High-tech and Telecom Industry Offshoring in high-tech and telecom 2010/March In this issue Contact centers, innovation services, and information technology are key offshoring activities in the high-technology and telecom industry 02 A shift in the governance model and rationales for offshoring reflects a strong cost concern 05 Looking forward, high-tech and telecom companies will test various approaches to tackle their offshoring challengescaptive service delivery models 08 The high-tech and telecom industry continues to experience unprecedented changes from both market and technology advancements, which force companies to continuously improve their business model and keep up with innovation. To sustain and thrive in this market, companies cannot avoid these changes. The primary challenge and main focus in the high-tech and telecom industry are the availability and efficient administration of resources. Customers demand more and improved services at lower prices with shorter time to market. As one option toward improving efficiency, high-tech and telecom companies take a global reach and source their products and services offshore. Some have gone beyond that and use offshoring as a way to enter new markets and access new capabilities not available in-house or onshore.
Contact centers, innovation services, and information technology are key offshoring activities in the high-technology and telecom industry 02 In addition to the extremely dynamic market, cost optimization remains a top priority for this industry. Despite their complex processes and legacy IT systems, companies need to accelerate their pace of innovation while meticulously reducing operational costs. At the same time, companies face the challenge of maintaining their existing customers. Accordingly, providing great customer services, keeping prices competitive, and offering new products and services to keep the existing customers are the core of their business. Chart 1: Distribution of functional implementations by high-tech and telecom companies (Percentage of companies offshoring function) Source: Duke University/The Conference Board Offshoring Research Network 2009 US survey Other Legal Services 1% 4% Given these characteristics of the high-tech and telecom industry, it is not surprising that we observe in the results of the Offshoring Research Network (ORN) survey 1 that a contact center, innovation services, and information technology are the top three offshoring activities among companies in this industry. As shown in Chart 1, almost 60 percent of high-tech and telecom companies have offshored their contact center operation, while approximately half of participating businesses are offshoring their innovation and information technology services. According to the ORN data, contact center offshoring in the high-tech and telecom industry started to take off around 1999 and has grown very rapidly since 2001 (see Chart 2). The majority of contact center offshoring by high-tech and telecom companies goes to Latin America (26 percent); other Asia, especially the Philippines (18 percent); and India (16 percent) (see Chart 3). Knowledge/Analytical Services Marketing & Sales Human Resources Software Procurement Finance & Accounting Information Technology 6% 16% 24% 3 48% The choices of Latin America and the Philippines as offshoring destinations for a contact center are interesting for further exploration. We explain this preference among high-tech and telecom companies as their attempt to avoid an offshoring hot spot such as India, which is now facing unsustainable wage inflation. Innovation Contact Center Percentage of companies 51% 58% 1 The ORN survey tracks offshoring activities in all functions (e.g., administrative services, innovation services, and knowledge and analytical services) over time. The ORN database includes 1,445 companies from across countries (e.g., U.S., Europe, Asia, and Australia) and industries. The high-tech and telecom industry accounts for 9 percent of the overall sample. The results presented herein are based on responses from high-tech and telecom companies worldwide.
