Author: Anurag S

The Equifax Data Theft: What if GDPR were in Force? | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

The high entropy data protection space has once again gained headlines after Equifax, the U.S- based consumer credit reporting agency, revealed that a July 2017 theft compromised more than 143 million American, British, and Canadian consumers’ personal data. The data breach incident, one of the worst cyber-attacks in history, was conducted by hackers who exploited a vulnerability in the company’s U.S. website and stole information such as social security numbers, birth dates, addresses, and driver’s license numbers. (Equifax maintains and develops its database by purchasing data records from banks, credit unions, credit card companies, retailers, mortgage lenders, and public record providers.)

Much about the situation would have been considerably different had this breach happened after May 2018, at which time the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) – a regulation by which the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union, and the European Commission intend to strengthen and unify data protection for all individuals within the European Union (EU) – goes into effect. Even though it is not headquartered in the EU region, Equifax would have come under the purview of GDPR, because it maintains and reports the data of British citizens. And the stringency of requirements and degree of implications would have been significantly higher for the credit rating agency.

GDPR and Equifax

Although not directly related to GDPR, another significant business impact is the sudden “retirement” of Equifax’s CEO less than three weeks after the breach was announced.

This massive cyber-attack is a wake-up call for the services industry. Starting today, operations and businesses must regard data protection regulations with the utmost importance. Non-compliance will not only harm firms financially, but also expose them to brand dilution and business continuity risks.

Some of the key imperatives for enterprises operating in the ever-so-stringent data protection space include:

  • Know and understand the data security laws under which your enterprise falls, especially those such as GDPR that have far reaching impacts
  • Redesign your business processes to incorporate privacy impact assessments to identify high risk processes
  • Implement necessary changes in the contracts with third parties to incorporate the stricter requirements of consent
  • Achieve process transformation to inculcate privacy by design; this includes risk exposure reduction by technological changes such as data minimization
  • Appoint a Data Protection Officer to align the business goals with data protection requirements
  • Make suitable changes in contracting and governance practices to ensure adequate emphasis on data protection

To learn more about the strategic impact of the EU GDPR on the global services industry, please read our recently released viewpoint on GDPR: “EU GDPR: Is There a Silver Lining to the Disruption.”

Signs of Structure in a Disordered Global Services World? | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

The global services market is in upheaval, and disorder seems to be the new world order. Geopolitical developments, macroeconomic pressures, and unprecedented pace of changes in technology have resulted in huge disruptions to the usual ways of doing business. However, despite the turmoil, the global services market continues to grow, albeit at a much slower pace compared to previous years.

eg5

When developing our Global Locations Annual Report 2017, Everest Group spent considerable time and effort analyzing the underlying data to determine if there are some signs of structure amidst the disorder. Here are some patterns and trends visible from our analysis:

Pervasive rotation of delivery capability toward digital

There has been significant increase in both number and share of new centers focusing on delivery of digital services. Between 2013 and 2016, the number of such centers grew by ~177 percent.

  • Regions: Most of this growth was concentrated in Asia Pacific and nearshore Europe
  • Segments: Cloud, Internet of Things, and Big Data witnessed the highest adoption rates
  • Sourcing model: While the lion’s share of the growth was with the in-house model, service providers also reoriented their delivery portfolios

Greater leverage of nearshore locations

Both service providers and global in-house centers are growing faster in nearshore locations, such as central and eastern Europe, Latin America, and the Caribbean, compared to traditionally offshore locations (such as Asia Pacific.) This is driven by multiple factors, most prominently the drive towards digitalization and the different talent demands this imposes. The chart below shows the increasing share of nearshore regions in new delivery center setups:

eg4

Complementary growth in onshore locations

There has been a rapid surge in large enterprises’ and service providers’ service delivery footprint in locations traditionally considered onshore. While firms either retained or reduced the pace of growth in offshore/nearshore locations, they ramped up presence significantly in the United States and continental Europe (see the following chart for new onshore delivery center setups of top-20 IT-BPO service providers.)

eg31  20 leading service providers across IT and BPS that Everest Group uses as “Index” providers to gauge market trends

This is largely driven by enterprises’ desire to deliver complex services coupled with the advantages of customer intimacy. However, for many providers, this is in anticipation of strict work visa issuance guidelines which may make it imperative for them to have a foothold in the onshore market for hiring talent

While there’s some “method to the madness” in these pervasive trends, there are many operational risks that are likely to add to the disorder. These include:

  • Increased safety and security risks (terrorism and border issues) in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand, and high crime rates in Guatemala and Jamaica
  • Continuing conflict between Russia and Ukraine
  • Frequent changes in political leadership in Egypt
  • Macroeconomic instability in Brazil and Argentina.

