourcing megadeals constitute a measly 6.8 percent of the total number of contracts in 2007, and represent a little less than 40% of the total outsourcing contract value for that period. The lion’s share of this goes to smaller deals of less than $50m. Their numbers are increasing and now comprise 39.5 percent of all the contracts.
Gartner feels that these decreasing outsourcing megadeal numbers could be a sign of a move towards multi-sourcing, with companies looking to several providers for the delivery of business and IT services.
Research director of Gartner, Kurt Potter, also states that, “Many clients want to test providers’ contracting practices, capabilities and cultures before moving favoured providers into larger contracts, or organisations are using smaller doses of outsourcing to delay larger outsourcing adventures.”

In what can only be termed a remarkable development, the Bar Council of England and Wales has invited members of the Bombay Bar Association to an honorary three day visit to their courts of law.
In a few days, next Wednesday, to be exact, a dozen Indian lawyers accompanied by a trio of solicitors nominated by the Law Society are slated to meet Judges from the House of Lords, interact with British lawyers and be present at court hearings and seminars. The seminars and discussions will cover topics like judicial review procedures, cross-border litigation, administrative law and intellectual rights.
The International Relations Manager of the Bar Council of England and Wales, Christian Wisskirchen, states it is hoped that the visit will boost the understanding of the English and Welsh legal systems particularly in relation to commercial law.
Finally the lucky group from the Bombay Bar Association will attend a dinner hosted by the English Bar Council and England’s Specialist Bar Association.
It is hoped that the milestone visit will advance relations between the two bars and will improve prospects for budding Indian lawyers.
At present neither Indian lawyers nor English lawyers are permitted to practice in each other’s courts. But Indian courts do allow lawyers from abroad to practice in Indian courts when Indian lawyers are permitted to practice in their respective country. It is hoped that visits like these would mellow the situation further.

Although most law firms accede to the fact that legal outsourcing, especially to India is now a reality, different lawyers have different opinions about it.
Here are some opinions.
Rob Hyndman, technology business lawyer, Toronto, Ontario, Canada: …And at least among lawyers, it’s a pretty notorious fact that in the big firms the work performed by juniors is (too) often completely unsupervised and not adequately reviewed for quality. The firms treat it as ’sink-or-swim’ training, and for that purpose it’s ultimately quite effective. But as to quality control, it’s often effectively outsourced blindly. My suspicion is that work outsourced to India is, at least in that regard, often of superior quality. And I see no difference between outsourcing to a junior, for review by the lead lawyer, and outsourcing to India, for the same review.
Jerome Shestack, former president American Bar Association, head of litigation Wolf, Block, Schorr and Solis-Cohen. “I think a lawyer has a responsibility over his work and he just can-t delegate it…The problem with outsourcing is, how do you keep control over it? How do you see how it’s being done?” …
“Yes, I do have concern about confidence, confidentiality, privacy, conflict of interest, ethical values, and those are issues are a real concern.”
Larry Newman, specialist in corporate transactions: “They have been instrumental in getting favorable results even in complex cases.”
Prism Legal’s Ron Friedmann, member NYC Large Law Firm KM Group: I’ve talked to lawyers who-d like to explore offshoring document review and to CIOs who want to investigate outsourcing help desks. So in my experience, outsourcing is not hype but serious consideration of this option, however, does not guarantee rapid growth. ”