And now the UK is a low-cost country too.

Well, not really. But you can now run call centers at parity in the UK when compared to the costs associated with running a third party call center in India. As per this recent article over in Global Services on how a “UK company reverts outsourced work from costly India”, New Call Telecom is opening a new call center in Burnley, England (a borough of Lancashire) because operational costs are on par with what they’d pay in Mumbai and New Delhi. Furthermore, since the average handling time of a call in the UK is 25% less, they will cut headcount costs as well. And the headcount they do hire will be “sticky”, unlike the Indian employees who leave for lunch and don’t come back when the call center across the street makes them a better offer.

So, now that it’s cheaper to open new call centers in the US and the UK, and now that Indian companies are hiring American citizens on American soil to fulfill the outsourcing contracts granted to them by American companies, is there really any reason to go to India? Maybe. But it is still getting more expensive by the day and will never offer home-soil advantages, especially in services.

Now, there is the problem that, because many companies outsourced all of their services, they no longer know how to even run a call center, but there is a solution for that. Insource some Indian experts to do it for you. And if you insource to Arkansas and set up some cameras, you can have the next great reality series. While NBC airs Outsourced, about ex-pat Americans shipped off to India to run call centers, FX will be airing Insourced about the life of an Indian call-center manager, who never left the country, who is shipped off to live with some hillbillies in the Ozarks.

Is Your Supply Management Organization Being Held Back?

A recent article over on the CPO Agenda on “Fresh Thinking”, which noted that Procurement must be bolder in bringing about wholesale change that delivers effective results for the business, highlighted a number of areas that could be ripe for change. These areas need to be looked at carefully because their current state could actually be holding the Supply Management organization back. In order to advance, Supply Management cannot accept the status quo when the status quo is an outdated, ineffective, and or costly way of running the business.

The following five areas are ripe starting grounds for a Supply Management organization that wants to take its operations to the next level.

  • Organizational Rules
    Are organizational rules limiting opportunities for efficiency and effectiveness? There are a number of ways organizational rules could be impacting the Supply Management organization, including, but not limited to:

    • Diversity/Buy American Mandates
      While it’s often a good idea to diversify spend and buy at least some products or services at home (to address offshoring risks), excessive diversity or buy american mandates can severely limit options and have a dramatic impact on efficiency and effectiveness.
    • Payment Terms
      If finance is imposing egregious payment times on suppliers (of 90 days or more), this will limit the supply base that is available to the organization as some suppliers won’t stand for such BS.
    • Approval Chains
      If Procurement has to get a sign-off from each affected organization before every buy, and executives for buys over a certain dollar limit, they will be spending more time trying to get signatures than doing their job. Sign-offs should only be required for critical buys or very high dollar buys, not for office supplies or temp services.
  • Specifications
    The specifications could be outdated, non-standardized, or overly specific and all of these can add cost and drain efficiency.

    • Overly Specific
      If the specifications call for specific components from specific suppliers that are essentially commodities, they are overly specific and limiting competitiveness.
    • Non-Standardized
      If each department has their own specification for a workstation with a different configuration, this can limit leverage — especially since it’s very easy to standardize on an office workstation configuration for business people and one for technical people.
    • Outdated
      If the specs are calling for components that are now only being manufactured by a 10th of the total supply base or using materials that are no longer in common use, then the specs are outdated and should be refreshed.
  • Marketplace
    The marketplace could be holding Procurement back by holding on to outdated products or insisting on a wide-diversity of products when only a few should be required. For example, customers may love the old, regular un-concentrated laundry detergent which costs more to package and transport and is less environmentally friendly than the new concentrated formula or may be split between six scented varieties of your dish detergent. In the first scenario, Procurement will need to work with Marketing to push the new, environmentally-friendly, product while phasing out the old product and in the second, Procurement may have to work with engineering to find a way to mass produce the base detergent and mix the scent in later to avoid six low-volume, high-cost production runs.
  • Perception
    If the rest of the organization thinks of Procurement as the back-room, paper-pushing organization where careers go just before they are put out to pasture, it is going to be challenging for Procurement to gain respect, exert influence, and get a majority of spend under management. Procurement will have to work on its image first, get some quick successes, and leave major organizational change to later.
  • The Ideal Solution
    If the concept for the “ideal solution” is outdated, then Procurement’s efforts will be outdated. Before effecting significant change, Procurement has to know what the optimal state is and why.

Are Your Employees Disengaged or Frazzled?

A recent article in Industry Week on “putting brain science to work in your company” that reviews Daniel Goleman’s The Brain and Emotional Intelligence: New Insights, which addresses the question of how you get the most from your people, is right when it notes that disengaged and frazzled employees aren’t really contributing to your organization.

Disengagement, where an employee is in a low-motivation state where they are distracted and inattentive to the task at hand, occurs when an employee is not inspired, motivated or engaged in the work they do. A disengaged employee performs well enough to keep his job, but no better.

Frazzled, where an employee is flooded with a cascade of stress hormones that causes the employee to focus on the problem bothering him rather than his job, occurs when the employee is upset with something. A frazzled employee can only address the problem, not the solution.

Only an employee in the flow, a state of neural harmony, where only what is relevant to the task at hand is what is activated, can be truly productive. The flow maximizes cognitive abilities and puts people are at their best. An employee in the “flow” isn’t the problem.

