When Outsourcing Goes Off the Rails

The practice of using outsourcing as a management tool is little more than 10 years old, and many executives who used outsourcing early on are now facing the end of an outsourcing relationship entered into in the early 1990s. Some of these deals have proven to be less than satisfactory in meeting the original goals and objectives that motivated the client to enter into an outsourcing arrangement.

A significant percentage of major outsourcing agreements implemented during this period terminated in failure; others were renegotiated as a result of this dissatisfaction. The American Management Association has estimated that 25 per cent of all outsourcing deals have failed. Analyst groups have suggested that 60 per cent of the current outsourcing deals will not be considered successful.

Invariably, the root cause of failures in outsourcing arrangements is found in the “scope” definition contained in the contractual documents. In a Computer Weekly report, Stuart Payne, COO at outsourcing consultancy Morgan Chambers, remarked, “The classic example of a customer not getting what they expected from outsourcing usually boils down to the fact that they did not think carefully enough about what they wanted. Most suppliers are clearly able to offer value-added services, but these things have to be properly articulated from the bidding stage of the deal and then written into the contract.”

Now that outsourcing has a track record to look at, we are in a position to better understand the dynamics of such relationships and learn how we can make them better. The 10-year contract inked in 1994 by U.S. rail company Amtrak with outsourcing firm ISSC is now past the halfway point, and serves as a good example for exploring the outsourcing relationship. It is now obvious that some of the goals and objectives were not achieved to the degree expected. With hindsight, it is easy to identify the reasons neither Amtrak nor ISSC fully achieved the benefits expected from the arrangement.

For Amtrak’s part, some of the reasons for not achieving the expected benefits included: too much focus on tactical goals and not enough focus on strategic goals; slowness at dispute resolution; inadequate contract management; slowness in addressing service level failures; and the making of informal modifications to the contract. On the ISSC side, problems occurred due to: staffing issues; scope issues; underestimating moves, adds and changes; and underestimating desktop user requirements.

Several other factors contributed to the difficulties in the relationship:

• The companies failed to develop an explicit and mutual understanding of all scope requirements.

• Both parties focused too heavily on legal and financial issues and concerns.

• The subcontracting plan received too little attention prior to signing the contract.

Would you recommend this article?


Thanks for taking the time to let us know what you think of this article!
We'd love to hear your opinion about this or any other story you read in our publication.

Jim Love, Chief Content Officer, IT World Canada

Featured Download

Previous article
Next article

Featured Articles

Empowering the hybrid workforce: how technology can build a better employee experience

Across the country, employees from organizations of all sizes expect flexibility...

What’s behind the best customer experience: How to make it real for your business

The best customer experience – the kind that builds businesses and...

Overcoming the obstacles to optimized operations

Network-driven optimization is a top priority for many Canadian business leaders...

Thriving amid Canada’s tech talent shortage

With today’s tight labour market, rising customer demands, fast-evolving cyber threats...

Staying protected and compliant in an evolving IT landscape

Canadian businesses have changed remarkably and quickly over the last few...

Related Tech News

Tech Jobs

Our experienced team of journalists and bloggers bring you engaging in-depth interviews, videos and content targeted to IT professionals and line-of-business executives.

Tech Companies Hiring Right Now