For more such trends and analyses on the value propositions of different locations through Everest Group’s MAP MatrixTM, which will help you frame your global services location strategy, please refer to our report, “Global Locations Annual Report 2017: Signs of Structure in a Disordered World.”

Six Common Mistakes Enterprises Make when Developing Service Delivery Location Business Cases | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

Everest Group regularly supports clients in developing fact-based business case models to assess all relevant costs and benefits associated with their service delivery portfolio and delivery location decisions.

Not surprisingly, we’ve seen an increase in this type of activity in the last several years due to technology disruptions, potential immigration reform laws, intensifying competition for talent, and macroeconomic and geopolitical uncertainties. We’ve also seen an increase in the number of faulty/incomplete business cases that, if unresolved, can result in unnecessarily high costs and less than expected benefits.

Six common mistakes enterprises make when creating their global service delivery location business cases.

#1 Clarity on the primary objective of the business case:

Establishing clarity on the key objectives of the business case for service delivery location selection is of utmost importance. Companies often include benefits of other initiatives (e.g., transformation) which may impact their overall locations footprint, but fail to include costs associated with these initiatives, resulting in a faulty business case. As business case assessment is typically done for long-term strategic decisions, it is critical to ensure clarity on the locations strategy and implementation roadmap under consideration.

#2 Underestimating the costs of “what it takes to get there”:

Companies often underestimate the costs associated with exiting their current location (e.g., lease termination and severance costs); disruption in their existing locations (e.g., loss of knowledge due to higher than expected attrition); migrations (e.g., employee relocation, technology migration, parallel/shadow run); and set-up of new centers (e.g., capex, cost of hiring and ramp-up, training costs, etc.)

Example: A global Financial Services company had a 12-month long shadow/parallel run to effectively complete knowledge transfer for high complexity processes. This negated most of the arbitrage-related benefits for the initial 12-18 months. In fact, the company incurred relatively higher total cost of operations (TCO) until steady state operations was achieved.

Example: In a recent engagement, the location selection for a Latin American client’s shared services center was greatly influenced by applicable withholding taxes (i.e., the Argentinean government levies a ~31.5% withholding tax on import of global services from certain locations such as Mexico). These factors significantly impacted the relative cost attractiveness of locations under consideration.

#3 Overestimating benefits:

Companies often plan multiple transformation and optimization initiatives in parallel with changes to their services delivery portfolio. In such cases, things seldom pan out as planned, and the savings achieved are significantly lower than expected in areas including:

  1. Headcount reduction from process improvements
  2. Delivery pyramid optimization
  3. Implementation of automation/technology solutions
  4. Economies of scale (in cases of location consolidation)
  5. Optimization of management and administrative overheads

Example: A BFSI firm changed its planned strategy midstream, as its initial plans to fund the business case for large scale service delivery location consolidation by reducing FTE headcount by ~ 6,000 could not be realistically achieved.

#4 Stakeholder misalignment:

A service delivery location decision must involve multiple stakeholders including onshore business leaders, offshore delivery leads, functional and GIC leaders, migrations and/or transformation teams, corporate real estate, and technology teams. Any lack of coordination among these stakeholders can pose challenges in alignment on data used, key assumptions, the roadmap for service delivery portfolio changes, and the plan for other transformation/optimization initiatives. All stakeholders must be kept in the loop from the beginning of the location evaluation, and they must periodically periodic sign-off on the approach.

#5 Industry benchmarks:

While it is important to leverage industry benchmarks, companies must contextualize information to their own unique situation. The specificity of operations or the role a location plays for the company can be different from the typical value proposition of that location/geography.

Example: A recent engagement for a global Financial Services client demonstrated that, despite industry benchmarks that indicated Location A offered ~20 percent cost savings over Location B for typical BPO processes, the client’s specific processes and talent needs reversed the cost attractiveness of the two locations.