03 Chart 2: Cumulative percentage of implementations offshored in high-tech and telecom industry by function and year (Percent of total number of implementations over whole period) Source: Duke University/Archstone Consulting Offshoring Research Network 2005 US survey and Duke University /Booz Allen Hamilton Offshoring Research Network 2006 US survey and Duke University/The Conference Board Offshoring Research Network 2007/8 US survey and Duke University/The Conference Board Offshoring Research Network 2009 survey Chart 3: Distribution of offshore destinations chosen by high-tech and telecom companies for particular function (Percent of implementations offshored to region) Source: Duke University/The Conference Board Offshoring Research Network 2009 survey 3 Contact Center 16% 26% 18% 5% 4% 5% 6% 4% 4% Finance & Accounting 35% 8% 4% 31% 4% 4% 2 Human Resources Information Technology Innovation 28% 46% 71% 14% 14% 5% 8% 11% 11% 1 4% 22% 14% 12% 6% 9% 5% 3% 2% 1 Marketing & Sales Procurement 24% 6% 29% 24% 6% 6% 6% 21% 41% 14% 7% 7% 7% 3% 5% Pre 1992 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Software Marketing & Sales Information Technology Finance & Accounting 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 India Latin America Western Europe Other Asia Eastern Europe & Russia China US & Canada Africa Middle East Australia Procurement Legal Services Human Resources Contact Center Other Innovation
04 Latin American service providers also indicate, in the 2009 ORN service provider survey, that telecommunication companies are among their top five client industries and expect continuing high growth (see Chart 4). In an attempt to compete with an incumbent player like India, both governmental and business bodies in Latin America express their commitment to build up their strength as a hub for contact center offshoring. A focused interview with a major service provider in Colombia shows that the company expects rapid growth in the demand for nextgeneration contact centers and customer services. So the company has invested in infrastructure and training for the advance nonvoice contact center, which will gradually replace the traditional (voice) call center. Although customer services and contact centers are critical in the high-tech and telecom industry, offshoring of innovation and information technology is also in an important focus. The participating companies in our sample indicate that their innovation and IT offshoring operations trace back prior to 1992, much earlier than contact center offshoring. However, their growth is more moderate and, hence, lags contact center offshoring since 2001 (see Chart 2). While IT activities of most hightech and telecom companies (46 percent) have been operated by Indian service providers, Western European providers take a relatively large portion of the pie in innovation offshoring 28 percent of innovation offshoring was sent to India and 22 percent to Western Europe (see Chart 3). This finding shows the potential for Western European providers to develop as a cluster for innovation service offshoring, especially for high-tech and telecom clients. Chart 4: Percent of Latin American providers indicating top industries served and high-growth industries Source: Duke University Offshoring Research Network 2009 Service Provider survey Finance and Insurance Public Administration Management of Companies and Enterprises Other Manufacturing Telecommunications Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and Hunting Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation Biotech and Pharmaceutical Healthcare and Social Assistance Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services Retail Trade Software 38% 38% 0 Top 7 Served 14 Industry 21 28 Growth 35 Industry 42 49 5 5 63% 56 63 70
A shift in the governance model and rationales for offshoring reflects a strong cost concern 05 Consistent with the trend in the finance and insurance industry, we observed in the 2009 ORN survey a decline in the captive service delivery model 2. In particular, the results show that a captive operation had been a preferred choice for the majority of high-tech and telecom companies: More than half of participating companies deployed a captive offshoring model from prior to 2001 to 2006 (see Chart 5). However, the strong preference for a captive model has faded and shifted toward local and international service providers. The number of captive offshoring implementations dropped from 61 percent during 2004 2006 to less than 30 percent in 2007 2009. Many companies realized the operational costs of a captive operation and the difficulty in achieving consistent economies of scale, leading them to reconsider whether they should keep their captive operation or sell it off source products or services from third-party providers. The challenge of running a captive unit is even more profound in a dynamic industry such as high-tech and telecom, which frequently requires investments to keep up with complex, fast-evolving technology. Another interesting shift in the high-tech and telecom industry is changes in the rationale for