Moreover, not only will disengaged or frazzled employees not be productive, but their disengagement and frazzledness can spread to their coworkers. It’s hard to give a cr@p when no one around you does. And if everyone is stressed out, chances are you will get stressed out to.

Thus, if an organization wants to be productive, and take it to the next level, the first thing it should do is identify those employees who are disengaged or frazzled and figure out why. If an employee is disengaged because tasks, in an effort to become lean or efficient, have been broken up to the point where they are monotonous, then the organization should address its processes and procedures. Sometimes assembly-lining tasks is a good idea, sometimes it isn’t. If all a person does is check totals on reports, that’s not a good procedure. And if a group of employees who are always frazzled have the same boss, chances are that the boss is the problem. Shape him up (with training) or ship him out (with a pink slip). Next level requires productivity, productivity requires engagement, and engagement requires being in the flow. Make sure your employees are there before trying to knock it up a notch.

For Good Outsourcing Contracts, Keep Litigation in Mind

A recent article in the Sourcing Interests Group newsletter that described “a litigation perspective on outsourcing relationships” is right when it states that a litigation perspective will improve your results with outsourcing agreements. Given that outsourcing agreements are typically long in duration, it is important to craft the best agreement possible. A litigation perspective will help. Why?

Without a litigation perspective, a typical outsourcing agreement is:

  • general
    Since it is impossible to predict every circumstance that may arise, most drafters of outsourcing agreements stick to general terms, broad service descriptions, and generic service level improvement requirements. This is bad because generality results in uncertainty, uncertainty breeds disagreement, and disagreements threaten the stability of outsourcing relationships.
  • full of vague terms
    Such as material breach; gross negligence; willful misconduct; direct, indirect, consequential damages; best efforts; generally accepted standards; and commercially reasonable efforts which sound very legal but which are typically unclear in case law.
  • sparse (or devoid) of communication protocol
    While most outsourcing agreements will contain clauses for dispute resolution, they will be sparse, or devoid, of clauses describing proper communication protocols for communicating, addressing, and responding to issues as they arise. Disputes only arise when issues are not adequately addressed as they arise.

However, with a litigation perspective, a typical outsourcing agreement is:

  • specific
    While the agreement will still contain general clauses for modifying procedures to deal with unexpected situations, it will contain provisions for dealing with situations that can be anticipated in advance, such as a spike in data processing, the inability for the service provider to handle increased order processing, or a change in regulations that restrict a service provider from performing one or more functions. For example, in the first case, if data processing requirements increase beyond a certain threshold in a given month, the organization will pay overtime rates to get it done. If the service provider can’t handle a rapid spike in customer orders, the organization will have the right to bring on a second service provider to assist. And if an unforeseen change in regulations preclude part, or all, of the functions from being performed by the service provider, the organization may cancel the affected parts, or all, of the agreements, without notice and penalty.
  • built on clearly defined terminology
    Instead of just saying that the service provider is liable for “direct damages”, the agreement will say that the service provider is liable for “direct damages, which include but are not limited to the additional cost of securing an alternative service provider” or instead of just saying the service provider is responsible for damages that result “willful misconduct”, which may or may not include a deliberate breach of contract, the agreement will say the service provider is responsible for damages that result from “willful misconduct, which include but are not limited to intentional tortious acts”.
  • clear on communication protocols
    The agreement will contain a communication protocol where the organization can officially notify the service provider of issues that arise, and response protocols for the service provider to officially respond to the issues.

Communication protocols are important as they provide official communication trails and a way to “shape the record”. If an official dispute arises, and goes to arbitration or court, and the organization does not have a clear record of events, that includes correspondence officially notifying the service provider of a(n impending) breach, then its chances of winning its case (and receiving damages) are not good.

Moreover, if the organization maintains a good “real-time” written record of events, that includes official communications that follow the protocol, it has a better chance of resolving the disputes quickly, cost-effectively, and with minimal disruption as a provider is not going to want to risk an official dispute when the client organization has a strong case.

Considering that termination of the relationship likely will cause both parties serious economic disruption, its important to draft the best agreement possible. The best way to do this is to keep litigation in mind and consider how you would prove the elements of a claim if a dispute were to arise as this will lead to the creation of clear and unambiguous clauses.

Comprehensive Energy Management: Taking Energy Management to the Next Level


Today’s guest post is from Robert A. Rudzki, President of Greybeard Advisors LLC, who has (co-) authored a number of acclaimed business books, including Beat the Odds: Avoid Corporate Death and Build a Resilient Enterprise, On-Demand Supply Management, and the just published text on Next Level Supply Management Excellence that is a follow up to the now-classic Straight to the Bottom Line.

Even the largest and most sophisticated companies tend to look at energy costs in a piecemeal way — plant by plant, facility by facility. One reason for this is the inherent complexity of the energy marketplace. Another is the need for local facilities to ensure adequate supplies.

Yet, by adopting a comprehensive approach to energy management, many companies discover significant opportunities to add value and reduce risk.

As the chart below illustrates, energy management embraces a variety of activities that are cost focused, such as establishing commodity prices, mission critical such as ensuring adequate supplies, and even policy- or community-focused such as green initiatives.



Comprehensive energy management is the process of systematically analyzing all the aspects that influenced total energy cost, with the goal of arriving at an optimal energy cost.

Chapter 10 of the just-released book Next Level Supply Management Excellence (Rudzki, Trent), is devoted entirely to the subject of comprehensive energy management. You can also obtain additional information by downloading the linked two-page PDF.

Thanks, Bob.