Menu

topics

The Curious Case of BOT

This may be a bit of memory jog as this is not about the automation BOT that has been the top of mind recall in recent times but rather the good old, Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) that is making a quiet but definitive comeback to the boardroom discussions. During the pandemic and post ‘The Great Resignation’, firms have and are continuing to de-risk their alternate service delivery models. As part of this, enterprises are increasingly assessing and executing BOT transactions. The drivers for them to do this are multifold e.g., deleveraging third-party outsourced portfolio, managing sensitivities around product development, building digital talent inhouse etc. While the classic BOT remains intact, its close variant, Virtual Captive, is increasingly gaining traction as this model offers a good balance between ‘Control’ and ‘Risk’. The supply side is becoming increasingly mature and arming their portfolios with innovative and agile ‘as-a-Service’ solutions.

Next time, when you are looking beyond Managed Services but do not just have the appetite for own captive, definitely worth adding this to the list of options. Lets you ‘test-drive’ offshore on a ‘Pay-as-you-grow’ model.

Know more about our GCC Lifecycle Advisory Services

The Incumbency Stockholm Syndrome

Staying in a marriage has its benefits in the current climate, but at what cost?

Yes, the global growth sentiment is bearish—painful inflation, stocks nosediving, supply chain bottlenecks, war, and whatnot. Why take-on additional risks of switching vendors, reopening contracts, and teasing transformation in this climate, correct? Correct! But have you set boundaries for your comfort zone? Because, if you have not then chances are that you are blurring the lines between that of a practical bear and that of a victim.

Nearly 70% of the IT-BPS transactions that our advisors managed recently were sole-sourced or incumbency vendor renewals / rescoping. Fewer than 20% of these sole-sourced transactions rightfully became competitive when solutioning inertia, contractual impasse, or commercial impracticality was met. In the rest, the enterprises buckled. They sought refuge in notional improvements, tactical promises, and basis point benefits in the face of facts and figures.

Any relationship is worth sustaining and that applies to the contractual kind. However, if you do not set boundaries, you will never know when to rightfully step out. And that is just damaging, no matter the climate.

Understanding the Client’s ‘Value’ Definition

Providers can get fixated with what they consider as value differentiators instead of understanding what the client’s value definitions are. Over the contract lifecycle, the value gap only tends to increase. With the anti-incumbency trend at its peak, Providers can benefit with a neutral and holistic assessment of existing client relationships to proactively cement and expand the account

A misalignment in the value definition between Service Provider and the enterprise  leads to significant gap between the value delivered by provider and value realized by client. This gap only gets amplified over the contract life cycle.

In our experience, the value gap is driven by:

  1. Contractual: Inadequately informed/challenged solution and contracting
  2. Execution: Weak operational governance around pricing, delivery, performance, end-user experience
  3. Evolution: Lack of strategic governance, innovation, account management

PERSPECTIVES

The Curious Case of BOT

The Curious Case of BOT

This may be a bit of memory jog as this is not about the automation BOT that has been the top of mind recall in recent times but rather the good old, Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) that is making a quiet but definitive comeback to the boardroom discussions. During the pandemic and post ‘The Great Resignation’, firms have and are continuing to de-risk their alternate service delivery models. As part of this, enterprises are increasingly assessing and executing BOT transactions. The drivers for them to do this are multifold e.g., deleveraging third-party outsourced portfolio, managing sensitivities around product development, building digital talent inhouse etc. While the classic BOT remains intact, its close variant, Virtual Captive, is increasingly gaining traction as this model offers a good balance between ‘Control’ and ‘Risk’. The supply side is becoming increasingly mature and arming their portfolios with innovative and agile ‘as-a-Service’ solutions.

Next time, when you are looking beyond Managed Services but do not just have the appetite for own captive, definitely worth adding this to the list of options. Lets you ‘test-drive’ offshore on a ‘Pay-as-you-grow’ model.

Know more about our GCC Lifecycle Advisory Services

The Incumbency Stockholm Syndrome

Staying in a marriage has its benefits in the current climate, but at what cost?

Yes, the global growth sentiment is bearish—painful inflation, stocks nosediving, supply chain bottlenecks, war, and whatnot. Why take-on additional risks of switching vendors, reopening contracts, and teasing transformation in this climate, correct? Correct! But have you set boundaries for your comfort zone? Because, if you have not then chances are that you are blurring the lines between that of a practical bear and that of a victim.

Nearly 70% of the IT-BPS transactions that our advisors managed recently were sole-sourced or incumbency vendor renewals / rescoping. Fewer than 20% of these sole-sourced transactions rightfully became competitive when solutioning inertia, contractual impasse, or commercial impracticality was met. In the rest, the enterprises buckled. They sought refuge in notional improvements, tactical promises, and basis point benefits in the face of facts and figures.

Any relationship is worth sustaining and that applies to the contractual kind. However, if you do not set boundaries, you will never know when to rightfully step out. And that is just damaging, no matter the climate.

Understanding the Client’s ‘Value’ Definition

Providers can get fixated with what they consider as value differentiators instead of understanding what the client’s value definitions are. Over the contract lifecycle, the value gap only tends to increase. With the anti-incumbency trend at its peak, Providers can benefit with a neutral and holistic assessment of existing client relationships to proactively cement and expand the account

A misalignment in the value definition between Service Provider and the enterprise  leads to significant gap between the value delivered by provider and value realized by client. This gap only gets amplified over the contract life cycle.

In our experience, the value gap is driven by:

  1. Contractual: Inadequately informed/challenged solution and contracting
  2. Execution: Weak operational governance around pricing, delivery, performance, end-user experience
  3. Evolution: Lack of strategic governance, innovation, account management

Back To Top
error: Content is protected !!