offshoring expressed in the 2009 survey. Chart 6, a comparison of offshoring drivers by year, suggests that in 2009, high-tech and telecom companies became very concerned about costs and pressure from tense competition in the market: of the six most important drivers of offshoring decisions, labor cost savings rose to 93 percent from 76 percent in 2007/08, and competitive pressure increased to 71 percent from 48 percent in 2007/08. Chart 5: Service delivery model over time by size (Percent of offshoring implementations using model in high-tech & telecom industry) Source: Duke University/Archstone Consulting Offshoring Research Network 2005 US survey and Duke University /Booz Allen Hamilton Offshoring Research Network 2006 US survey and Duke University/The Conference Board Offshoring Research Network 2007/8 US survey and Duke University/The Conference Board Offshoring Research Network 2009 survey 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 33% 4% 7% 56% Pre-2001 6% 39% 3% 52% 2001 2003 11% 61% 2004 2006 45% 27% 27% 2007 2009 Other Local Joint Venture International Domestic Captive 2 Captive is a service delivery model in which the processes offshored are performed by a fully owned subsidiary instead of a third party service provider in an offshore location
06 At the same time, a focus on offshoring as a growth strategy, part of a global strategy, and to gain access to talent became less significant in 2009. The results show that the number of companies indicating their rationale to use offshoring was part of a larger global strategy dropped from 83 percent in 2007/08 to only 54 percent in 2009. The percentage of companies viewing offshoring as their growth strategy significantly decreased, from 76 percent in 2007/08 to 25 percent in 2009. Similarly, access to qualified personnel, one of the top four important drivers of offshoring in 2007/08, dropped to near the bottom of the list of important drivers of an offshoring decision, with only 17 percent of companies calling it important or very important. Given the long, slow economic recovery, these changes in offshoring rationale are not difficult to explain. Most companies have been pursuing the safe mode for their operations, including offshoring, and delaying their expansion or any aggressive plans. The reduction in the need to acquire talents offshore is also explained in part by a significantly high unemployment rate during the economic downturn. According to the latest report from US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the H1B visa cap for 2009 was not reached, reflecting less domestic in shortage of skill and talents than the earlier years. Chart 6: Offshoring drivers by year Source: Duke University/The Conference Board Offshoring Research Network 2007/8 US survey and Duke University/ The Conference Board Offshoring Research Network 2009 survey Access to new markets 26% Exploit location-specific advantages 14% Accepted industry practice 22% Access to qualified personnel 17% Domestic shortage of qualified personnel 17% Growth strategy Increasing speed to market Business process redesign Other cost savings Part of a larger global strategy Improved service levels Competitive pressure Labor cost savings 39% 44% 43% 42% 52% 5 5 48% 54% 58% 75% 76% 83% 65% 71% 76% 93% 2007/8 2009
07 Differences in rationale for offshoring between large (more than 20,000 employees) and midsize (500 20,000 employees) or small (less than 500 employees) companies are another worthwhile point. According to the latest survey data, we observe that large high-tech and telecom companies are more vulnerable to political risks and instability of infrastructure than midsize and small companies (see Chart 7). Almost 40 percent of large high-tech and telecom companies say that political backlash at home and political instability are the key risks for their offshoring operations, while less than 15 percent of midsize and small companies express their concern about these risks. Stability of infrastructure is rated by large companies as the most significant risk in offshoring (tied with service quality), while only 17 percent of midsize and small high-tech and telecom companies indicate a strong concern about infrastructure instability. Chart 7: Offshoring risks by company size Source: Duke University/The conference Board Offshoring Research Network 2009 survey Incompatibility between IT systems 19% Industrial relations/trade unions at home 19% 12% Wage inflation 23% 32% Increasing difficulty in finding qualified personnel offshore 33% Loss of synergy across firm activities 43% Lack of intellectual property protection 27% 2 Legal/contractual risks 29% 19% Loss of internal capabilities/process knowledge 32% 45% Lack of acceptance from customers 36% 39% Political instability 38% 9% Political backlash at home 39% Data security 43% 4 Lack of buy-in of offshoring in corporate culture 47% 4 High employee turnover 48% 44% Loss of managerial control 49% 35% Operational efficiency 52% 44% Lack of acceptance from internal clients 52% 42% Cultural differences 52% 54% Infrastructure instability 55% 17% Service quality 55% 48% 7 0 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63 70 Large Midsize/Small