#6 Talent competition in the local market:

Companies often underestimate the true extent of competition in the local talent market, and the impact of attrition on sustainability of their operations. This impacts a company’s ability to scale initially, retain talent, and back-fill lost staff.

Example: A global manufacturing company faced significant challenges in hiring language skills for its newly setup shared services center in the APAC region, resulting in significantly lower arbitrage savings than expected.

While developing business cases models can be a significant challenge, we believe that addressing the above-mentioned points can reduce chances of error significantly. Learn more about Everest Group’s Service Delivery Locations practice.

How Will Brexit Impact Your Europe Delivery Strategy? | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

On June 23, 2016, the United Kingdom (U.K.) voted to leave the European Union (EU) through a referendum, also known as “Brexit.” Indications over the last few months are that it will be a “hard Brexit,” wherein the U.K. makes a clean break from the EU’s common market. If that happens, we can anticipate the following major changes to the global services operating environment:

  • Passporting for companies will become tougher: Banks and financial institutions in the U.K. will find it more challenging to operate/set up new centers across countries in the region, as the U.K. will no longer be a part of the EU free trade market
  • Talent movement across U.K. borders will be a challenge: People will require separate work visas to work in the U.K. and continental Europe. Although this is expected to apply to new work visas, changes to visas for people currently working in these countries are still uncertain.

As many global companies leverage the U.K. and countries in continental Europe to deliver services to all of Europe, passporting and talent movement restrictions could have a significant impact on their business strategy, regardless of their operating location in the region.

Potential Brexit impacts on companies operating in the U.K. and EU

In the wake of the uncertainty, global companies that are planning to service their European customer base would prefer setting up their GICs/back-office centers in continental Europe instead of the U.K. This might cause a surge in back-office activity in continental European locations, and talent demand for multiple IT and business process functions in those countries might go up.

Additionally, companies that are currently operating in the U.K. and the rest of Europe will need to prepare for possible legal/policy changes, and will need to expedite visa, HR, and administrative processes for their employees. We expect this to lead to increased demand for back-office activity in the U.K. and continental Europe.

Moreover, with talent movement restrictions becoming a possibility, companies currently operating only in the U.K. might need to rethink their talent hiring strategy in the region, especially for language-specific needs that were previously easy to fulfill.

To paint a picture of the potential Brexit impacts, following are several sample scenarios about companies operating in the U.K. and EU, and their possible decisions pre- and post-Brexit.

Brexit decision scenarios

What lies ahead for those impacted by Brexit decisions

Until the exact Brexit-related policy changes become clearer, global companies might delay or shelve their investment decisions for the U.K. and rest of Europe. They might also possibly move toward greater levels of automation in their business operations to mitigate potential risks.

While it will be a wait and watch game over the next 10-12 months for companies operating in the U.K. and EU, they’ll need to keep their eyes carefully trained on developments in order to create effective strategies for dealing with the possible changes in the near- and long-term.
For a more detailed discussion on the topic, please refer to the recently released Everest Group viewpoint, “The Road Ahead: A Global Services Perspective on the Impact of Brexit. ”

Aspirants Show Potential as Star Performers | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

The global services space is complex and dynamic, impacted on a daily basis by developments and challenges – both natural and man-made – economic blips, corporate mergers, acquisitions, and divestitures, and so much more. Given this changeable nature, global services leaders are hard pressed to keep up with, much less make sense of, the global service delivery landscape.

Everest Group’s MAP MatrixTM cuts through the clutter and helps guide decision-making. This framework categorizes service delivery locations based on operating cost, talent availability, and relative risk into three clusters, plus a bonus category:

Leaders: The most attractive locations, Leader locations are characterized by significant talent availability at comparatively low cost, but also high levels of competitive intensity.

Major Contenders: These locations offer an attractive mix of talent availability and cost efficiency, but not quite at the level of Leader locations.

Aspirants: Aspirant locations generally have low talent potential due to limited market activity and/or a constrained entry-level pool. They may offer relatively lower costs but also may require higher investment to develop talent.

Star Performer: This is the bonus category. A Star Performer is a location that has experienced significant new center set-up activity in the past year; Star Performers can fall into any one of the three clusters.

How does an understudy qualify as a star?

Given those definitions, people are often confused when we rate a location as both an Aspirant and a Star Performer; “how,” they ask, “can a low-potential location possibly perform at a ‘Star’ level?”

