Monthly Archives

September 2016

The Services Industry is Changing in Radical Ways | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

By | Blog

The times they are a changing, as the old Bob Dylan song said. In a recent post, I blogged about the dramatic changes we’ll see in the services industry over the next two or three years. Let’s look at two more forces driving industry change.

A major force is the maturity of the labor arbitrage model in services. Ten years ago, it was very difficult and intimidating for a company to set up facilities in India (or another low-cost location), hire Indian teams to run it and build the policies and processes that enable operating with excellence. But the market has matured, and that’s no longer the case. It is now much easier for companies to build offshore capabilities themselves rather than relying on third parties. Today there is a ready-made pool of facilities that they can rent, management teams they can hire and well-understood offshore policies, programs and tax rules that can be applied.

So the do-it-yourself barrier has dropped as the market has matured, leading to the current growth and capability of GICs, which I described in my recent blog. When you combine this with companies’ desire to shift from unit/service component value to business outcome value, it creates a dramatic shift to bring outsourced work back in house to internal GICs. I expect this trend to continue.

A third factor driving change recently emerged but is already making an impact by giving services customers more choices in models. This change is based on the AACC technologies – automation, analytics, cognitive and cloud. The service models coming with these technologies favor small, cross-functional teams that are aligned directly with the business users around producing business value. Moreover, the teams are organized around end-to-end services. The result? Businesses are no longer looking for large offshore factories of labor.

As the AACC technologies and capabilities become more mature, I believe they will also shift the balance, at least in many areas, toward a do-it-yourself model over a third-party service provider.

So times are changing. I’m not saying that the third-party service model will be eliminated. I’m just saying that this model is about to change in some radical ways.

Everest Group Names Top 25 Healthcare Start-Ups of 2016 | Press Release

By | Press Releases

Hot healthcare start-ups are driving disruption in a market craving innovation, witnessing a resurgence of investment activity.

From more than 200 healthcare start-ups, Everest Group has identified the Top 25 Healthcare Start-ups of 2016, based on criteria such as technology disruption, business disruption and market buzz.

“Although the investment climate has become more moderate in general, healthcare is witnessing a resurgence in investment activity, especially in the area of innovative care delivery,” said Abhishek Singh, practice director with Everest Group and leader of Everest Group’s Healthcare & Life Sciences research practice. “The healthcare market, particularly in the United States, suffers from issues of cost, access and quality. Stakeholders are trying to tackle those issues with technology solutions, which makes healthcare a fertile field for start-ups with fresh approaches, disruptive technologies and sufficient sources of start-up funding.”

From an initial long list of more than 200 companies, Everest Group identified a short list of 50 companies based in North America that were able to raise sufficient funds from the market. These 50 were assessed on the following evaluation criteria:

  • To what extent has the start-up addressed existing challenges through technology?
  • To what extent has the start-up created new channels via technology?
  • To what extent has the start-up transformed existing business functionality?
  • To what extend has the start-up created a new market or a new ecosystem?
  • How much trust have the investors shown in the start-up?
  • What kind of market recognition has the start-up received?

The “leader board” of the Everest Group list of hot healthcare start-ups comprises five highest-ranking companies in each of five focus-area segments:

Care financing:

  • Clover Health
  • HealthEdge
  • Oscar
  • Remedy Partners
  • Zipari

Care management:

  • Apixio
  • NantHealth
  • RedBrick Health
  • Sharecare
  • Welltok

Electronic health records:

  • CareCloud
  • Flatiron
  • Health Catalyst
  • PracticeFusion
  • Redox

Practice management:

  • Augmedix
  • Cureatr
  • Doximity
  • Vitals
  • ZocDoc


  • American Well
  • Doctor on Demand
  • HealthTap
  • Teladoc

Three new Market Insights™ published by Everest Group graphically depict these findings:


These high-resolution graphics are available for complimentary download and may be included in news coverage, with attribution to Everest Group.


A more detailed discussion about the ranking is available in “Hot Healthcare Start-ups: Dawn of a New World Order.” This report provides a detailed analysis of each of the 25 hot healthcare start-ups, including a business overview, leadership details, funding trail, disruptions across technology and business, and market buzz. The report also focuses on opportunity in the healthcare value chain, implications for enterprises and service providers, and an assessment of key investment markets.

How a PMO May Cause Your Transformation Initiative to Fail | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

By | Blog

Enterprises have undertaken transformation initiatives for decades, and there is a bevy of books, articles, white papers and consultants that tout how to ensure transformation success. One of the top best practices touted is to use a central Project Management Office (PMO) that takes responsibility for the transformation plan and holds the organization accountable for achieving it. It sounds like a great idea. The problem is it doesn’t work very well.
I’m not saying companies shouldn’t have PMOs. Project Management Offices are known for effectiveness in tracking outcomes, directing resources and investments for the project, documenting decisions and reporting. But they’re not known for orchestrating change. In fact, the track record of PMOs for successfully driving and achieving change in a complex transformation initiative is very low.

Read more at Peter’s blog