Looking forward, high-tech and telecom companies will test various approaches to tackle their offshoring challenges 08 One of the best ways to gain insight into offshoring of an industry is to look into companies future plans. The ORN surveys capture the data on companies expectations and their plans for the next 18 36 months. The results from high-tech and telecom companies show that information technology offshoring is expected to grow strongly; 52 percent of high-tech and telecom companies are planning to expand their existing information technology offshoring operation in the near future (see 6% Chart 8). Consistent with the safe mode approach discussed earlier, the results from future plan questions suggest that a relatively large 33% number of hightech and telecom companies do not plan to make any major changes 39% to their offshoring operations and simply want to sustain themselves Chart 8: Future plans of high-tech and telecom companies Source: Duke University/The Conference Board Offshoring Research Network 2009 survey 6 7% Contact Center Information Technology Innovation 5 4% 52% 3% through the tough economic time. More than 15 percent of participating companies say that they have no change planned in their existing contact center and innovation offshoring over the next 18 36 months, and 13 percent say the same thing for the existing information technology offshoring operations. Interestingly, as high as 11 percent of high-tech and telecom companies told us that they have a plan to relocate their contact center operation to another offshore location. The focus interviews with this group of companies yield several explanations for this relocation plan, including avoiding 11% a hot spot, moving to a near-shore location, and shifting their operations to a location with lower costs. 45% 4 3 36% 31% 61% 2 17% 12% 11% 1 Expanding No change planned 1 12% 2% 3% 5% 6% 2% 2% Relocating back to US Transfer to third-party service provider Transfer to wholly owned subsidiary 5% Relocating to another offshore location
09 Apart from relocation plans in contact center offshoring, we see that a number of companies (10 percent for information technology and 12 percent for innovation offshoring) plan to sell their captive operations to third-party service providers. This captive spin-off is a trend we are also starting to see in other industries, such as finance and insurance and retail and consumer goods. It also speaks to the declining preference for a captive model shown in Chart 4. Nevertheless, more than 12 percent of participating high-tech and telecom companies expect to bring their innovation outsourcing team back into a wholly owned subsidiary. According to the follow-up interviews with these companies, most express their strong concern about data security and intellectual property issues in their innovation outsourcing. From a macro perspective, competition has been fierce in high-tech and telecom over the past year, especially in increasingly saturated markets such as North America and Europe. Cash flow issues have become one of the major problems for many industry companies because of the increased difficulty to acquire new customers and the dried-up global credit market. From a market perspective, we observe various approaches taken by companies to survive in this economic environment, including the consolidation of businesses (e.g., consolidation in the fixed-line phone market), continued capital investments to expand (e.g., expansion and upgrades of existing network in the broadband business), and scaling services and bundles to meet customer demand (e.g., in the wireless business). In the pressure to quickly adopt emerging technology and create new products and services, offshoring is critical to high-tech and telecom companies survival in the current global marketplace. Overall, the survey findings imply that the single best approach has yet to be found for high-tech and telecom. Companies are trying different approaches to progressively develop the organizational capabilities they require to efficiently manage their offshoring operations and gain the most from offshoring.
www.pwc.com To have a deeper conversation about any of the issues in this paper, please contact: Charles Aird PricewaterhouseCoopers Phone: (704) 344-7651 Email: charles.l.aird@us.pwc.com Derek Sappenfield PricewaterhouseCoopers Phone: (240) 481-5345 Email: derek.sappenfield@us.pwc.com Bob Scheier PricewaterhouseCoopers (267) 330-2736 robert.h.scheier@us.pwc.com PwC Advisory Statement: 2010 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. All rights reserved. PricewaterhouseCoopers refers to PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (a Delaware limited liability partnership) or, as the context requires, the PricewaterhouseCoopers global network or other member firms of the network, each of which is a separate and independent legal entity. This document is for general information purposes only, and should not be used as a substitute for consultation with professional advisors. DH-10-0279