Here’s how. First, remember a Star Performer is not a location that shines brighter than all other locations; it is, simply, a location that has seen significant activity in recent years.

In 2015, in fact, three Aspirant locations (Kingston, Santo Domingo, and Colombo) also performed at the Star level.

Exhibit 1: MAP Matrix – Business Process Services (BPS) (English and Spanish)

MAP

There are many things about the Aspirant locations that make them attractive:

  • They are compelling for companies that are primarily planning to establish small-scale delivery centers (<300 FTEs)
  • These locations offer access to a significant bi-lingual, entry-level talent pool, enhanced by low competitive intensity for various business processes
  • These cities provide comparatively low cost of operations
  • They offer potential as “spoke” locations to complement nearby “hub” locations
  • Their geographical and time zone-driven ease of business management may be attractive

Service providers are the growth engine in these locations as they try to drive lower overall cost of operations at the same time that they diversify their talent base in a relatively less competitive market.

Colombo, specifically, emerged as a Star Performer in the Aspirants cluster for delivery of transaction-intensive BPS, with significant new center set-ups in the past year.

Exhibit 2: MAP Matrix – Transaction-intensive BPS

MAP Matrix 2

These locations’ talent profiles – as well as that of Guatemala City and Belfast – also fundamentally shifted, as they are moving up the value chain, especially for BPS delivery for both voice and non-voice processes and, in some cases, judgment-intensive processes (such as financial planning and analysis, analytics, and banking middle-office).

Exhibit 3: Aspirants progressing towards higher maturity
Aspirants_progressing

Given the dynamic nature of the global services market, not to mention the overall global economy, it is truly possible for Aspirants to perform at Star level.

For more insights on the global service delivery landscape, please see Everest Group’s Global Locations Annual Report 2015: Resurgence of Activity Amidst Evolving Propositions.

Changing Talent and Business Needs Drive Growth: Diversifying Global Locations Portfolios | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

Practitioners of global service delivery are continuously diversifying their delivery locations portfolio and looking beyond the traditional choice of offshore locations for expansion. In fact, onshore (source geographies) and nearshore locations witnessed aggressive market activity in 2014-2015, despite often offering higher operating costs than their offshore counterparts. Here are some highlights from Everest Group’s recently released Global Locations Annual Report 2015: Resurgence of Activity Amidst Evolving Propositions.

Nearshore locations

During 2014-1H2015, nearshore locations (in CEE, Ireland, Northern Ireland, and Scotland for Europe, and in Latin America and the Caribbean for the U.S. and Canada) witnessed growth in terms of new center setups and increasing headcount. This increase in market share was at the expense of the Asia-Pacific region in the global services delivery context.

One of the major drivers of significant growth in these markets is the changing value proposition of these locations. Companies are now looking at these areas for delivery of high-end work, such as analytics for knowledge-based services, judgement-oriented processes for both BFSI and non-BFSI sectors, and cloud and digital in the IT services domain.

Beyond an attractive talent profile, these locations are also enticing due to cultural affinity with source markets, as well as geographical and time zone proximity that makes managing the business easier.

Exhibit 1: Snapshot of market activity (new center set-ups) in major regions

APglobaldelivery

Tier-1 and 2 locations in Chile, Costa Rica, Jamaica, and Mexico led growth in Latin American and the Caribbean.

In the nearshore Europe region, Ireland, Romania, and Poland accounted for the highest number of new center setups – due primarily to highly skilled talent, significant availability of a multilingual pool, and moderate-high savings – driving growth for the entire region.

Onshore locations

Onshore delivery experienced significant market activity in locations in the United States, United Kingdom, Western Europe, Australia, Japan, and New Zealand.

Exhibit 2: Number of new center setups by top 20 service providers in onshore locations

onshorelocations

Providers have been increasing their presence in onshore locations, although the pace of setups appears to be stabilizing. Several factors have led to this increase:

  • Increase in the complexity of services, and lack of adequate talent depth in offshore/nearshore locations
  • Increased pressure from buyers to grow onshore presence to enable easier coordination, better alignment/training, etc.
  • New regulations around data security, especially in the banking sector, making onshore delivery necessary, or at least preferred
  • Willingness of service providers to explore newer models and newer tier-2 locations in onshore geographies

For detailed insights on key changes in the global services sector in terms of delivery and sourcing models, please refer to Everest Group’s Global Locations Annual Report 2015: Resurgence of Activity Amidst Evolving Propositions.

A Snapshot View of Locations’ Changing Value Proposition| Sherpas in Blue Shirts

There has been a lot of market activity buzz in some offshore/nearshore regions in the last year. Declining local currency, strong sector-aligned growth, and niche offerings from certain locations (e.g., high-end knowledge services work and SI/consulting, cloud, and digital) have all contributed. Let’s take a quick look.

The changing cost proposition

Chile, Argentina, Mexico, Colombia, Brazil, and Ukraine witnessed a steady decline in local currency, making them attractive from offshore/nearshore delivery standpoint.

Exhibit 1: Countries that witnessed significant decline in local currency during 2014-2015

countries

This changing cost proposition enabled tier-1 and 2 locations in India, China, Mexico, and Costa Rica, to grow at a significant rate and thereby become “Star Performers” for various functions on Everest Group’s MAP Matrix™ 2015.

Function/sector-aligned growth

Costa Rica is witnessing surge in IT services along with its sweet spot for BPS and CC services.

Exhibit 2: Everest Group’s MAP Matrix™ 2015 – IT-ADM

mapmatrix

Singapore and Poland witnessed growth primarily on account of strong BFSI industry. The domestic / regional BFSI market remains strong (and continues to grow), hence, enabling the growth of back-office sector aligned to these services.

Exhibit 3: Everest Group’s MAP Matrix™ 2015 – Transaction-intensive BPS

transactionbps

Niche offerings

Despite relatively high operating costs, Singapore and Dublin managed to grow in terms of new setups and expansion of current setups. Niche offerings in these locations were one of the primary reasons for an upshift in market activity in these regions. For example:

  • Growth in Singapore was led by a push from the strong domestic BFSI industry
  • Growth in Dublin was driven by increasing leverage for high-end work in knowledge services (analytics), IT-ADM (SI/consulting, cloud, and mobility), and judgment-intensive business processes (primarily aligned with the BFSI industry.)

In the Everest Group’s Global Locations Annual Report 2015: Resurgence of Activity Amidst Evolving Propositions, we evaluate key shifts in the relative positioning of locations from their cost, talent, and risk profile attractiveness for various functions, e.g., Contact Center (English), Transaction BPS, Judgement-oriented BPS, IT-ADM, Bilingual (Spanish and English) and Multilingual (European languages) BPS. The report covers key shifts in the relative positioning of locations from their cost, talent, and risk profile attractiveness. The report also offers perspectives on the suitability of locations under various scenarios – with insights on key risks and rewards associated with each cluster of locations.

Are You Familiar with the Offshore GIC Hot Spots? | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

If you said Asia Pac, great … but do you know what APAC is particularly good at? And do you know about available alternatives beyond APAC?

We all know location is half the battle (possibly the entire battle). But location selection is difficult – it’s not just about cost arbitrage, talent scalability, and sustainability, but also linguistic and cultural affinity.

The most mature location may not be the best fit for your company or your industry, and you definitely can’t toss a dart and hope to find the right location.

Here’s the battle plan – a map of GIC “hot spots.” Need multi-lingual support? Check out Central & Eastern Europe; Poland alone delivers services in more than 34 foreign languages. Need support in the Technology and Telecom industry? You might want to take a look at MEA (Middle East & Africa). While you’re there, check out Latin America, India, and the rest of Asia, too.

Click on the map to expand the image

GIC-Heatmap

 

Looking for more information on GICs? Check out these three resources:

Is Costa Rica’s Magic Beginning to Fade? | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

Recent news announcements on several third party service providers’ pullouts from Costa Rica may lead people to believe that the country is losing its luster as a sourcing destination for outsourcers and global in-house centers (GICs). But, before jumping to any conclusions, let’s gain some perspective on these announcements.

HP

HP in February 2013 announced it was scaling back the English-language customer support team in its Global Services Center by 400 employees. However:

  1. HP has nearly 6,500 employees in Costa Rica, spread over multiple sites and processes/functional areas, and this move affects only 400 working in just one of the company’s 20 different units operating in the country
  2. This particular reduction in headcount was part of a global restructuring plan announced in May 2012 by CEO Meg Whitman
  3. Most of these 400 employees will be given the opportunity to apply for one of the 300 new jobs being created in the other 19 units
  4. HP is planning to hire 150 employees into the Global Engineering Services unit it opened late in 2012

Rather than signaling that HP’s confidence in Costa Rica is shaken, this move indicates a strategic shift in how the company plans to utilize the location, and that the kind of work supported in the country may be moving up the value chain.

Stream and Teletech

Reportedly driven by rising wages and other operational costs, TeleTech is expected to cut ~ 160 of its 1,250 positions in Costa Rica. And while Stream Global Services recently shuttered its 700-750 FTE operations in the country, it opened a new center in Honduras with a capacity of 750 FTEs.

Everest Group believes these developments are the result of the providers’ evolving location portfolio strategies to control/optimize service delivery costs with rebalanced footprints.

Costa Rica Facts

While the country has traditionally been, on average, 30-40 percent more expensive than other less-developed locations in Central America for delivery of bilingual (Spanish-English) voice-based BPO services, it is still fairly attractive due to its:

  • High cultural affinity and solid English language skills
  • Geopolitical stability, and relative safety and security
  • Well- established depth and breadth of ITO/BPO service offerings
  • Opportunities to support European languages per its ability to attract people from countries in Latin America and Europe

And although wage inflation and attrition levels increased steadily over time, and are now at levels that make its cost profile less attractive than lower-cost and lesser-developed options in Latin America (Managua, Guatemala City, San Salvador, Tegucigalpa, Santo Domingo, Peru, and Colombia) and the Caribbean, sourcing activity in the country has not slowed down for third party providers or GICs.

In fact, Costa Rica experienced record delivery center establishment activity in 2012, on par with China, and behind only India (see Exhibit 1). Amazon and Bridgestone are among the most notable companies that setup GIC operations in Costa Rica last year.

Exhibit 1

Costa Rica delivery center setups

Moreover, as depicted in Exhibit 2, it has dominated center set-up activity in Latin America for the past three years.

Exhibit 2

LATAM delivery center setups

Costa Rica clearly continues to present an attractive mix of skills and opportunities, and these often outweigh the higher cost of operations in service providers’ and GICs’ tradeoff analyses.

So what’s in Costa Rica’s future as a sourcing destination? Everest Group predicts the market will continue to mature across multiple dimensions, and will exhibit the following major shifts/trends:

  1. It will increasingly be leveraged for up-the-value-chain, more complex work, not just in business processes such as F&A, but also in areas including knowledge processes, IT, and creative media. This will be driven primarily by a maturing talent market, synergies with customer service work, and efforts by companies to optimize facility costs
  2. Wage inflation and attrition for bi-lingual (English-Spanish) professionals will plateau in the next 18 months, driven by a moderate slowdown of growth
  3. Call center players will rebalance their Latin American portfolio footprints, and transactional contact center work, especially that requiring a medium level of English proficiency or monolingual Spanish delivery, will move to emerging locations
  4. Large new investments in the contact center space, or existing players scaling to more than 1,500-2,000 in the country, are unlikely. There will be a gradual decrease in size of new centers as companies start to support higher-order work that is less FTE-intensive
  5. Players will continue to leverage some unique talent and operating models to continue operations/grow in the country. These will include tapping into pools from areas adjacent to the Greater Metropolitan Area (GMA), leveraging part-time students and diploma holders, and even opening satellite centers outside the GMA
  6. GICs will continue to play a significant part in the increasing maturity of Costa Rica. They will find value in expanding the depth and breadth of services supported from Costa Rica, in part to better utilize their sunk costs

While we do not expect Costa Rica’s magic to fade away anytime soon, some of its charm will shift from some specific areas, especially English-Spanish voice delivery, to emerging areas of work such as  IT, knowledge processes and F&A. Moreover, the recent developments in Costa Rica are an inevitable part of the natural evolution/maturation of a delivery location; we’ve seen, and continue to see, similar trends in other sourcing destinations such as India and the Philippines.

For a deeper analysis of the GIC landscape in Costa Rica, please refer to our recently-released report, Global In-house Center (GIC) Landscape in Costa Rica and Trends in Offshore GIC Market

How can we engage?

Please let us know how we can help you on your journey.

Contact Us

"*" indicates required fields

Please review our Privacy Notice and check the box below to consent to the use of Personal Data that you provide.